subject:"\(313\) On The Decks"


The one thing that always put me off the vestax was the fact that I didnt
want to become reliant on the features it has which arent available on
technics [ I find it bad enough playing out in places that dont have hamster
switch on their mixer ]. Techn ics have always been built like a brick
sh!thouse and IMO vestax deck build quality has always been pretty shady -
but to their credit the new ones do actually feel damn solid and from what
Ive heard they do kick technics ass somewhat. From the brief experience Ive
had using them they seem to suffer way less with skipping/jumping than
technics which may be something to do with the crazy straight tonearm they
use.

I think nowadays the price is fairly comparably between 12's and 2000's (I
think when the vestax first arrived they were like 500GBP a deck or
something daft). Many people argue that its best to have technics because
theyre the club standard but Im seeing the vestax  popping up in more and
more clubs nowadays so I dont know if thats still valid.

jus' my tuppence worth ! 

peace,
Marc

 -Original Message-
 From: seth redmond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 10:32
 To: 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 OK, this is a little off-topic but...
 
 I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher 
 torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the 
 people who've 
 used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or 
 Technics (probably 
 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?
 
 ta
 
 -s
 
 
 _
 The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
 http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
 
 

--
This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of 
this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This 
communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an 
offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an 
official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman 
Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  
Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate 
and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change 
without notice.

RE: (313) re: best decks


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.  

:-Original Message-
:From: Langsman, Marc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:41 AM
:To: 'seth redmond'; 313@hyperreal.org
:Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
:
:
:The one thing that always put me off the vestax was the fact that I
didnt
:want to become reliant on the features it has which arent available on
:technics [ I find it bad enough playing out in places that dont have
:hamster
:switch on their mixer ]. Techn ics have always been built like a brick
:sh!thouse and IMO vestax deck build quality has always been pretty
shady -
:but to their credit the new ones do actually feel damn solid and from
what
:Ive heard they do kick technics ass somewhat. From the brief experience
Ive
:had using them they seem to suffer way less with skipping/jumping than
:technics which may be something to do with the crazy straight tonearm
they
:use.
:
:I think nowadays the price is fairly comparably between 12's and 2000's
(I
:think when the vestax first arrived they were like 500GBP a deck or
:something daft). Many people argue that its best to have technics
because
:theyre the club standard but Im seeing the vestax  popping up in more
and
:more clubs nowadays so I dont know if thats still valid.
:
:jus' my tuppence worth !
:
:peace,
:Marc
:
: -Original Message-
: From: seth redmond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Sent: 20 November 2002 10:32
: To: 313@hyperreal.org
: Subject: (313) re: best decks
:
:
: OK, this is a little off-topic but...
:
: I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher
: torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the
: people who've
: used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or
: Technics (probably
: 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?
:
: ta
:
: -s
:
:
: _
: The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
: http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
:
:
:
:---

:---
:This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
the
:designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended
recipient
:of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
:distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This
:communication is for information purposes only and should not be
regarded
:as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any
financial
:product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official
:statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed
to
:be secure or error-free.  Therefore, we do not represent that this
:information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as
:such.  All information is subject to change without notice.
:

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread seth redmond

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 -


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

Sorry I coming into the topic late, buta re we talking
about Vestax TTX vs. Technics by chance? My friend
just got a set of the TTXs and they seem pretty pimp.
They have a keylock (pitch shift?) function on them
that we don't know how to use yet. Anyone familiar?

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, seth redmond wrote:

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 -

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*.
a
href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail;http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail/a

TJJ

~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~

PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread James Bucknell

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 +
 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 -
 
 
 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

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Toby Frith

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 +
  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 -

  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

RE: (313) re: best decks


Or speed up and slow down the record rather than the platter - tho if
the hole is too slack the record will stop completely, if its too tight
the effect on the motor is virtually the same.

:-Original Message-
:From: Toby Frith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:03 PM
: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 +
:  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 -
: 
: 
:  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
: 
: 
:
:

Re: (313) re: best decks

But it's worth persevering with. I rarely touch the record or platter and it
gives you far more control over those records that aren't constant, e.g.
disco. It also doesn't sound so obvious. You also become far more sensitive
to tempo changes - it'll take about 10-20 seconds to get stuff pretty much
dead on when cueing up.

I wouldn't follow Pierre when it comes to beat matching in any case ;)

 I've yet to master the trick of using the pitch adjust to do it. Tricky,
but
 the best way.

  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.

RE: (313) re: best decks

Don't DJ here any more, but I nearly always used the outside to drag or push
on 1210's, and never had motor problems with them at all. More often than
not, you'd have to take the 1210's apart to get back the bezel for the
on/off. The only other viable way of speeding/slowing without going against
the motor is by over/under-repitching. If you try and play with the vinyl,
you either end up not having an effect, or you over step the mark (that
doesn't include press-pushing it, as that's working against the motor also).

I'd say that using the spindle is probably more risky than using the
outside, unless you really want to throw some speed into getting it matched.
Again, if you get it wrong, you can knock back the mix by more than you
really need, or you find that the motor overrides your attempts, and you get
further out. Only time I really used the spindle was for phasing tracks by
thumbing the spindle (never grab it, as you may find that a heavily-used
deck may have more give in the motor).

The only thing I found with Technics was the accuracy between +/- 2 and the
point at which the pitch light goes on/off. Usually over a 120bpm track
you'd lose/gain quarter to half a bpm. Not sure if that's relevant anymore
with newer versions (if there are any).

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: James Bucknell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 November 2002 16:08
 To: 313@hyperreal.org
 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 +
  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 -
 
 
  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

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread T.J.Johnson

Actually, touching the platter has the same effect on
the motor as adjusting the pitch unless you are totally
jamming the platter to a near halt. If you lightly
touch the platter or just twist the spindle, the
effects are no worse than adjusting the pitch. When
you adjust the pitch, the motor slows down but the
platter still wants to spin fast. The platter's moment
of inertia puts a torque on the motor (which is
instantaneously spinning slower that the record) before
it slows down. I wouldn't worry too much about it. If
it were disastrous to the motor, Technics wouldn't have
a stop button, which brings the platter to a fast halt.
This exerts a bigger torque to the motor than rubbing
your finger against the platter for sure.

Just imagine if you were to hold a merry-go-round by
its shaft while it were spinning and your hands were
the motor keeping it going. If you want the thing to
spin faster, you would have to start moving your hands
ffaster. In doing this, you would feel a reaction
torque on your hands from the platter. ie, the
merry-go-round would want to spin slower until the
motor pushes it faster. When the motor pushes the
platter pushes back. When you touch the platter the
platter pushes and the motor pushes back...

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, James Bucknell wrote:

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 +
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 -

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*.
a
href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail;http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail/a

TJJ

~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~

PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com

RE: (313) re: best decks


I think this is down to the fact there is a bearing on a spring that
clicks into place to lock the pitch control on zero - I know you can
have this modified so you don't get the click - im not sure if the later
technics with quartz lock ditched this featuer making the modification
unecessary

:The only thing I found with Technics was the accuracy between +/- 2 and
the
:point at which the pitch light goes on/off. Usually over a 120bpm track
:you'd lose/gain quarter to half a bpm. Not sure if that's relevant
anymore
:with newer versions (if there are any).
:
: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: James Bucknell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Sent: 21 November 2002 16:08
: To: 313@hyperreal.org
: 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 +
:  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 -
: 
: 
:  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
: 
: 
:

RE: (313) re: best decks


Ah yes that reminds me about the other cool feature on the pdx2000s -
the stop button stops records dead - no slow down at all really and
there is a pot to adjust the braking speed from this to power off style
slow down (there is also one for start up speed which is slightly less
useful)

:-Original Message-
:From: T.J.Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:37 PM
:To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Cc: 313@hyperreal.org
:Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks
:
:Actually, touching the platter has the same effect on
:the motor as adjusting the pitch unless you are totally
:jamming the platter to a near halt.  If you lightly
:touch the platter or just twist the spindle, the
:effects are no worse than adjusting the pitch.  When
:you adjust the pitch, the motor slows down but the
:platter still wants to spin fast.  The platter's moment
:of inertia puts a torque on the motor (which is
:instantaneously spinning slower that the record) before
:it slows down.  I wouldn't worry too much about it.  If
:it were disastrous to the motor, Technics wouldn't have
:a stop button, which brings the platter to a fast halt.
: This exerts a bigger torque to the motor than rubbing
:your finger against the platter for sure.
:
:Just imagine if you were to hold a merry-go-round by
:its shaft while it were spinning and your hands were
:the motor keeping it going.  If you want the thing to
:spin faster, you would have to start moving your hands
:ffaster.  In doing this, you would feel a reaction
:torque on your hands from the platter. ie, the
:merry-go-round would want to spin slower until the
:motor pushes it faster.  When the motor pushes the
:platter pushes back.  When you touch the platter the
:platter pushes and the motor pushes back...
:
:
:
:On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, James Bucknell wrote:
:
:
: 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 +
:  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 -
: 
: 
:  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*.
:  a
:href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://join.msn.com/?page=features/
feat
:uredemailhttp://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail/a
: 
: 
:
:
:TJJ
:
:~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~
:
:PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart.
:http://www.peoplepc.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

You can do the same on a 1210 tho... just lift the needle off the record.

Problem is tho, you have to make it sound like you meant to do it. ;)

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: Neil Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 12:42
 To: 'T.J.Johnson'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks



 Ah yes that reminds me about the other cool feature on the pdx2000s -
 the stop button stops records dead - no slow down at all really and
 there is a pot to adjust the braking speed from this to power off style
 slow down (there is also one for start up speed which is slightly less
 useful)

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread seth redmond

pimp? keylock? que?

From: T.J.Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 313@hyperreal.org
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 03:53:01 -0800 (PST)

Sorry I coming into the topic late, buta re we talking
about Vestax TTX vs. Technics by chance?  My friend
just got a set of the TTXs and they seem pretty pimp.
They have a keylock (pitch shift?) function on them
that we don't know how to use yet.  Anyone familiar?

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, seth redmond wrote:

 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 -

 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*.
 a
href=http://mail.peoplepc.com/jump/http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail;http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail/a

TJJ

~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~

PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com

_
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Michael Lees


Hi,

I bought a pair of the old vestax (PDX1's or something - they had 
another version PDX2's which had the tone arm at the top for scratching) 
about 3 years ago. I can say I've not had one problem with them, I 
prefer the old style vestax aesthetically.

It's certainly true, you do feel a difference going back to technics.
I played on technics for about a year prior to buying the vestax. At 
first the vestax felt strange and I wasn't sure if I'd made the right 
decision, however after a few months I was very pleased! Going back to 
Technics now is difficult but I think that's because I hardly ever use 
them. If you play regularly with both I think you shouldn't have too 
much of a problem.


The other good things about my vestax are :),
* On switch doesn't get in the way -- I had/have a bad habit of 
switching technics off with the side of my hand.

* Everything is replaceable (including pitch fader) - Never had to though
* they feel very responsive-after a while
* *Never* skip, plus you can play ultra warped records with nay problem
* Needles seem to last longer?
* Sc,.., sc,.., scratching!

2p

ps. bear in mind I'm talking about the older vestax, not too sure if 
what I say holds for 2000's but everyone says 2000s are a big 
improvement anyway.


--Mike



seth redmond wrote:

OK, this is a little off-topic but...

I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher 
torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the people 
who've used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or Technics 
(probably 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?


ta

-s


_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread rob buse

I am fairly sure that messing with the platter in any way does no damage to 
the motor.  If you ever examine the platter on a 1200, you will see that it 
is the only moving part in the system.  By starting the platter then throwing 
it forward or dragging it back, you are only working against the magnetic 
field the base unit generates.  There are no gears or belts causing 
mechanical strain and wear.  The design is so simple, which is probably why 
it hasn't changed in a long, long time.

.rob buse


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

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 -


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



___
Sent through e-mol. E-mail, Anywhere, Anytime. http://www.e-mol.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

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 +
   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 -
  
  
   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

RE: (313) re: best decks

 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

I dont think slowing the platter down with your finger affects the drive -
at least not on technics as the platter is not geared to the drive but is
driven by an induction coil. 
However I think with the vestax you can maybe use the +/-50% to 'jog' the
record instead of touching it ? I sometimes do this with the pitch on the
technics but its a bit of a bugger. 

--
This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of 
this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This 
communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an 
offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an 
official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman 
Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  
Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate 
and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change 
without notice.

Re: (313) re: best decks

- Original Message -
From: Craig Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Toby Frith [EMAIL PROTECTED]; James Bucknell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:45 PM
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 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).

Just a matter of practice if ya ask me ('cheating' isn't necessary), but it
always helps to know your records of course. There's no reason mixing with
the pitch should ever be slower if you've learned to mix that way. I can't
say I'm at the 10-20 seconds rate that Jonny's got, but I can match to where
I'd feel comfortable easing it in within the first 16 bars (about 25-30
seconds) - some tracks/circumstances are harder than others of course.

It's futile for anyone to try and convince someone else they should mix
differently than what works for them, but I will say this much from my own
experience: I know a number of people who used to swear by touching their
records (including me) who now only touch their records in the mix if they
really f*ck up, but I don't know anyone who's learned to mix w/o touching
that has decided that touching records in the mix is a better way to do it.
If you ever want to see a master of this technique, watch TP.

Tristan
=
Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
Music: http://www.mp313.com
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

Re: (313) re: best decks

I don't mean to go on, but...

You can *hear* whether a record is too fast or slow. You don't have to know
in advance. Also: cueing up is *faster* when you get used to not touching
the records. Try it. If anything, pitch mixing means you have more control
over records and therefore don't have to worry about, say, disco records
that speed up at a chorus: you accurately compensate as it happens.

I'll say it again: try it. I don't touch records in the mix, and I don't
organise my records by bpm or front - back (I'm not sure what that means
but I think you mean programming out a set in advance), and believe it or
not, can mix records I've never heard before: I buy new ones after all. And
it is much easier doing this by using the pitch control.

 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. ;)

RE: (313) re: best decks


I don't see how it can possibly be faster - if the record is too slow
you must move the pitch control too far in order to overcompensate and
then shift it back down once its caught up whereas if you touch the
record you can just give it a nudge and adjust the pitch control which
is instant.

:-Original Message-
:From: Jonny McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:08 PM
:To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Toby Frith; James Bucknell; 313@hyperreal.org
:Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks
:
:I don't mean to go on, but...
:
:You can *hear* whether a record is too fast or slow. You don't have to
know
:in advance. Also: cueing up is *faster* when you get used to not
touching
:the records. Try it. If anything, pitch mixing means you have more
control
:over records and therefore don't have to worry about, say, disco
records
:that speed up at a chorus: you accurately compensate as it happens.
:
:I'll say it again: try it. I don't touch records in the mix, and I
don't
:organise my records by bpm or front - back (I'm not sure what that
means
:but I think you mean programming out a set in advance), and believe it
or
:not, can mix records I've never heard before: I buy new ones after all.
And
:it is much easier doing this by using the pitch control.
:
: 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. ;)
:

RE: (313) re: best decks

Like I said in the post before

Horses for courses. ;)

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: Tristan Watkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 13:57
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Toby Frith; James Bucknell; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks


 - Original Message -
 From: Craig Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Toby Frith [EMAIL PROTECTED]; James Bucknell
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:45 PM
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks


  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).

 Just a matter of practice if ya ask me ('cheating' isn't
 necessary), but it
 always helps to know your records of course. There's no reason mixing with
 the pitch should ever be slower if you've learned to mix that way. I can't
 say I'm at the 10-20 seconds rate that Jonny's got, but I can
 match to where
 I'd feel comfortable easing it in within the first 16 bars (about 25-30
 seconds) - some tracks/circumstances are harder than others of course.

 It's futile for anyone to try and convince someone else they should mix
 differently than what works for them, but I will say this much from my own
 experience: I know a number of people who used to swear by touching their
 records (including me) who now only touch their records in the mix if they
 really f*ck up, but I don't know anyone who's learned to mix w/o touching
 that has decided that touching records in the mix is a better way
 to do it.
 If you ever want to see a master of this technique, watch TP.

 Tristan
 =
 Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
 Music: http://www.mp313.com
 Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
 a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

yeah the zero on the fader and zero of the pitch lock can be misaligned

 -Original Message-
 From: Neil Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 12:40
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'James Bucknell'; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 I think this is down to the fact there is a bearing on a spring that
 clicks into place to lock the pitch control on zero - I know you can
 have this modified so you don't get the click - im not sure 
 if the later
 technics with quartz lock ditched this featuer making the modification
 unecessary

 :The only thing I found with Technics was the accuracy 
 between +/- 2 and
 the
 :point at which the pitch light goes on/off. Usually over a 
 120bpm track
 :you'd lose/gain quarter to half a bpm. Not sure if that's relevant
 anymore
 :with newer versions (if there are any).
 :
 :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: James Bucknell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 : Sent: 21 November 2002 16:08
 : To: 313@hyperreal.org
 : 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 +
 :  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 -
 : 
 : 
 :  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
 : 
 : 
 :

--
This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of 
this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This 
communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an 
offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an 
official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman 
Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  
Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate 
and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject

Re: (313) re: best decks

- Original Message -
From: Neil Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 313@hyperreal.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 I don't see how it can possibly be faster - if the record is too slow
 you must move the pitch control too far in order to overcompensate and
 then shift it back down once its caught up whereas if you touch the
 record you can just give it a nudge and adjust the pitch control which
 is instant.

It really is. You get a feel for zeroing in on it really quickly. It
actually helps you hear better, if that makes any sense. I've taught DJing,
so I know this is a pretty useless argument, but the only way you can know
for sure, is to learn it and try it, or watch someone who knows how to do
it.

