|
What's with the DJs that are so anal about technical skills? (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| PivotTechno |
Technical DJ asks, "so, what's with DJs who only transition from one track to another, without really working the mixer?" :rolleyes:
This thread is so full of hurt, from the original question (why do you care? ego get bruised or something?), to the inevitable subsequent intellectual masturbatory pissing match. Shut up and go play some music.
Yes, I just went there. February must be a slow month. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
i do.
you seem to think yours is impeccable. You also seem be rather derisive toward other people's view which would be fine if you could supplement your superlatives with actual content. |
Nah, that's basically irrelevant and more of a case of your ongoing and futile attempt to discredit me with the one roughly hewn weapon you've got (namely you know much about music theory), regardless of whether it's appropriate to the discussion or not. I could commission the world's greatest painter to render in brilliantly skillful detail a canvas portrayal of a thousand virgins being anally sodomised by robotic penises controlled by David Guetta, and although neither of us could analyse a damn thing about the technical craft of the painting, we'd both be able to confidently assert that it was a tasteless piece of . Well, I would. You'd probably order a print to hang in your living room.
And I don't visit the production forum because I was on the verge of getting banned for calling everyone in there an utter wit over and over again. |
|
|
| Dj Pluviose |
| quote: | Originally posted by PivotTechno
Technical DJ asks, "so, what's with DJs who only transition from one track to another, without really working the mixer?" :rolleyes:
This thread is so full of hurt, from the original question (why do you care? ego get bruised or something?), to the inevitable subsequent intellectual masturbatory pissing match. Shut up and go play some music.
Yes, I just went there. February must be a slow month. |
Boy, you speak of many "hurt" that indicates me who got offended or sobbing.
But your post itself speaks itself of bitter discontent as well :stongue:
Anyways, so I got more questions.
My friend, who spins top 40 hiphop type of music was showing me how he mixes Trance. He uses really fast transitions though, and mixes way into the nearly the middle of the song. there's like barely any build up of the trance track at all. It was a bit unusual to me, since I am normally used to hearing longer transitions, ranging from 30 seconds to 1 minute and a half. Is Trance supposed to mixed like that? I heard top 40 DJ mixing is a lot different from EDM mixing
Also, is Serato/Scratch Live preferred for mixing Trance? I find the process to technically intriguing, but is the whole manual part of technically beat matching it on Serato the best way to mix Trance?
I get a vibe that to use Serato, it is something you can brag about to other people. has anyone ever faced this? |
|
|
| Ronald Ravin' |
to me it's not about HOW you are doing it, it's WHAT you are doing. you have to draw the line somewhere. putting on a mixtape at a party, or a playlist in iTunes, does that make you a DJ? Yeah it makes you a radio DJ, or a wedding DJ. not something i want to hear at a club
if you're doing auto beatmatch, but actually doing something else useful like nasty cuts and loops or scratches i can totally respect that. if you're just standing there waving your arms in the air and pretending to be busy what the do we need you for? basically what is the value added of you standing there on stage actually interacting with the audience vs just piping some internet feed into the venue. Are you PERFORMING or ACTING? big difference. one is being a DJ the other is DJ Hero
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Pluviose
Boy, you speak of many "hurt" that indicates me who got offended or sobbing.
But your post itself speaks itself of bitter discontent as well :stongue:
Anyways, so I got more questions.
My friend, who spins top 40 hiphop type of music was showing me how he mixes Trance. He uses really fast transitions though, and mixes way into the nearly the middle of the song. there's like barely any build up of the trance track at all. It was a bit unusual to me, since I am normally used to hearing longer transitions, ranging from 30 seconds to 1 minute and a half. Is Trance supposed to mixed like that? I heard top 40 DJ mixing is a lot different from EDM mixing
Also, is Serato/Scratch Live preferred for mixing Trance? I find the process to technically intriguing, but is the whole manual part of technically beat matching it on Serato the best way to mix Trance?
