Depends a little bit on the amount of time you've got to get the mix in, and whether or not the target track is being thrown out to into the open, or whether it's only in your cans. Pitch mixing also means you've got to know your tracks very well, OR (I emphasise or) that you've cheated in some way (front->back box, or BPM's on labels).
Horses for courses as they say. ;) Dscaper ---------- Aeonflux Radio - http://www.aeonflux.co.uk "A man who know's what he knows, and knows what he doesn't know, is the sign of a man who knows." > -----Original Message----- > From: Toby Frith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 20 November 2002 12:03 > To: James Bucknell; 313@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks > > > I've yet to master the trick of using the pitch adjust to do it. > Tricky, but > the best way. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: James Bucknell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <313@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 4:07 PM > Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks > > > > jeebers--it's bad to slow a record by dragging your finger against the > > platter? does the same apply to speeding the record up by twisting the > > spindle? > > > > i just watched what dj pierre did and tried to do the same. > > > > so how are you meant to slow a record on the 1200s without touching the > > platter? > > james > > > > > > > > > From: "seth redmond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:49:45 +0000 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 313@hyperreal.org > > > Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks > > > > > > I'm still undecided on whether the torque is better or worse. Although > it > > > seems logical to get as much as possible, when I tried mixing > on Vestax > I > > > missed the ability to drop a record back into time by > dragging my finger > > > across the edge of the plate as I could with 1200s; although > unexpectedly > > > had no trouble moving back to technics again. > > > I am pretty convinced that once I got out of this habit (bad for the > motor > > > in any case) I wouldn't mind. The only thing I am sure I would miss on > > > technics is the +10 pitch control. I never had to use the > +50's but I've > > > often found that I was agonisingly just-out-of-range on the > technics and > had > > > to piss about subtely speeding the other record up / down > > > > > > it's not the first time I've heard doubts about the build quality, but > don't > > > know anyone who's had them long enough for it to be an issue. their > mixers > > > have always been pretty nice mind. > > > > > > -s > > > > > >> From: "Neil Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> To: "'Langsman, Marc'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"'seth redmond'" > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<313@hyperreal.org> > > >> Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks > > >> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:55 -0000 > > >> > > >> > > >> I got one pdx 2000 (as it was all I could afford at the time) and I > > >> really love it: -50% is actually really useful as use you can mix > things > > >> at half tempo to do some weird x2s, having a reverse button is also > very > > >> useful and yes they seem to have quite a lot more torque - which may > not > > >> be a good thing if you play out a lot as after using vestax technics > > >> feel very light and you need to use a much gentler touch and yeah > > >> skipping is virtually non existent which I believe is due to the > tonearm > > >> being designed to produce no lateral force perpendicular to > the tonearm > > >> instead all the forces run parallel to the tonearm (or that's the > theory > > >> anyway) > > >> Build quality wise I would say that echnics still have the edge > insomuch > > >> as touching the deck with the needle on the record doesn't > seem to make > > >> a noise thru the speakers whereas at high volumes if you tap > the vestax > > >> you can hear the tapping. > > >> > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail > > > > > > > > > > >
