>i myself found derrick may's set dissappointing. Now i have only seen him 3 >times but i have never real been impressed (except for a solar night). Granted >he did play excellent tracks
>His set was good but i lacked to dj skills of a so called pioneer. I >dont really think a really even mixed many records, lots of cuts and fades, and >why dont you listen people before you maybe Rolando, kevin, and derrick were >sharing the same records. This by far is not a diss for derrick but a voiced >dissapointement again, maybe its just me. I also found the poet at the end >excellent and meaning fulling but i found the drum guy to be offbeat and just >plain annoying after a while how long can you proceed with the same beat, i >think he even had to start the record over again did'nt he. I have been thinking about this, and trying to work out why it makes me sad. The thing is with a DJ's set, it's not really supposed to be broken down into its elements like that. I can never understand why people dissect a set into tracks, and technical tricks, and that's it. It's valid, sure, I just don't get that myself. Maybe you're analysing it too much, breaking it down, so you're doomed to find faults with it, in a sense. The thing is you're deconstructing it when the DJ has put all this energy into creating an illusion, an experience, a vibe. It's like looking at a beautiful woman and trying to identify her flaws. You could try and suspend that critical voice and just see if the DJ moves you - it's supposed to be a spiritual thing as much as an an intellectual one, after all - but if you're over critical than that intuitive response doesn't stand much of a chance. If the DJ still doesn't move you, then, OK, it ain't happening. People say that Hawtin is technically superior to Mills but I would take Mills anyday just because he has that jouissance. Technique isn't everything. Maybe this is the voice of a self-confessed failed trainspotter (I can never pick tracks out of context). Just an idea anyway. C