Most of who I consider to be the best DJs, and especially those who mix
fastest, mix using the pitch. This is not to say they never touch a record,
but that it's a last resort. Where's Derek Plaslaiko AKA 'Mr. I Don't Need
Headphones'? ;)

Tristan
=
Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
Music: http://www.mp313.com
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

(313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Eric Scuccimarra

I have a pair of the older Vestax and I love them. I have no problem using 
Technics other than that annoying 0 pitch lock on the older models. My 
Vestax are not the ones with the +-50% but still the extra 2% on the slider 
helps a lot. I find the motor on the Vestax to be much stronger than on any 
Technics I've used and my only complaints are that the tone-arm seems to be 
lighter and not quite as stable and that when you hit stop it slows down 
instead of screeching to a halt like the Technics do. These problems may 
have been corrected on the newer Vestax.


Eric

At 10:31 AM 11/20/2002 +, seth redmond wrote:

OK, this is a little off-topic but...

I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher 
torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the people 
who've used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or Technics 
(probably 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?


ta

-s


_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Stang Anya

Have to agree with Jonny, although I don't really deejay, I only mix
for my livingroom walls. My original reason for using the pitch only
was that I just didn't want my sweatysalty fingerprints all over my
records (and I did do it to try it out) so I had to find a way on how
to go about this. And that's how it works best for me now.

Anya : )

 -Original Message-
 From: Jonny McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:08 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Toby Frith; James Bucknell; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 I don't mean to go on, but...
 
 You can *hear* whether a record is too fast or slow. You 
 don't have to know
 in advance. Also: cueing up is *faster* when you get used to 
 not touching
 the records. Try it. If anything, pitch mixing means you have 
 more control
 over records and therefore don't have to worry about, say, 
 disco records
 that speed up at a chorus: you accurately compensate as it happens.
[...]

RE: (313) re: best decks


Each to his own I think - but Im with merf, I can mix both ways but Im
geenrally at the point now where I can shift the record with my fingers and
then stick the pitch control in roughly the right place. As I mix quite a
lot of ghetto stuff now which generally involeves having the two tunes
pitched in like 5 secs , using the pitch fader without touching the record
it definitely too slow.

If you check godfather and assault in the mix [some good vids on groovetech]
they dont use the pitch method - its just too slow to get a track mixed in
in like a few seconds.

 -Original Message-
 From: Tristan Watkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 14:22
 To: Neil Wallace
 Cc: 313
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Neil Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 313@hyperreal.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:13 PM
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 
  I don't see how it can possibly be faster - if the record 
 is too slow
  you must move the pitch control too far in order to 
 overcompensate and
  then shift it back down once its caught up whereas if you touch the
  record you can just give it a nudge and adjust the pitch 
 control which
  is instant.
 
 It really is. You get a feel for zeroing in on it really quickly. It
 actually helps you hear better, if that makes any sense. I've 
 taught DJing,
 so I know this is a pretty useless argument, but the only way 
 you can know
 for sure, is to learn it and try it, or watch someone who 
 knows how to do
 it.
 
 Most of who I consider to be the best DJs, and especially 
 those who mix
 fastest, mix using the pitch. This is not to say they never 
 touch a record,
 but that it's a last resort. Where's Derek Plaslaiko AKA 'Mr. 
 I Don't Need
 Headphones'? ;)
 
 Tristan
 =
 Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
 Music: http://www.mp313.com
 Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
 a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com
 
 
 

--
This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of 
this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This 
communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an 
offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an 
official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman 
Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  
Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate 
and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change 
without notice.

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Erik Jälevik

This has happened on mine. Does anyone know if this is easy to fix? Or maybe
point me to somewhere where it tells me how to do it?

- Original Message -
From: Langsman, Marc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Neil Wallace' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'James
Bucknell' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks



 yeah the zero on the fader and zero of the pitch lock can be misaligned

RE: (313) re: best decks


basically there are two pots from what I remem in the 1210s - I think one
changes the scale of the pitch control and the other chnages the alignment.
I think you need to fiddle with both of them but Ive not tinkered with mine
in a while so Id recommend you check the 1210s faq out :

http://music.hyperreal.org/dj/sl1200.html 



 -Original Message-
 From: Erik Jälevik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 14:28
 To: 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 This has happened on mine. Does anyone know if this is easy 
 to fix? Or maybe
 point me to somewhere where it tells me how to do it?
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Langsman, Marc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Neil Wallace' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'James
 Bucknell' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:20 PM
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
 
 
 
  yeah the zero on the fader and zero of the pitch lock can 
 be misaligned
 
 
 

--
This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the 
designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of 
this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This 
communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an 
offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an 
official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman 
Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  
Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate 
and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change 
without notice.

Re: (313) re: best decks

- Original Message -
From: Langsman, Marc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 313 313@hyperreal.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 Each to his own I think - but Im with merf, I can mix both ways but Im
 geenrally at the point now where I can shift the record with my fingers
and
 then stick the pitch control in roughly the right place. As I mix quite a
 lot of ghetto stuff now which generally involeves having the two tunes
 pitched in like 5 secs , using the pitch fader without touching the record
 it definitely too slow.

Seen it done in zero seconds, :) but in general I'd agree.

 If you check godfather and assault in the mix [some good vids on
groovetech]
 they dont use the pitch method - its just too slow to get a track mixed in
 in like a few seconds.

Fair enough. In these guys hands adjusting the pitch of the records *at all*
is an afterthought. :) They do adjust the tempo with the pitch as well
though. I think it's safe to say you need to be competent with both in order
to get a record mixed in less than 30 seconds.

Tristan
=
Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
Music: http://www.mp313.com
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

I you're all getting the wrong end of the stick with what I'm saying.

