|
Another stupid dj automation tool (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Fast Turtle |
| if you can hear a song and determine the key with no reference, doesn't that indicate perfect pitch, at least to some extent? |
|
|
| psiico111 |
| I would say so, if you could name it. But if you could listen to a song then then pick another that was in the same key while never being able to name the key, that I would call relative pitch. |
|
|
| DJ_Elyot |
Actually, there is growing evidence that humans have a much stronger long-term memory for pitches than was originally thought. A lot of people will be able to sing a song that they've heard perhaps dozens of times in the past, and sing it in the right key on the first attempt without having heard it in days. After that, it's just training to be able to identify pitches. Somebody just has to tell you the name of one key you solidly have memorized; then your relative pitch becomes perfect pitch with a moderate amount of ear-training.
One weakness of mixing in key is that the RELATIVE keys of songs, when tempo changes are in effect, might not always be an integral number of semitones. If you've got a song in A minor at 138 BPM and another song in A minor at 140 BPM pitched down to 138 BPM, you're going to be off by (140/138 - 1) / (2^(1/12) - 1) = about 1/4 of a semitone. ICK. Pitching a song by semitone is equal to changing its tempo by about 6% (since 1.06 ^ 12 is close to 2). I suppose master tempo fixes this problem, but I do think MT has a rather negative effect on the sound quality. Plus, vinyl DJs have no such option.
Not every track is in a key either. With the ability to adjust pitch by a non-integral number of semitones, there exist tracks whose key is, say, halfway between A and B flat. I have one friend (a math student, like me) with an extremely formal background in piano training; she claims to have perfect pitch and tends to dislike a lot of trance sets because songs are not always pitched to one of the 12 keys that she happens to know. Apparently tracks in something like A-halfsharp minor sound rather disturbing to her. I simply claim that she needs to come out of her cave and understand that pitches are not a strictly integral quantity. Probably if she had been trained on violin, she wouldn't have this problem.
The camelot system is nothing new or brilliant; mix into tracks in the same key, or one perfect fifth higher or lower. Anyone who's had some formal music training should understand circles of fifths.
What would be better is do something along the lines of:
- pitch all tracks to a consistent BPM, say 135
- compute the "key at 135" of each track as a decimal between 0.00 and 11.99, rather than simply classifying the keys into 12 categories.
- a mix is then harmonious if the "key at 135" of the two tracks is the same, or off by about +/- 5.0 mod 12 for our circle of fifths. Anything worse than about -0.1/0.1 or +/- 4.9/5.1 will sound a little off, probably any more than 15% of a semitone difference will sound bad to anyone with some ear training.
If I had infinite time, I'd try coding something like this up, although probably it would be more difficult to use than the "dumbass" camelot system for those without mathematical inclination. |
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ_Elyot
Actually, there is growing evidence that humans have a much stronger long-term memory for pitches than was originally thought. A lot of people will be able to sing a song that they've heard perhaps dozens of times in the past, and sing it in the right key on the first attempt without having heard it in days. After that, it's just training to be able to identify pitches. Somebody just has to tell you the name of one key you solidly have memorized; then your relative pitch becomes perfect pitch with a moderate amount of ear-training.
One weakness of mixing in key is that the RELATIVE keys of songs, when tempo changes are in effect, might not always be an integral number of semitones. If you've got a song in A minor at 138 BPM and another song in A minor at 140 BPM pitched down to 138 BPM, you're going to be off by (140/138 - 1) / (2^(1/12) - 1) = about 1/4 of a semitone. ICK. Pitching a song by semitone is equal to changing its tempo by about 6% (since 1.06 ^ 12 is close to 2). I suppose master tempo fixes this problem, but I do think MT has a rather negative effect on the sound quality. Plus, vinyl DJs have no such option.
Not every track is in a key either. With the ability to adjust pitch by a non-integral number of semitones, there exist tracks whose key is, say, halfway between A and B flat. I have one friend (a math student, like me) with an extremely formal background in piano training; she claims to have perfect pitch and tends to dislike a lot of trance sets because songs are not always pitched to one of the 12 keys that she happens to know. Apparently tracks in something like A-halfsharp minor sound rather disturbing to her. I simply claim that she needs to come out of her cave and understand that pitches are not a strictly integral quantity. Probably if she had been trained on violin, she wouldn't have this problem.
The camelot system is nothing new or brilliant; mix into tracks in the same key, or one perfect fifth higher or lower. Anyone who's had some formal music training should understand circles of fifths.
What would be better is do something along the lines of:
- pitch all tracks to a consistent BPM, say 135
- compute the "key at 135" of each track as a decimal between 0.00 and 11.99, rather than simply classifying the keys into 12 categories.
