I see benefits in both styles. In any given party, there's always a group of people that like to be up close to the dj to see him/her work the tables, and then there are people that are into the music just as much who sit back and dance/chill away from the dj. So, if you're not hell bent on seeing exactly what the dj is doing, then it shouldn't matter what medium s/he is using.
I think being a digital-J could be really sweet....but for different reasons. With vinyl mixing, most of the effort and time is spent matching beats, creating a flow a flow on the fly. This creates a great live energy feel....and is (and always will be) awesome to experience both as the dj and the listener. However, with a digital set already put together, the effort of the dj can be spent in other departments; especially effects. I've been toying around with some pre-made sets, and then working them through a Space Echo, Filter, spring reverb, and digi-reverb. The result is quite mind blowing and I'm actually way more animated tweaking all those effects than when I'm doing a straight up turntable mix. Though the source may be pre-made, the result is anything but stagnant sounding. For me, what counts is the end product....how it SOUNDS. As long as you're doing something creative on the fly...something that can compliment the mood of the crowd, isn't that what really counts for a dj? As a dj, I will always have a deep love for the tactile feel of vinyl. But, I'm not gonna turn my shoulder to new things that can enhance the experience. GYS set.go.recordings www.mp3.com/gys > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:47 AM > To: Cyclone Wehner > Cc: 313 Detroit > Subject: Re: [313] Future of DJ'ing, also anyone at MIDEM? > > > > > Yeah, I am on the artform side. I think it will be the > demise of DJing the > > day that it becomes a machine-led thing. > > how is it any less of an "artform" when technology is involved? > > I think the real issue here is unwarranted nostalgia holding > us back from > a better experience. How can you confidently state that there's no > "art" to mixing mp3s using finalscratch when you haven't even > tried it, > and most likely haven't even seen anyone else try it? > > What, just because it doesn't rely on a crappy, outdated, extremely > inconvenient technology, it's not as good? > > It's not about "finding song x on npaster vs finding song x on a > record" and which is more rewarding - of course it's more rewarding to > find song x on vinyl. but try to think of the possibilities > that digital > mixing opens up - you could easily play your own songs, the > ones you don't > want to spend $50 getting an acetate cut, or even more to > have it actually > released. You could work in live elements, you could do effects, the > creative control is only limited to what your computer can do. > > And remember, this system works WITH your turntables - you > can still bring > your records along and play them the same as you did before. > You're not > being asked to abandon vinyl here... just to accept the > possibility that > vinyl is not the end-all, be-all of mixed music. > > Please don't waste my time arguing practicalities like "mp3s > don't sound > as good" or "computers crash!" - and don't waste my time > telling me vinyl > is superior becuase it's what "we've always used." So what? It's > romantic notions like that that'll hold the music back and let it > stagnate. Of course there's room to acknowledge the past, but there's > also plenty of room to move forward... the problem with accepting new > technology might be striking a balance between the two... but > denying new > technology because it's not what we've always used is not the > solution. > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