Firstly, my comments were in association to a little bit upon the
circumstances (i.e. awkward venue acoustics, bad/underpowered/non-existant
monitors, headphone breakdown). Secondly, I worked long and hard enough to
mix either via touching or shifting since 1991 (professionally for 6 years)
using a mix of the two as a basis. Lastly, You can *hear* whether a record
is too fast or slow. You don't have to know in advance. - ahhh now I know
why headphones and a monitor come in handy. Please. :)

I'll reiterate Horses for courses as they say.

BTW, you're initials ain't CJ are they? :)

I think I got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. This sarcastic
headache won't waver.

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: Jonny McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 14:08
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Toby Frith; James Bucknell; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks


 I don't mean to go on, but...

 You can *hear* whether a record is too fast or slow. You don't
 have to know
 in advance. Also: cueing up is *faster* when you get used to not touching
 the records. Try it. If anything, pitch mixing means you have more control
 over records and therefore don't have to worry about, say, disco records
 that speed up at a chorus: you accurately compensate as it happens.

 I'll say it again: try it. I don't touch records in the mix, and I don't
 organise my records by bpm or front - back (I'm not sure what that means
 but I think you mean programming out a set in advance), and believe it or
 not, can mix records I've never heard before: I buy new ones
 after all. And
 it is much easier doing this by using the pitch control.

  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. ;)

Re: (313) re: best decks

I've thought about not replying to this, but your tone annoys me. More fool
me :P So I apologise for being involved in this most ludicrous of threads.

I don't quite get what you're saying - you're right. Please try and
construct well formed sentences, it makes it easier for me. I'm suggesting
people can try the pitch control technique - it's not, as you seem to be
saying (and this is a prime example of where you get incoherent), cheating
or impossible. It isn't: I do it, others do it and it's fine. It's OK. Maybe
you just can't manage it. That's OK too. Maybe you feel your 6 years'
professional experience is being undermined? I'm sorry about that. All I am
suggesting is that it can be done and that it has it's benefits. But then
*you* are the one telling us about horses for courses, so you know this,
right? Anyway, I'm not going to continue flogging this dead horse. If you
feel the need to continue your hilarious gags like the CJ initials one, do
it offlist, and try the even better gag: Have you got a rubber, Jonny. It
kills me every time.

Sorry 313. Maybe I've been reading the DHP too much lately.

 I you're all getting the wrong end of the stick with what I'm saying.

 Firstly, my comments were in association to a little bit upon the
 circumstances (i.e. awkward venue acoustics, bad/underpowered/non-existant
 monitors, headphone breakdown). Secondly, I worked long and hard enough to
 mix either via touching or shifting since 1991 (professionally for 6
years)
 using a mix of the two as a basis. Lastly, You can *hear* whether a
record
 is too fast or slow. You don't have to know in advance. - ahhh now I know
 why headphones and a monitor come in handy. Please. :)

 I'll reiterate Horses for courses as they say.

 BTW, you're initials ain't CJ are they? :)

 I think I got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. This sarcastic
 headache won't waver.

 Dscaper

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread T.J.Johnson

I didn't even get the CJ joke.  CJ Bolland?  

Johnny Dangerously is a sweet movie by the way.

Horses for Courses?  WTF?  Is that like Different
strokes for different folks?

Whatever.  These posts are pretty amusing to read
though...


On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Jonny McIntosh wrote:

 
 I've thought about not replying to this, but your tone
 annoys me. More fool
 me :P So I apologise for being involved in this most
 ludicrous of threads.
 
 I don't quite get what you're saying - you're right.
 Please try and
 construct well formed sentences, it makes it easier
for
 me. I'm suggesting
 people can try the pitch control technique - it's not,
 as you seem to be
 saying (and this is a prime example of where you get
 incoherent), cheating
 or impossible. It isn't: I do it, others do it and
it's
 fine. It's OK. Maybe
 you just can't manage it. That's OK too. Maybe you
feel
 your 6 years'
 professional experience is being undermined? I'm sorry
 about that. All I am
 suggesting is that it can be done and that it has it's
 benefits. But then
 *you* are the one telling us about horses for
 courses, so you know this,
 right? Anyway, I'm not going to continue flogging this
 dead horse. If you
 feel the need to continue your hilarious gags like the
 CJ initials one, do
 it offlist, and try the even better gag: Have you got
 a rubber, Jonny. It
 kills me every time.
 
 Sorry 313. Maybe I've been reading the DHP too much
 lately.
 
  I you're all getting the wrong end of the stick with
 what I'm saying.
 
  Firstly, my comments were in association to a
little
 bit upon the
  circumstances (i.e. awkward venue acoustics,
 bad/underpowered/non-existant
  monitors, headphone breakdown). Secondly, I worked
 long and hard enough to
  mix either via touching or shifting since 1991
 (professionally for 6
 years)
  using a mix of the two as a basis. Lastly, You can
 *hear* whether a
 record
  is too fast or slow. You don't have to know in
 advance. - ahhh now I know
  why headphones and a monitor come in handy. Please.
:)
 
  I'll reiterate Horses for courses as they say.
 
  BTW, you're initials ain't CJ are they? :)
 
  I think I got out of bed on the wrong side this
 morning. This sarcastic
  headache won't waver.
 
  Dscaper

TJJ

~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~

PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart. 
http://www.peoplepc.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

*rotflmao* - try not to take this post the same way as you took the last.
Yes, it was partially sarcastic as I mention at the bottom of my last post,
but you will also notice I smile alot when doing so. If I was serious about
it, then I don't smile. :)

Ok, last post on this, as the next food I'm keeping to myself, instead of
feeding the trolls.

 I don't quite get what you're saying - you're right. Please try and
 construct well formed sentences, it makes it easier for me.

I'll break it down into nice and simple sentances for you, so that you can
dissect them later at your pleasure. :)

 Maybe you feel your 6 years'
 professional experience is being undermined? I'm sorry about
 that.

Quite the opposite. I'm certain that there are many many many more people
that read these threads that are far better than I am and in a far shorter
timespan. But I ain't the one that stated the ability to play unknown
records on the fly, so it equates that I at least justify my previous
position as having a little experience of the dj'ing.