I get a vibe that to use Serato, it is something you can brag about to other people. has anyone ever faced this? |
Every DJ has his or her own style and methods. I don't think there is any way it's "supposed" to be mixed. if you listen to a state of trance, even armin does plenty of abrupt cuts, but he does it well. just mashing any 2 random tracks together is probably not going to sound good. the only thing I would say you're "supposed" to do is definitely match beats and bars together, so you don't end up with a measure with 5 beats, or have a 5-bar long buildup, but i'm sure the right DJ could even make that sound good, and not many people would notice, but it sounds less natural. Like pink floyd made 7 beat loops sound great in Money but very few musicians are pink floyd I can't even think of another example
top 40 mixing is different so far as, the tracks are just much shorter and have much more varied tempos, so do to long transitions you are pretty much forced to loop the beginning or end and some songs just won't work at all together. Which ranges in difficulty from simply impossible with vinyl records (not without scratching anyway) to pushing one button on traktor.
it's certainly more DIFFICULT to beatmatch with vinyl, whether it's controlling serato or an actual analog record, than it is to beatmatch CDs, which is still more difficult than having a computer program do it for you, but either way your track selections and transitions are still either good or bad. |
|
|
| Dj Pluviose |
Here's an old mix I made. Here is basically what I do. I've done some more unique queuing and some really flashy transitions from time to time, but since this is something to share with everybody, I wanted to be a bit conservative on my presentation.
https://soundcloud.com/tsuyoshi-tak...t-in-1999-final
I don't mess around much while the songs are playing, I just mainly focus on mixing the tracks together in a nice harmony. What do you guys think? |
|
|
| Bierheld |
I think the answer lies in the middle as usual. Short transitions can add surprise and intrigue, and are usually the most memorable when performed well. Long transitions generally add smoothness which is important for hooking in listeners for longer stretches of time, allowing them to relax and get lost in your mix. Really I'd say you need both. Too much of the first and people become apathetic, too much of the second and they'll grow bored. Knowing what to do when is a matter of building intuition I guess.
In the end though it's more important to stick with a certain artistic vision and make it work for you, which means at times you'll have to compromise in order to tackle the shortcomings. I for instance by personal conviction think short and eclectic transitioning as often done by pop and hiphop DJ's is genuinely superior. So I tend to go as wild as I can get away with whilst still factoring in the importance of a smooth ride. If you think long transitions are the way to go then go for it, but always remain critical. It's the end result that matters, not how you got there. |
|
|
| Bierheld |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Pluviose
Here's an old mix I made. Here is basically what I do. I've done some more unique queuing and some really flashy transitions from time to time, but since this is something to share with everybody, I wanted to be a bit conservative on my presentation.
https://soundcloud.com/tsuyoshi-tak...t-in-1999-final
I don't mess around much while the songs are playing, I just mainly focus on mixing the tracks together in a nice harmony. What do you guys think? |
I think that in this case you'll have a hard time finding an audience if you're just going to jukebox old overplayed trance music of questionable quality. Generally if you play old music I do think you should be aware of it's status and try and do something unique with it order for your work to have any artistic relevance. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
I've done a lot of genre mixes in a lot of different genres, from pop music to drum 'n bass to progressive house to breaks, and what you learn when you mix in different genres is that different mixing styles are required. Certain genres have prevalent mixing styles that work best with the music, and over time the music gets written to suit the DJs. This is why a lot of DJs can't play outside their little box, because they hone one particular mixing style and when they try and apply it to another genre, it doesn't work. Techno DJs are used to looping and layering, drum 'n bass DJs to double-dropping, prog DJs to smooth blending, psy DJs to slamming the bassline in. It's the same with programming a set - there is such a huge difference between programming a house set and a trance set, for example. Different approaches don't translate.
That's why this kind of discussion is usually just a lot of vague noise, people talking in universal terms about something that is actually very specific. In this instance, it's completely obvious that these "Top 40" DJs have learned a specific style of mixing that applies to the music they play and are too dimwitted to realise that trance requires a different approach.
