Veber
12-11-2010, 10:22 PM
(unedited)
I want to just throw this out there and get some replies.
Ok, DJ'ing "recently" changed with digital mixing technology. To me -it has watered down mixes and the music.
Extreme Example:
Heard a mix within the past year - It was about a one hour mix with about a tracklist of 30+. It was the most schizophrenic mix I've ever heard. It was confusing, non-linear and had no groove because the groove changed to rapidly. I could barely get "into" the groove before it would morph into something similar. It was not fun to hear and I think it steals away from the artist that creates the full track. It did the music a dis-service
Regular Example:
Ok, one hour mix with 20+ track listing. This mix sounded like a live set. Transitions were gradual and getting into the groove was easier, but still couldnt lock in - because the flow kept getting interrupted. Live sets I like live, not recorded. Part of the "live" set is being there, feeling the crowds wants/needs and having the artist correspond.
Listening to older sets have alot more passion and respect for the tracks. Tracks are played longer - and transitions (albeit obviously) are more striking and obvious that ANOTHER DIFFERENT track is coming into the mix. The hard cuts / major contrasts are now gone from mixing. Hard cuts are nice and raw, but they are gone now because (I believe) the technology is making the "dj" lazy. Plus, if technology is so great - why isnt everything going to producers making "dj tools" only? This is a reductionist philosophy which is paradoxical. A track has a structure - beginning middle end. A ableton set done with just tools? uhhhh thats a live set? just play live.
I do agree on some aspects of digital mixing that beatmatching shouldnt be part of the dj's job. And technically it shouldn't. The dj listens to the crowd, picks a good selection, and mixes tracks artfully. There responsibility is this. Beat matching is a "technicality" not related to any art. I was hoping for dj's to pick choosier tracks and more creative mixing, but I'm not seeing it. Im seeing 10 very similar tracks mixed in no particular order with no clear "transition" like a dj set usually has. And yes, I guess since you dont have to beat match - you have time to be creative - but I'm not seeing this result. I'm seeing more concentration of which "batch" of tracks to be played rather than, "what specific track" I want to play next.
I'm dissapointed in not hearing hard cuts anymore - and maybe selecting tracks in poor orders.
.... Wondering if anyone is noticing the same or would like to hear opinions...
Adam Weber
I want to just throw this out there and get some replies.
Ok, DJ'ing "recently" changed with digital mixing technology. To me -it has watered down mixes and the music.
Extreme Example:
Heard a mix within the past year - It was about a one hour mix with about a tracklist of 30+. It was the most schizophrenic mix I've ever heard. It was confusing, non-linear and had no groove because the groove changed to rapidly. I could barely get "into" the groove before it would morph into something similar. It was not fun to hear and I think it steals away from the artist that creates the full track. It did the music a dis-service
Regular Example:
Ok, one hour mix with 20+ track listing. This mix sounded like a live set. Transitions were gradual and getting into the groove was easier, but still couldnt lock in - because the flow kept getting interrupted. Live sets I like live, not recorded. Part of the "live" set is being there, feeling the crowds wants/needs and having the artist correspond.
Listening to older sets have alot more passion and respect for the tracks. Tracks are played longer - and transitions (albeit obviously) are more striking and obvious that ANOTHER DIFFERENT track is coming into the mix. The hard cuts / major contrasts are now gone from mixing. Hard cuts are nice and raw, but they are gone now because (I believe) the technology is making the "dj" lazy. Plus, if technology is so great - why isnt everything going to producers making "dj tools" only? This is a reductionist philosophy which is paradoxical. A track has a structure - beginning middle end. A ableton set done with just tools? uhhhh thats a live set? just play live.
I do agree on some aspects of digital mixing that beatmatching shouldnt be part of the dj's job. And technically it shouldn't. The dj listens to the crowd, picks a good selection, and mixes tracks artfully. There responsibility is this. Beat matching is a "technicality" not related to any art. I was hoping for dj's to pick choosier tracks and more creative mixing, but I'm not seeing it. Im seeing 10 very similar tracks mixed in no particular order with no clear "transition" like a dj set usually has. And yes, I guess since you dont have to beat match - you have time to be creative - but I'm not seeing this result. I'm seeing more concentration of which "batch" of tracks to be played rather than, "what specific track" I want to play next.
I'm dissapointed in not hearing hard cuts anymore - and maybe selecting tracks in poor orders.
.... Wondering if anyone is noticing the same or would like to hear opinions...
Adam Weber