 I'm suggesting people can try the pitch control technique -
 it's not, as you seem to be saying (and this is a prime example
 of where you get incoherent), cheating or impossible. It isn't.

I never said impossible. But as people have already highlighted, when time
is against you in a mix, sometimes stalling/pushing a track might be the one
thing that can save that mix. Some people prefer to touch the platter, other
people don't. I've never advised either way on which was correct/wrong, and
I was highlighting the instances of why you may need to stall/push. Alot of
people can pitch mix because of the style of music that they play, whereas
other genres demand a far higher usage of push/stall. (I emphasise or) in
my previous post was key to how you chose to read it, as I was attempting to
indicate that people should at least try and gain a good working knowledge;
not of a track, but how a track is built. That was an error on my part, and
I apologise. :)

 I do it, others do it and it's fine.
 It's OK. Maybe you just can't manage it. That's OK too.

Believe me I can do it. :)

Lastly:

I've thought about not replying to this, but your tone annoys me. More fool
me :P So I apologise for being involved in this most ludicrous of threads.

serious
I thought it was quite useful actually, as it's highlighted the different
ways in which people mix. What I think is ludicrous is the way in which
people can somehow read between the lines and use a bit of creative
thinking to try a force a thread down a path that it was never intended to
be taken. At no point have I dilluted the thoughts of others to fit my own
devices.

Lastly, I was actually being serious about the CJ, and the hehe after the
statement was in worry, and not in jest of your name. I do have limitation
as to how far I will dive to drag up humour. It wouldn't be the first (nor
would it be the last) time that someone has turned out to be someone.
/serious

Oh, and Horses for Courses is the same Different strokes for different
folks. ;)

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.

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread rh


You can increase the torque on Techniques, thats what I have done.  When I
hit stop the platter actually goes in reverse for a while.  All you have
to do is open it up and turn a yellow plastic nut clockwise.

rh
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Neil Wallace wrote:

 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:55 -
 From: Neil Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Langsman, Marc' [EMAIL PROTECTED],
  'seth redmond' [EMAIL PROTECTED], 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks


 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.

 :-Original Message-
 :From: Langsman, Marc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 :Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:41 AM
 :To: 'seth redmond'; 313@hyperreal.org
 :Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
 :
 :
 :The one thing that always put me off the vestax was the fact that I
 didnt
 :want to become reliant on the features it has which arent available on
 :technics [ I find it bad enough playing out in places that dont have
 :hamster
 :switch on their mixer ]. Techn ics have always been built like a brick
 :sh!thouse and IMO vestax deck build quality has always been pretty
 shady -
 :but to their credit the new ones do actually feel damn solid and from
 what
 :Ive heard they do kick technics ass somewhat. From the brief experience
 Ive
 :had using them they seem to suffer way less with skipping/jumping than
 :technics which may be something to do with the crazy straight tonearm
 they
 :use.
 :
 :I think nowadays the price is fairly comparably between 12's and 2000's
 (I
 :think when the vestax first arrived they were like 500GBP a deck or
 :something daft). Many people argue that its best to have technics
 because
 :theyre the club standard but Im seeing the vestax  popping up in more
 and
 :more clubs nowadays so I dont know if thats still valid.
 :
 :jus' my tuppence worth !
 :
 :peace,
 :Marc
 :
 : -Original Message-
 : From: seth redmond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 : Sent: 20 November 2002 10:32
 : To: 313@hyperreal.org
 : Subject: (313) re: best decks
 :
 :
 : OK, this is a little off-topic but...
 :
 : I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher
 : torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the
 : people who've
 : used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or
 : Technics (probably
 : 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?
 :
 : ta
 :
 : -s
 :
 :
 : _
 : The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
 : http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
 :
 :
 :
 :---
 
 :---
 :This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
 the
 :designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended
 recipient
 :of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
 :distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This
 :communication is for information purposes only and should not be
 regarded
 :as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any
 financial
 :product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official
 :statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed
 to
 :be secure or error-free.  Therefore, we do not represent that this
 :information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as
 :such.  All information is subject to change without notice.
 :

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread House of Suki

Actually,  that doesnt increase the torque (which is a function of the
motor), it increases your break.

-Original Message-
From: rh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 8:16 AM
To: 313@hyperreal.org
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

You can increase the torque on Techniques, thats what I have done.  When I
hit stop the platter actually goes in reverse for a while.  All you have
to do is open it up and turn a yellow plastic nut clockwise.

rh
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Neil Wallace wrote:

 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:49:55 -
 From: Neil Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'Langsman, Marc' [EMAIL PROTECTED],
  'seth redmond' [EMAIL PROTECTED], 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 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.

 :-Original Message-
 :From: Langsman, Marc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 :Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 10:41 AM
 :To: 'seth redmond'; 313@hyperreal.org
 :Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks
 :
 :
 :The one thing that always put me off the vestax was the fact that I
 didnt
 :want to become reliant on the features it has which arent available on
 :technics [ I find it bad enough playing out in places that dont have
 :hamster
 :switch on their mixer ]. Techn ics have always been built like a brick
 :sh!thouse and IMO vestax deck build quality has always been pretty
 shady -
 :but to their credit the new ones do actually feel damn solid and from
 what
 :Ive heard they do kick technics ass somewhat. From the brief experience
 Ive
 :had using them they seem to suffer way less with skipping/jumping than
 :technics which may be something to do with the crazy straight tonearm
 they
 :use.
 :
 :I think nowadays the price is fairly comparably between 12's and 2000's
 (I
 :think when the vestax first arrived they were like 500GBP a deck or
 :something daft). Many people argue that its best to have technics
 because
 :theyre the club standard but Im seeing the vestax  popping up in more
 and
 :more clubs nowadays so I dont know if thats still valid.
 :
 :jus' my tuppence worth !
 :
 :peace,
 :Marc
 :
 : -Original Message-
 : From: seth redmond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 : Sent: 20 November 2002 10:32
 : To: 313@hyperreal.org
 : Subject: (313) re: best decks
 :
 :
 : OK, this is a little off-topic but...
 :
 : I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher
 : torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the
 : people who've
 : used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or
 : Technics (probably
 : 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?
 :
 : ta
 :
 : -s
 :
 :
 : _
 : The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
 : http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
 :
 :
 :
 :---

