|
Do pro DJ's Standardize the BPM on there CD's?? (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RJT |
Just for the record, I am in fact discussing tracks that I have purchase (mainly from Beatport), here are some examples:
Alex Dolby - Hazy Way (Evil Nine Mix) is at 131.80
Argy - 1985 (Sydenham & Ruin Mix) is at 127.21
Argy - Malena (Original) is at 124.22
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 124.89
Chelonis R Jones - Dirty Lipstick (Original Mix) is 119.9
... and I'm only through the C's in one list I have.
I will agree that while most tunes at at X.0, there are definitely more than a few out there that aren't.
And if anyone would like to see my receipts for Beatport, I keep them all ;) |
|
|
| Jarvmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Oh, and before I get flamingjune'd, ..... |
That made me laugh.... a lot!!! |
|
|
| Pinokio |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 124.89
|
What do you use to find the BPM of your tracks?
Mixmeister tells me that
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 125.0
Mixed In Key tells me that
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 140.8 (Obviously this is wrong) |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Pinokio
What do you use to find the BPM of your tracks?
Mixmeister tells me that
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 125.0
Mixed In Key tells me that
Beanfield - Tides (Ripperton Mix) is at 140.8 (Obviously this is wrong) |
I check them all against MixMeister, Ableton, Rapid Evolution, Mixed in Key, and if necessary, maths. :p
If I get general agreement from them, I use the program assigned one - if not, I try to ration it out myself.
Interestingly enough, they all seem to be wrong about the same amount of time, and in reality, the most accurate one seems to be when you warp a track in Ableton properly.
All I know is that .1 is definitely noticeable enough to throw a mix out of wack if you aren't watching it/correcting it properly. |
|
|
| starboy |
| use mixmeister it has been 100% acurate with every song ive ever bought since i converted to cd's (one year ago) |
|
|
| Psychotron |
| never had a problem with virtualdj |
|
|
| basilisk |
| quote: | Originally posted by starboy
use mixmeister it has been 100% acurate with every song ive ever bought since i converted to cd's (one year ago) |
Yeah, pretty much... I don't use it for anything other than BPM analysis, but it does that well enough. There are times where the measurement will be off one way or another, but this is more typical with older trance. In those cases, its time to use your ears while previewing the next song to mix in. I mean, no one is blindly relying on this sort of thing and not listening to verify if things are sounding good, right? :) |
|
|
| AndreiD |
| Mixmeister is quite good when you want to see the bpm of a track. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
I think if you play tunes in a similar or the same sub-genre or style, your going to find similar BPMs so it's not that hard. The BPM counter initially on Pioneer CDJs is accurate, but really matching the BPMs isn't so you should be able to tell. I don't really like to write BPMs of my tracks, because I do try to keep them around the same style. Most of the tracks I have are anywhere from 125 - 132 (Prog House/Trance) and then 133 - 140 (Epic/Melodic Trance).
I think DJs who play tracks with a larger variety of genres, styles with greater differences in BPMs (esp those who build the BPM up)should label the BPM of their tracks, but when you find so many around say 130 (as I do) and just go up or down from there...it isn't that hard to mix without labelling. I mean unless you don't have many tunes, who has the time to write down the BPM for each and every track? I guess if you did..it would be when you initially go to make a label for the track. I have hundreds of tracks, so it would take me quite sometime to label them. |
|
|
| sleepydragon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spirit5
who has the time to write down the BPM for each and every track? I guess if you did..it would be when you initially go to make a label for the track. I have hundreds of tracks, so it would take me quite sometime to label them. |
thats why u do it as u buy them then it takes u no time at all. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by sleepydragon
thats why u do it as u buy them then it takes u no time at all. |
Yeah I know, but I am not about to do that to all what 950 or so tracks I have from Beatport. Nevermind all the keys, it would take me months...and I have school starting. I just mix for fun so it doesn't really matter, though I would like to get better. |
|
|
| Stu Cox |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spirit5
Yeah I know, but I am not about to do that to all what 950 or so tracks I have from Beatport. Nevermind all the keys, it would take me months...and I have school starting. I just mix for fun so it doesn't really matter, though I would like to get better. |
Just start doing it with the new tunes you get from now on and when you find a free hour or something, have a blitz of some of your more recent stuff and get some of it marked up.
It's not as if your whole collection needs to be marked up for you to get any benefit from it, just take advantage of it when you're mixing tracks you have had the chance to label. I've only got the tracks I've got since January marked up (so probably less than 1/10 of my collection!) as I only started marking tempos on my tunes a few months ago, keys go back about a year further as I started doing that a while ago.
As I say, I don't really use it to help me beatmatch tracks (unless the tracks are exactly the same tempo in which case it can save a few seconds, but even then isn't always perfect) - I just use it for harmonic mixing. If you can mix fine without tempos marked and you're not too fussed about harmonic mixing then it's probably not worth doing it. |
|
|
|
|
