|
What do you think of AutoBPM
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jocker |
There is a lot of discussion on this subject: does it really help a DJ, or does it distract him and so on. I think the following: it's really a needful thing because it speeds up the process of pitchmatching and lets the DJ concentrate on the playing itself, making the mixes more enjoyable by both the DJ and the public.
I can't agree with the people who say that AutoBPM brings the fun out of the DJing. With that statement, the most fun we should have is by using some old mixer with no equalizer, no crossfader and no of a lot of else. As Judge Jules said, we have to embrace the new technology.
Of course, sometimes AutoBPM distracts, because what you see and what you here sometimes don't match. In that way, you have to check everything by ear not looking at the counter at all. I got the technique as follows: to bring the pitch of the monitor song to within 1 bpm according to the display and then just stop using the BPM counter...
I would really like to hear some discussion here and if you have some interesting techniques of how to use AutoBPM, I would like to hear them. |
|
|
| skywarp |
Beatcounters (or AutoBPM as you call it) are just a crutch for the people who don't have the talent or the patience to learn to beatmatch properly.
My little theory on that is if you look at the music in terms of numbers, BPM, pitch adjustment %, you lose touch with the music itself and your mixing will reflect that - it will be boring and emotionless.
If you are a least bit serious about DJing, you will not use a beatcounter - in the long run it is counterproductive (not to mention that you'll be the laughing stock of all the other jocks).
peace |
|
|
| Jocker |
| There is no talent involved in beatmatching, if you may. It's simply shifting the pitch adjuster back and forth. Of course, with practice comes experience and you save time, but still, beatmatching has nothing to do with art, it's a mechanic process... |
|
|
| metchoun |
no, i say no.. who has talent, doesnt need any betacounters, after few weeks he will learn how to hear two different sources of sound on the same level and to match their speed. these are talented people.
untalented have their beatcounters, but their music sux. pioneer 500 has beatcounter... i dont use them, its faster for me to match speed by my own... and more natural. |
|
|
| Impulse |
in my opinion, autoBPM is for beginners, for the people that haven't really mastered the art of beatmixing. you don't need it and you'd actually do better without it. you need some self discipline ;). it does take a while, but its so much better knowing that you have just created the perfect mix. it's one of the best feelings in the world. as for the crowd, they realy couldn't care less, unless they were diehard trancers. all they care about is precise clean mixing with no out-of-beat rhythmes. personally, i wouldn't touch a BPM counter. it does distract you because your constantly concentrating on the numbers rather than the music your playing and the crowd. technology has improved, but improved on what level? i mean, what would our forefathers of trance and dance say about this?? :) you might even be looked down upon for using an additional source to mix. one of the aspects of Djing is beat-mixing, a natural talent. it takes time to develop as i said, but it's worth it. i hope this helped you out
--Impulse |
|
|
| Morbius |
| Even disregarding what Impulse said above (which I agree with 100%, cept maybe for the "looked down upon for using an extra source" thing :) ), what if you've always used a BPM counter and then you have to play at a venue without one? Wouldn't be much fun :) |
|
|
| metchoun |
| like ive said.. proffesionals dont use bpmcounter ;) they can have it but they dont count at him... |
|
|
| breakdown |
i think auto bpm's or other beatmatching tools defeat the object of the dj.. it makes it so much easier to beat mix, that you could pick a lot of people from a crowd, give them a couple hours and they'd be able to beat match 2 tracks.
dj's using bad quality mixers, or basic mixers who can beat match are the ones who are good.
and no it isn't just a matter of twiddling pitchadjusters.. ain't as easy as that.. so yea.. |
|
|
| Bundesbahn |
| I agree that Beatcounter is a great way for the beginners, but I tend to find myself refer to the BPM for the flow of the set. Sometimes a fast Trance set is not as good as a groovy slower one. It's all about the flow of the set and the rhythm that goes along with it. The beatcounter is just there to make sure I don't make everyone into jib-tech warriors. :) |
|
|
| Jocker |
| Reply to infinity: exactly!!! A person from the crowd should be able to beatmix two tracks in two hours. Because beatmixing is too easy. The most important thing is the song selection and free flow of the mix... And we always invent things to make our lives easier. Why don't you play a two-channel mixer then with no EQ? Otherwise it should be too easy. |
|
|
| metchoun |
| like someone said somewhere... you can give untalented dj two vestaxes and for a proffessional two belt drive -tables. wholl play better? :) its same wiith mixers :) |
|
|
| Darkevil |
I personally don't think AutoBPM is a bad thing, however I am a beginner DJ as well and I don't think using AutoBPM is a good habit to pick up!.. learning and struggling to DJ using natural means is a better way to learn mixing than using a AutoBPM to learn, because in the long run, when you can beatmatch naturally... using the AutoBPM is just a luxury item. Another thing to think about is the fact that the party you maybe playing at might not have AutoBPM on the mixer... now yer FUCT! :>
|
|
|
|
|