 :---
 :This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
 the
 :designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended
 recipient
 :of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
 :distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This
 :communication is for information purposes only and should not be
 regarded
 :as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any
 financial
 :product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official
 :statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed
 to
 :be secure or error-free.  Therefore, we do not represent that this
 :information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as
 :such.  All information is subject to change without notice.
 :

Re: (313) re: best decks

OK. If I've misread I apologise, though I'll confess I'm still unable to see
it when I read your emails. That's not reading between lines :) Just one
point, I'm sure you *can* play unknown records on the fly: all records are
unknown at some point. That's precisely my point about pitch control: it's a
lot easier. If it isn't your bag, then fair enough. I don't think we
actually disagree there, given my misreading. And I'm not suggesting you do
have to do it all the time. As Neil pointed out to me, if you need to be at
plus 8, you're going to have to use your hands. I'm not claiming there's any
more merit in it than as a general approach. If I've given the impression of
suggesting people must mix in one way then that'll be my mistake. My last
post on this.

Take care,

J R McIntosh ;)

Re: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread plaztikjezuz

personally I like the 1200's any club you play at will have these.

and I personally think the 1200's have more torque.
if you weight the platers of the 1200's over the vestax the tech's weigh a hell 
of a lot more. so the tech's engine has to not only move the weight of the 
record but also that plater.

maybe not more torque but the engine is stronger.

scotto
lansing, mi.
 OK, this is a little off-topic but...
 
 I'm leaning toward the Vestax for the longer pitch control and higher 
 torque, but I'm interested to know the list's opinion. Of the people who've 
 used both, what do people prefer the Vestax PX2000 or Technics (probably 
 1200 Mk3 if I can find any)?
 
 ta
 
 -s
 
 
 _
 The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
 http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

RE: (313) re: best decks

I did say it would be my last post, but it wouldn't be right for obvious
reasons.

My apologies also. I must admit I haven't exactly been in the best of moods,
and likewise I may have also misread comments. Well, at least we can lay
claim to entertain the other list members for the afternoon. :)

Seth Raymond (thread starter) had better buy some decks now or me and Mac
are going to take his head off. *lol*

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: Jonny McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 20:18
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks


 OK. If I've misread I apologise, though I'll confess I'm still
 unable to see
 it when I read your emails. That's not reading between lines :) Just one
 point, I'm sure you *can* play unknown records on the fly: all records are
 unknown at some point. That's precisely my point about pitch
 control: it's a
 lot easier. If it isn't your bag, then fair enough. I don't think we
 actually disagree there, given my misreading. And I'm not
 suggesting you do
 have to do it all the time. As Neil pointed out to me, if you
 need to be at
 plus 8, you're going to have to use your hands. I'm not claiming
 there's any
 more merit in it than as a general approach. If I've given the
 impression of
 suggesting people must mix in one way then that'll be my mistake. My last
 post on this.

 Take care,

 J R McIntosh ;)

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Cyborg K

Do you think it's possible to beat match as fast using the pitch slider as
using your hands?

If one is quick mixing this would be an issue...  I personally probably use
my hands more than I should, that is just how I have taught myself, I find
if I nudge the pitch slider forward extra to correct for the actual tempo
difference+the amount the records are off beat, I have a hard time finding
the exact spot again (which would be just slightly removed from the original
position)...

/dave

-Original Message-
From: Jonny McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 3:18 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks


OK. If I've misread I apologise, though I'll confess I'm still unable to see
it when I read your emails. That's not reading between lines :) Just one
point, I'm sure you *can* play unknown records on the fly: all records are
unknown at some point. That's precisely my point about pitch control: it's a
lot easier. If it isn't your bag, then fair enough. I don't think we
actually disagree there, given my misreading. And I'm not suggesting you do
have to do it all the time. As Neil pointed out to me, if you need to be at
plus 8, you're going to have to use your hands. I'm not claiming there's any
more merit in it than as a general approach. If I've given the impression of
suggesting people must mix in one way then that'll be my mistake. My last
post on this.

Take care,

J R McIntosh ;)

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread plaztikjezuz

it may not be faster, but IMO it is safer, when you are speading up a record by 
hand sometimes they slip and then you are no longer just a quarter beat behind 
but an unknown amount of beats ahead. 

I just reciently learned how to do this where I feel comfortable doing it in 
front of people and I think it makes a mix smoother. there are less jagged 
edges in the mix. I still resort to the speed up or drag when I'm getting the 
track close in my head phones, but I try to use the pitch for matching when I'm 
mixing.

I still touch the record if I have to, like when I really blow the mix. (lol)

scotto
lanisg, mi

ps. I would like to thank jim bishop  trent abbey for taking the time and 
teaching the tricks. 
 
 I don't see how it can possibly be faster - if the record is too slow
 you must move the pitch control too far in order to overcompensate and
 then shift it back down once its caught up whereas if you touch the
 record you can just give it a nudge and adjust the pitch control which
 is instant.

RE: (313) re: best decks

2002-11-20 Thread Fred Heutte

I know, I've given this speech before.

It's more or less an accident of history that the Technics 1200 founded
the modern DJ age and continues to be the standard turntable.  It's
certainly been put to far more different kinds of uses than the designers
could ever have imagined.

The real reason is that, overall, it is a marvel of mechanical engineering.
There's a lot of talk about torque and how the Vestax design meets or
exceeds the Technics, but what you don't hear about is that delicate
balance between torque, starting speed and platter weight that distinguishes
the 1200 from all other turntables.  This is what makes the 1200 a musical
instrument, at least in a secondary way, as compared to a mere audio
reproduction device.