The only way to learn to DJ "correctly" is the same way every artist in every field finds his or her style - analyse closely the work of those that inspire you and take away things to try out and experiment with, to be modified, retained or discarded depending on the results. If you don't enjoy how someone DJs, why would you take any advice from them? |
|
|
| Dj Pluviose |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
I think that in this case you'll have a hard time finding an audience if you're just going to jukebox old overplayed trance music of questionable quality. Generally if you play old music I do think you should be aware of it's status and try and do something unique with it order for your work to have any artistic relevance. |
Thanks for the feedback. Appreciate it! And I totally agree actually. The thing is, people here in California have no idea about the music I am playing. Even though I'm playing overplayed music that was really popular in the UK and Europe, here in the states this it is very safe to consider this exotic EDM.
So I don't trip too much over the mainstream stuff I am playing. In the states, what we consider "well known" Trance is ATB Til 9 PM and the likes of Dj MystiK
Nobody knows about all the monikers that Tiesto, Ferry, L.S.G., and Cosmic Baby had. I have the advantage in exposing all the gems of the past because....
1) Trance never even made it big in the states
2) All the old Trance heads from the older years have moved on.
3) when I play for people now, I'm playing to a much younger crowd such as people my age who were too young to even experience the 90s Trance
sooo, I guess you could say I'm lucky. Many people have no idea what Trance is here. In their minds, Trance is either House or Techno, or it is a song on ASOT.
Thanks for the feedback everyone~
As a matter of fact, I don't like long transitions all the time as well. If I could get a hand on my other mixes, I'd show you. Some songs are just really awesome when you give a short and unexpected transition, it draws the crowds attention. I've done transitions like that too. I think more towards the end I like to make the transitions shorter. |
|
|
| Dj Pluviose |
With what System-J said, I think it's pretty much concluded the conversation for me.
Each genre needs a different approach, so next time a Hiphop DJ guy tries to rattle my cage about I'll explain to him that different genres require a different approach.
Now do I only mix long transitions? Mostly, but not always. I like short transitions as to the more shocking factor of shifting craziness and energy at the end of an epic set. |
|
|
| Ronald Ravin' |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Pluviose
Here's an old mix I made. Here is basically what I do. I've done some more unique queuing and some really flashy transitions from time to time, but since this is something to share with everybody, I wanted to be a bit conservative on my presentation.
https://soundcloud.com/tsuyoshi-tak...t-in-1999-final
I don't mess around much while the songs are playing, I just mainly focus on mixing the tracks together in a nice harmony. What do you guys think? |
so this is a classic trance set, which I personally consider an entirely different genre much as 80s is generally considered a different genre than General pop music. You will definitely have a hard time getting an audience for this on Ta and internet generally because theyve all heard these tracks a million times and mostly moved onto other genres. You aren't ever going to become a big Dj off classic trance sets because Edm generally is all about the new hotness, but you can certainly find an audience.
80s music was great, there are still tons of people who listen to it, and go to and run 80s club nights but 80s is a dead genre by definition. I was born in the mid 80s most of that music is older than me. But I love 80s music. Do most people in my age range love 80s? Hell no, if you want to be an 80s Dj you need to play for older people who still go clubbing.
If youre ok with a dead genre then just go for your audience. I would be the first one in line if anyone ever threw a classics party in the bay area so put me on your list. :p they have one in New York occasionally but never heard of anything like that out here. It would be unique for sure, do the kids want to listen to it, could you actually pay bills I have no idea. I am your target audience, but I'm also not going to listen to this on a day to day basis because... I have also heard these a million times. I guess my point is some things work well in one context and not at all in others so if you want someone to listen you have to get that right.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I've done a lot of genre mixes in a lot of different genres, from pop music to drum 'n bass to progressive house to breaks, and what you learn when you mix in different genres is that different mixing styles are required. Certain genres have prevalent mixing styles that work best with the music, and over time the music gets written to suit the DJs. This is why a lot of DJs can't play outside their little box, because they hone one particular mixing style and when they try and apply it to another genre, it doesn't work. Techno DJs are used to looping and layering, drum 'n bass DJs to double-dropping, prog DJs to smooth blending, psy DJs to slamming the bassline in. It's the same with programming a set - there is such a huge difference between programming a house set and a trance set, for example. Different approaches don't translate.
