Exactly my point Tristan... As anyone who knows me knows I am long-time fan and friend of one D. Tenaglia. Though I am disappointed with the progressive shite he's been playing of late - thankfully here in NYC @ Vinyl he doesn't actually play as much of that as I'm told he does abroad. Danny has been doing subtle re-edits, with Pro-Tools, of all manner of tracks, burning them on CD-R and using them in his sets for like 4 years now. I love it when I hear something out on the dancefloor that I love and it's just a bit different (and a lot of times even better)! At this point I would say he spins about 50% CDs and most of them are tailored by him, for him, as well. A couple of DT's edits that stand out in my mind are a nice one of Microworld's Signals, and a version of the original mix of Plastic Dreams that ditches all the cheesy piano crap at the end and stretches the 'good' part out quite a bit. It's a great way to mark yourself out from the pack IMHO - even if the only ones picking up on it are the few of us really know the music. Once I actually get my Sony VAIO set up right I plan on burning some edits of my own. I quite fancy extended versions of some of my favorite Mills tracks.
With all the bickering over this thread I feel I oughta reiterate my feeling that I look on mixing tracks with a fade-in as a challenge. Yeah it's a pain in the ass to get it right, but when you do manage it, it feels (and sounds) pretty damn nice!=) The trick I use if the monitors are too damn loud, and others use as well I am sure, is matching BPMs in the middle of the track and then pumping the gain and/or the levels up to cue the beginning of the track up, then turning 'em down to where they oughta be as you bring the track in. Having said that, on those nights I am not really on it I would appreciate having a more 'friendly' version available;) Dave Clark wrote: >>Try going to some of those glitchy German (Villalobos, Isolee) or West Coast (Twerk, Safety Scissors) guys and mixing those, when you come back to techno things suddenly seem a -lot- easier. I have to agree with that completely Dave...I would add Brinkman to that list as well;-) If you're making an un-mixed compilation for yourself, which I do from time to time as it's nice to hear the whole track, the fade-in tracks are actually preferable to those that bang in from the start. Sorry if this post isn't terribly coherent but I am a little drunk and tired... Cheers, m* NP - http://www.klubradio.de/rams/robhood.ram (Sooooo nice!) > Wow, that's a really good idea! To take it a step further (or maybe not as > far actually), you could sample 1-bar loops of all your DJ-unfriendly > tracks, then burn them to CD. Bring it with you wherever you go, then you > could loop the 1 bar, mix it in, then "double up" with the actual track > (which would make the cue point mostly irrelevent), or you could have all > three tracks in the mix (or whatever the context demands). This way when you > know you're playing a booth with a CD-player, you can bring your > DJ-unfriendly records too. Just a thought... > > I don't really find this to be a huge issue, but sometimes I screw up my > sets of 32 if I rush to find the cue point and it *is* annoying. When I make > tracks without a fade in, I try to get a discernable beat with a good cue > point in there by the 8th or 16th bar b/c I want to make my tracks > listenable and DJable. > > Tristan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