- a mix is then harmonious if the "key at 135" of the two tracks is the same, or off by about +/- 5.0 mod 12 for our circle of fifths. Anything worse than about -0.1/0.1 or +/- 4.9/5.1 will sound a little off, probably any more than 15% of a semitone difference will sound bad to anyone with some ear training.
If I had infinite time, I'd try coding something like this up, although probably it would be more difficult to use than the "dumbass" camelot system for those without mathematical inclination. |
I feel thats somehow the smartest post I've ever read. lol
Impressive. You lost me at pitch. ;) |
|
|
| Jer. |
If you're not tonedeaf and know the basics of musical scales and harmonies, mixing in that manner isn't difficult at all - Like Frase said, this has been done for years.
This is just making it more accessible - Now EVERYONE can mix in harmony no matter how ass-backwards their musical sense is..
Even the train wrecks will sound pretty! |
|
|
| Tb. |
| I think in 20 years DJing will be a thing of the past. The technology will become accessable to everyone, easy to use and the line between DJ and artist will be even further blured. I forsee some new medium in which artists deliver real time music, kind of like a more advanced version of Ableton. When people pay money to see someone play other peoples music, they want more than just some guy's playlist, they want to see skill and artistry. |
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jer.
Even the train wrecks will sound pretty! |
:stongue: :stongue: |
|
|
| Elendil |
To be honest, I think this will simply force the best of the best to evolve as artists. If simply playing tracks doesn't cut it anymore, then you must integrate other elements into your show. Live remixing, live musical integration (on the fly recording of other instruments), light programming...
There is so much more that a DJ can do, rather than simply playing a set. And he should be forced to evolve, if he truly wants to claim to be a true innovator. Plus, I think the most important thing about a DJ, TRACK SELECTION, is something that many people just don't have - nor will they. You need to be knowledgeable about much more than simply beats or pitch to be a truly good DJ.
Not worried in the slightest, to be honest. |
|
|
| spolitta |
a very good post above.
The whole Djing and DJs are overrated now, at the very end DJing is very much about mixing somebody else's tracks using beatmatching and a 3 band eq. DJing has never been a hard job thats why its easy to program simulation software, while they are far from perfect one day you might see some really smart DJ software that can do much more than you expect now (not that computers will ever take over). But even if that happens its not the end of the world, the real deals are the tracks themself, something that a computer can never do not even in the future. Again, I totally agree with the above post, it's time to get more creative or else call yourself an oldschool DJ. |
|
|
| sufee_b |
| quote: | Originally posted by spolitta
a very good post above.
The whole Djing and DJs are overrated now, at the very end DJing is very much about mixing somebody else's tracks using beatmatching and a 3 band eq. DJing has never been a hard job thats why its easy to program simulation software, while they are far from perfect one day you might see some really smart DJ software that can do much more than you expect now (not that computers will ever take over). But even if that happens its not the end of the world, the real deals are the tracks themself, something that a computer can never do not even in the future. Again, I totally agree with the above post, it's time to get more creative or else call yourself an oldschool DJ. |
uhh noooo thats not all there is, track selection, flow, etc...:conf: :conf: |
|
|
| nusty |
live pa ftw? :conf: ;)
I like music but if I know that they can't play it themselves I don't care for it anymore. perfect example is that for years I worshiped Astral Projection and traveled all over the place to see them. Then 2 years ago at wemf they got drunk and more or less let thier laptops do the work... now I can't look at them the same.
I see DJs in a similar light... If they can't actually beat match themselves and pick their own tracks then they loose a lot of my interest very very quickly. It probably has something to do with the fact that they then are likely worse than I am at dj'ing... lol. why would you want to listen to someone worse than yourself? |
|
|
| sufee_b |
I find all this to be such hypocrisy...DJs mocking software- the same softwares their favourite producers use...the same technology they use to produce the music they play...
turntables?? pffttt...I've personally seen a DJ beat match using 2 cassette players that have slow forwards and hold the mixes for 30 seconds or more...who needs pitch control when theyre DJs that can do that kind of ...Ive seen people who can consistely ID the key of a track at least 75% of the time..but how does all this matter?
lets all ignore these technologies to produce or DJ...and especially edm fans saying this?! a music based on technology and synthetic sounds..lol...lets all go back to to using instruments, natural instruments that is since theyre even "puritans" who mocked the electric guitar when it first came out, and DJ w/o pitch control or any like that so we can all praise and worship their skill and make rock stars out of em, not becasue of their music, creativity and the music they play, but how well they can beatmatch, mix, scratch records, eq, etc.
:disbelief |
|
|
|
|