That's why this kind of discussion is usually just a lot of vague noise, people talking in universal terms about something that is actually very specific. In this instance, it's completely obvious that these "Top 40" DJs have learned a specific style of mixing that applies to the music they play and are too dimwitted to realise that trance requires a different approach.
The only way to learn to DJ "correctly" is the same way every artist in every field finds his or her style - analyse closely the work of those that inspire you and take away things to try out and experiment with, to be modified, retained or discarded depending on the results. If you don't enjoy how someone DJs, why would you take any advice from them? |
Well said! |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I've done a lot of genre mixes in a lot of different genres, from pop music to drum 'n bass to progressive house to breaks, and what you learn when you mix in different genres is that different mixing styles are required. Certain genres have prevalent mixing styles that work best with the music, and over time the music gets written to suit the DJs. This is why a lot of DJs can't play outside their little box, because they hone one particular mixing style and when they try and apply it to another genre, it doesn't work. Techno DJs are used to looping and layering, drum 'n bass DJs to double-dropping, prog DJs to smooth blending, psy DJs to slamming the bassline in. It's the same with programming a set - there is such a huge difference between programming a house set and a trance set, for example. Different approaches don't translate.
That's why this kind of discussion is usually just a lot of vague noise, people talking in universal terms about something that is actually very specific. In this instance, it's completely obvious that these "Top 40" DJs have learned a specific style of mixing that applies to the music they play and are too dimwitted to realise that trance requires a different approach.
The only way to learn to DJ "correctly" is the same way every artist in every field finds his or her style - analyse closely the work of those that inspire you and take away things to try out and experiment with, to be modified, retained or discarded depending on the results. If you don't enjoy how someone DJs, why would you take any advice from them? |
all this is in my opinion the basics in that the real technique of djing is knowing what to play when to play. I would assume most djs like most other instruments are proficient at the beginner stuff. There is a methodology despite most djs not really being able to explain why they are playing something. Good club djs would know how to space things so that the bar would not suffer. They would take so many things into account. I would say it is much harder to be a good club dj than an afterhours / EDM dj. You have to be more versatile, you have to play for 4-5 hours and you don't have the luxury of drugs making everything you do sound great. CLub djs could never get away with a premixed cd. AFterhour djs could.
i know i'm drawing a line in the sand as when i was a dj, there were club djs and there were afterhour / rave djs. I did both and the rave djing was the easiest and funnest.
I should mention i meant a good club dj which is rarely the case. But back in the day were even club djs played vinyl and were part of a record pool and was still a somewhat respectable job, the bet djs in town were always the club djs.
When i started, the cities oldest club dj told me to come see how it was done. And it was impressive in that.
he could tell you so many things with a glance of the area
how many girls were dancing
how many guys were dancing
how they were dancing, like was it enthusiastic or just forced.
How many people were not really into the music.
He could give you the ethnicity breakdown. And the city was somewhat racist and he had orders not to play stuff that would say start a breakdance circle.
He knew what to play to bring more girls, the type of girl, he could basically control so much just by track selection. He had all the other skills but his ability to use his librarian skills and basically control every aspect of the night was what I thought was technique. Alot of djs say they can read a crowd, but few can really parse it in so many categories.
His set had a form that allowed for alcohol sales , i mean he had every record under the sun and played what was right for the people he knew from experience what they liked as most cities tend to have a certain taste.
bought his EDM collection for 1000$ when he retired, 5000 records of classic trance / house. He was a dj in clubs for like 20 years. And he drank way too much and had a miserable life . |
|
|
|
|
