|
TA DJ's: Choose the challenge (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| SYSTEM-J |
| Ha, you were on the verge of running with my idea before I said we should open it to a vote. |
|
|
| jonmitz |
| quote: | Originally posted by ziptnf
3 Random Tracks
|
I completely misunderstood the 3 random track option. Nice job with the namedropping and quotation marks, though, it's real productive to discussion :rolleyes:
I'd change my vote to the 3 random track option, but I can't. w/e |
|
|
| ziptnf |
| quote: | Originally posted by jonmitz
I completely misunderstood the 3 random track option. Nice job with the namedropping and quotation marks, though, it's real productive to discussion :rolleyes:
I'd change my vote to the 3 random track option, but I can't. w/e |
Lol I only name dropped you because that's an extremely vague and general qualification to DJing and while I think it's silly, it can be considered a legitimate point. |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| How about this? We do a tribute mix challenge. We name artists with big enough catalogs, put them in a hat and pick out at random. |
|
|
| Lews |
| I really like Jack's idea. Would be interesting to see how different people use the same material. Shame other people aren't too keen on it. At the very least it would make this a very cost-effective round. |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
What about reviving the Global Excursion-series? One track per DJ.
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...=2#.UmoLXFO1bSg
The only issue I can see with this is that having the same file reencoded more than a dozen times could make the sound quality of the final mix quite dodgy. |
|
|
| Bierheld |
| quote: | Originally posted by ziptnf
It's sounding like there is somewhat of a split between the first option and the traditional challenge.
Please recall that this is only for the upcoming challenge, not to replace the traditional challenge entirely!!!
And to answer your question, Jon, both new options involve you picking tracks, the challenge lies in how you handle the random tracks that are assigned to you or the tracks that are in the crate for you to choose. Nobody is going to mix for you. That's why it's still in the "spirit of DJing" or whatever such nonsense that is.
So let's discuss the pros and cons of each:
3 Random Tracks
Pro's:
- You may be challenged to take your mix in 3 separate directions, or you could try to seamlessly integrate them, depending on how well you mix them with your track choices.
- You can adapt your mix style to whatever genres are presented to you.
- You may get more than one genre, so it can be more challenging
Con's:
- The tracks may be so radically different, that it's impossible to integrate them without it being obvious which tracks were assigned to you
- You may not like the tracks you are given, yet are forced to use them anyway
- Someone else has chosen 3 tracks for you, which is "against the spirit of DJing" according to jonmitz
|
With a bit of compromise you could probably eradicate some of the cons:
For the first one:
We could still include a sort of gentleman's agreement stating the tracks should at least have some sort of similar element, the submitter should be able to picture them being in a single mix. You may even choose tracks from the exact same genre if you want, the mixer would still be able to take the mix in a different direction if he so wishes.
So long as the submitted three track pairs are kept together and not shuffled around in one big pile it should work out.
You can still choose tracks that are challenging to mix, but there's no fun in getting some awkward microhouse-acid jazz-speedcore combi. That's not even challenging anymore, it's just dumb.
The second one is irrelevant if the only competitor is the genre challenge. That said at least with this one you can choose to muffle them away a bit or only use certain elements for layering or something. Although it wouldn't necessarily be good sportsmanship to do so it's still better then having people drop out completely. Alternatively you could up the submission pool to 4 or 5 tracks and allow the mixer to pass up on a few of them.
The third one sounds like a personal problem. |
|
|
| ziptnf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
The second one is irrelevant if the only competitor is the genre challenge. That said at least with this one you can choose to muffle them away a bit or only use certain elements for layering or something. Although it wouldn't necessarily be good sportsmanship to do so it's still better then having people drop out completely. Alternatively you could up the submission pool to 4 or 5 tracks and allow the mixer to pass up on a few of them. |
That could certainly be an interesting modification.
Now this is where we choose to decide whether or not we follow this process:
1. User X submits 5 tracks to me
2. I put all tracks in the master crate
3. Once all submissions are in, I randomize all tracks and send a "5 track pack" to User Y
OR
1. User X submits 5 tracks to me
2. I randomly choose who will receive these 5 tracks
3. I send the "5 track pack" that is still in tact from the original submission directly to User Y
Then in both cases, User Y must use at least 3 of the tracks in his/her mix, indicating which ones they received.
Thoughts on this modification? |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| That's wack, if we're gonna do a master crate you should be able to pick whatever you want out of the master crate. Don't tell me what to play, bitch. |
|
|
| ziptnf |
| Then vote and shut the up. |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| First thing I did. |
|
|
| 2techs |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
How about this? We do a tribute mix challenge. We name artists with big enough catalogs, put them in a hat and pick out at random. |
|
|
|
|
|
