Yes, track selection is definitely more important - while the traditional DJ might cock up track selection sometimes (by simply not being able to find the right record in time, or having had to limit the number of records brought to a gig for weight reasons), a high-tech DJ has no excuse for picking the wrong track.
And while a traditional DJ might argue that his/her crap track selection is compensated for by their impeccable mixing (I myself wouldn't agree with them, but there you go), a high-tech DJ can't really say the same. So track selection is more crucial, if anything, to someone using digital technology. That's an interesting observation about the DJ/live set thing! I think new legislation might have to come into place to differentiate between the two - at what point does asemblage become composition? When Jeff Mills hooks up a TR-909 to his mixer, does he become a live PA or is he still technically a DJ? It'll be interesting to see how the law manages to cope with this... what is the current legal distinction between a DJ and a live act under US law? Brendan > -----Original Message----- > From: robin pinning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 23 May 2003 14:53 > To: 313@hyperreal.org > Subject: RE: (313) Fw: Dex and FX with Kirk Degiorgio > > > > yeah that's what i'm getting at. in fact track selection (brendan > mentions it at the end of the below post) is more important > to the hi-tech dj. > > another thought: > > from what i can gather the Rave Act in the US classifies a > party with no > djs and just live acts as something other than a rave and the > law is less > stringent (please correct if wrong). So is a "DJ" with a powerbook and > ableton live now a live act and not dj? > > will this change things? > > robin... > > > > I would agree that "traditional" DJs listening to mixes > done in things > > like Ableton will try to copy some of the techniques they > hear, and that > > this will also help the traditional form of mixing to progress and > > absorb new ideas. For example, the first time I heard > proper booty music > > was back in 1996 when I got a tape from 12 Tech Mob - the > tape had been > > recorded using multitracking and various other tricks, but > at the time I > > didn't know - I thought it was a straight mix. > > > > So off I went, spending the next few years gathering booty and > > ghetto-tech records and attempting to emulate the frenetic > multi-layered > > action you get on the mix tape. When I eventually found out > that the mix > > was not recorded live, of course, I realised I'd been > wasting my time, > > but in the process of trying to do the whole thing live I'd learnt a > > whole bunch of new tricks and had generally upped the standard of my > > mixing, which was a good thing. And did it make me value > the tape any > > less? No! It was just as enjoyable a listening experience, > whether it > > had been put together by NASA or by a demented child with > sticky tape. > > > > I definitely don't think straight-turntable mixing is dead, > and won't be > > for a long time. And when I say "long time", I'm speaking in > > generational terms, not "the next few years". Even if the > future sees us > > all with ableton/final scratch and so on within about a > five years, the > > fact of the matter will remain that if your basic track > selection skills > > are lacking then you won't do very well. > > > > Brendan > >
