> i don't think you understand what final scratch is, and how de9(?) was made. > final scratch is a tool that allows use to use two regular turntables and a > regular mixer to control any a digital file on a computer just like you would a > slab of vinyl. you slow the turntable down and the digital file slows down etc. > you do it live. it's not digital editing tool like pro tools or peak etc. > anything you do with you do live.
i'm briefed on final scratch. i've seen acquav!va use it. in addition, i'm aware of the production techniques involved in the creation of both de9 and closer to the edit. i'm also aware of the physics behind the technology. i've watched these develpments rather closely. you're missing one of my points: that many other DJs dont need it, dont prefer it, and whose performance would be limited by said technology. > as for the detrimental trade on vinyl. well, it's heavy, wears out, and is hard > to distribute. digital files can be endlessly copied and emailed all over the > place, placed on sites. it allows more people to have access to more music. what > you do on the turntables should be determined by your skill level and > inventiveness, not by the vinyl you can afford or have access to. > instead of letting record companies, distributors, and record stores determine > what tracks you have access to you can play tracks by anybody that cares to post > them. your words are very interesting. so what if vinyl is heavy, wears out and is hard to distribute? all of those things are unique to the DJ trade and the art form. thomas brinkmann is able to utilize a unique technological tool, one final scratch can't even approach and that relies on vinyl and not mp3. that not just anyone can have any track is central to my argument. dont think i'm preaching vinyl elitism - but if everyone had access to any and every track, would they create something unique, special, or anything but homogenized? here's an analogy - if everyone had the exact same make, model and color Porsche, would it still be special?? more people with more access is giddy hat-tip to liberalist egalitarianism. part of the fun of DJing, to me, is digging through crates in used shops, looking on the internet for out of print tracks, trading them with my friends, cleaning them up once in a while and chatting with people all over the world when buying or selling vinyl. "what you do on the turntables should be determined by your skill level and inventiveness, not by the vinyl you can afford or have access to" contradiction! first you say that everyone will have access to more music, then you assert that 'inventiveness' will occur? my retail experience shows me first that as soon as a new mix CD comes out kids are lining up to buy the tracks on that mix. and often they don't just want the tracks - they want to play them in the SAME order. second, since anyone can own and play anything, what will stop the 'top' DJs from playing all the songs a crowd wants to hear? easy access is exactly why mp3 DJs devalue our beloved music! also, your statement seems focused solely on 'smooth mix' djs like hawtin, and i daresay, many of the big room trance djs. what about those who dont blend for hours? are you asserting that that m!lls is not inventive? rob swift? cut chemist & dj shadow? et al? i agree that people with too much money own a lot of good tracks. but making tracks FREE to people will make that problem much, much worse. while i support unknown artists sharing their work, universally accepting this style of DJing will most certainly mire music production and DJing in a rut of banality. it's clear that you're behind this technology as some sort of 'bar-raising' effort that would urge DJs to be more creative. in fact, like so much globalization and imagineering, it's only going to homogenize an already dilute musical form. i can live with being a vinyl junkie but i'll never be an mp3 junkie. in the spirit of healthy debate, vince > Subject: Re: [313] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] everywhere > > Personally, I just can't get into Final Scratch and digital editing. There > are hundreds DJs out there who are equipped with the physical hardware to > (nearly) do this kind of audio montage live. They're called turntablists. > And in techno, a few names shouldn't be too far out of mind - Mills, Young, > Parker, Bone to name a few key Detroiters. > > Not to mention the detrimental effect use of digital files may have on the > trade of vinyl discs... > > Vince Woolums > AOL IM: vincewoolums > http://bnsrecords.gemm.com > http://www.recordcollectorinc.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Glyph1001 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <313@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 5:28 PM > Subject: Re: [313] hawtin hawtin everywhere > > > > Mixed reviews is the consensus. I personally thought musically, the cd > > was pretty cool and funky. I've said before that it sounded Studio > > One-ish. This series is all about the gear and techniques that goes into > > the production of these mixes, not necessarily the music itself, > > although some people expected way too much from R1chie musically, hence > > the mixed reviews. > > > > g. > > > > Rusty Blasco wrote: > > > > > So what's the consensus floating around thus far concerning the new > > > R!chie H!wtin joint? I personally haven't heard it yet and am waiting > > > for my first paycheck in months (fingers crossed it doesn't get held > > > up somewhere in the bureaucratic process); a positive public opinion > > > will increase the excitement I have towards my not-too-distant > > > purchase. Has he mellowed out or become any housier (as a colleague > > > informed me)? Please respond to me personally. > > > > > > Rusty > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
