|
Can the Pioneer CDj 1000 make beat matching easier? (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| hooj1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Regardless, all these pitch arguments are usually made by people who can't beatmatch and blame the equipment for their lack of skill. |
and people who make blind staments like this are just bitter.
and btw. this is not an argument, we are stating FACTS about TTs. |
|
|
| Ryan0751 |
The fact that TT's aren't as accurate as CDJ's regarding pitch that is...
CDJ's are more accurate
TT's are theoretically more PRECISE, but realistically are not due to physical limitations.
Listen to old mixes by really renowned DJ's, they drift on TT's. If they are so super precise and perfect, why aren't they making perfect mixes?
| quote: | Originally posted by hooj1
and people who make blind staments like this are just bitter.
and btw. this is not an argument, we are stating FACTS about TTs. |
|
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: |
I also get very worried when people start bringing maths in to beatmatching conversations, because you, as a "DJ" should be able to ing beatmatch, without a sodding calculator. |
who mentioned a 'sodding calculator'?
the point was that after a while you just know instinctively through simple mathematic relationships how much to pitch it
just like a chef knows the ratios between ingredients after making food for a while
if you have to use only your ears every time then you must not have much experience deejaying, because pitching becomes second nature |
|
|
| djemm |
Some things to add:
1) BPM Counters (while not always reliable) cut your beatmatching time down by a relatively significant margin (depending on your skill level). By being able to roughly match up the bpms right off the start, you're automaticly within roughly +/-0.8% of being beatmatched. Peace of cake from that point.
2) Cueing. the cueing feature on cdjs makes beatmatching so much faster then vinyl its not even funny. re-cueing is instant rather then a several second process.
I gues these two points don't really prove that cdj1000s make beatmatching easier, but it does make it faster which in my mind, will make it easier as well. |
|
|
| flygekorre |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
who mentioned a 'sodding calculator'?
the point was that after a while you just know instinctively through simple mathematic relationships how much to pitch it
just like a chef knows the ratios between ingredients after making food for a while
if you have to use only your ears every time then you must not have much experience deejaying, because pitching becomes second nature |
wise words, second that
and basically all tracks in electronic music run at a whole-numbered bpm
Can the Pioneer CDj 1000 make beat matching easier?
in my opinion with the display and bpm counter they actually do compared to vinyl
but then on the other hand, with a bit of practice it doesn't really matter, as beatmatching get's like the most common thing to do...
edit:
djemm got a good point with cueing too, but that comes with all cdjs, the process of beatmatching is the same on e.g. cdj100 and a cdj1000 mk3, the technology itself on the pricier ones isn't more accurate |
|
|
| hooj1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Listen to old mixes by really renowned DJ's, they drift on TT's. If they are so super precise and perfect, why aren't they making perfect mixes? |
ummm, thats because they're not perfect DJs. Renowned DJs still drift on CDJs, so your argument holds no water.
i've also seen Digweed throw down perfect mixes on TTs and I've seen him drift on CDJs and vice versa.
but you are right about the fact that CDJs will always hold pitch. thats why its important to have TTs tuned up every so often. |
|
|
| Andrømeda |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
The fact that TT's aren't as accurate as CDJ's regarding pitch that is...
CDJ's are more accurate
TT's are theoretically more PRECISE, but realistically are not due to physical limitations.
Listen to old mixes by really renowned DJ's, they drift on TT's. If they are so super precise and perfect, why aren't they making perfect mixes? |
wrong again, with a digital CDJ1000 there's latency involved meaning there is a delay when moving the pitch of a cdj1000 :D
analogue is more accurate than any digital cd player
Wtf, plus the old mixes from back in the day where 10x more accurate, subtle than they are now (majority) (statistic wise). These days we have ableton mixes with warped tempos, which is nonsense
PLus when using analogue you have the original source in physical form, rather in cd version
/end thread |
|
|
| Zild |
| Listen. They're both easier than a slut step sister. |
|
|
| Andrømeda |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
Listen. They're both easier than a slut step sister. |
agree |
|
|
| starboy |
| Important post here. |
|
|
| Ryan0751 |
Ugh this is just wrong on so many levels.
| quote: | Originally posted by Andrømeda
wrong again, with a digital CDJ1000 there's latency involved meaning there is a delay when moving the pitch of a cdj1000 :D
analogue is more accurate than any digital cd player
Wtf, plus the old mixes from back in the day where 10x more accurate, subtle than they are now (majority) (statistic wise). These days we have ableton mixes with warped tempos, which is nonsense
PLus when using analogue you have the original source in physical form, rather in cd version
/end thread |
|
|
|
| Andrømeda |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ryan0751
Ugh this is just wrong on so many levels. |
how, prove it
Every CD player that was ever made by man or machine has Latency, proven fact.
/end thread again
i win |
|
|
|
|