The 1200 has its share of faults -- everyone hates the placement of the
on-off switch, and the little pop-up light, which requires something
approaching knee surgery to fix, is useful but the lights are difficult
and expensive to replace.  I've found almost universally that, when pitched
off the 0% locked pitch position, they spin just a little faster after
being stopped and restarted.  And rotation speeds are very consistent
over most of the pitch range but vary noticeably once you get above +/- 6%.

And don't even get me started about how they rip off customers on
replacement parts like covers.  Last I checked, it was $45 per HINGE on
those covers!

The 1200 has a number of clever design features that go almost unnoticed.
And there is a consistency of materials and construction that's always
evident.  Even beat-up club 1200s are pretty reliable.  

The 1200 was first marketed to some degree as an audiophile turntable,
since it evolved out of the high-end Technics line of the day.  It was
hardly then and certainly not now a true audiophile unit.  Just the
rumble figures alone would scare the average reader of Absolute Sound.
But we're not here to talk about playing 180 gram virgin vinyl on $6,000
turntables.  You laugh!  But take a look:

http://www.audiocircuit.com/9150-turntable-circuit/Commercial/Nottingham%20Analogue-
NOT/9150CMNOT.htm

Besides, the 1200 rumble adds the distinctive je-ne-sais-quoi to a
really good bassline playing on a Really Big Sound System.

I've seen 1200s that ran daily for 10 years without a hitch, although
you can tell the pitch controls are ral loose!  I've seen them
indoors in all kinds of situations including on stages that bounced
like trampolines, outdoors on the beach and in the hills, and they are 
almost if not quite indestructible.  

I've seen DJs do all kinds of crazy things with 1200s, not just
backspins, platter twists and what have you.  Not even Rotator plumbed
the depths of what a 1200 can do.  If you watch enough DJs over the years, 
you'll be surprised at how many different ways there are to play.  There 
is great versatility built into its somewhat simple and otherwise 
nondescript design.  

I'm not always a believer in the standard equipment in a given field.  
I use the Opera browser instead of Internet Explorer, and have never worn 
a pair of Nike shoes even though Portland where I live is Niketown.

But the 1200 deserves its place as *the* standard DJ turntable.

Fred

RE: (313) re: best decks

Had a play along time ago on a set of gold-plated Technics. The shop keeper
wasn't too happy when I put 5-pence pieces on the back of the carts tho.

I think they were something to do with their anniversary (mid-90's).

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: Fred Heutte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 20:34
 To: 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks


 I know, I've given this speech before.

 It's more or less an accident of history that the Technics 1200 founded
 the modern DJ age and continues to be the standard turntable.  It's
 certainly been put to far more different kinds of uses than the designers
 could ever have imagined.

 The real reason is that, overall, it is a marvel of mechanical
 engineering.
 There's a lot of talk about torque and how the Vestax design meets or
 exceeds the Technics, but what you don't hear about is that delicate
 balance between torque, starting speed and platter weight that
 distinguishes
 the 1200 from all other turntables.  This is what makes the 1200 a musical
 instrument, at least in a secondary way, as compared to a mere audio
 reproduction device.

 The 1200 has its share of faults -- everyone hates the placement of the
 on-off switch, and the little pop-up light, which requires something
 approaching knee surgery to fix, is useful but the lights are difficult
 and expensive to replace.  I've found almost universally that,
 when pitched
 off the 0% locked pitch position, they spin just a little faster after
 being stopped and restarted.  And rotation speeds are very consistent
 over most of the pitch range but vary noticeably once you get
 above +/- 6%.

 And don't even get me started about how they rip off customers on
 replacement parts like covers.  Last I checked, it was $45 per HINGE on
 those covers!

 The 1200 has a number of clever design features that go almost unnoticed.
 And there is a consistency of materials and construction that's always
 evident.  Even beat-up club 1200s are pretty reliable.

 The 1200 was first marketed to some degree as an audiophile turntable,
 since it evolved out of the high-end Technics line of the day.  It was
 hardly then and certainly not now a true audiophile unit.  Just the
 rumble figures alone would scare the average reader of Absolute Sound.
 But we're not here to talk about playing 180 gram virgin vinyl on $6,000
 turntables.  You laugh!  But take a look:

 http://www.audiocircuit.com/9150-turntable-circuit/Commercial/Nott
ingham%20Analogue-
NOT/9150CMNOT.htm

Besides, the 1200 rumble adds the distinctive je-ne-sais-quoi to a
really good bassline playing on a Really Big Sound System.

I've seen 1200s that ran daily for 10 years without a hitch, although
you can tell the pitch controls are ral loose!  I've seen them
indoors in all kinds of situations including on stages that bounced
like trampolines, outdoors on the beach and in the hills, and they are
almost if not quite indestructible.

I've seen DJs do all kinds of crazy things with 1200s, not just
backspins, platter twists and what have you.  Not even Rotator plumbed
the depths of what a 1200 can do.  If you watch enough DJs over the years,
you'll be surprised at how many different ways there are to play.  There
is great versatility built into its somewhat simple and otherwise
nondescript design.

I'm not always a believer in the standard equipment in a given field.
I use the Opera browser instead of Internet Explorer, and have never worn
a pair of Nike shoes even though Portland where I live is Niketown.

But the 1200 deserves its place as *the* standard DJ turntable.

Fred

Re: (313) re: best decks

- Original Message -
From: Craig Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Fred Heutte [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:07 PM
Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks

 Had a play along time ago on a set of gold-plated Technics. The shop
keeper
 wasn't too happy when I put 5-pence pieces on the back of the carts tho.

 I think they were something to do with their anniversary (mid-90's).

Were they black as well? I seem to recall seeing some gold plated 1210's
when they first came out. I think it was some kind of promotion or limited
edition, as you say.

Tristan
=
Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
Music: http://www.mp313.com
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

RE: (313) re: best decks

http://www.homedj.co.uk/Images/Product/Technics/Decks/sl1200ltd.gif

Sexay. :)

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: Tristan Watkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 November 2002 21:52
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fred Heutte; 313@hyperreal.org
 Subject: Re: (313) re: best decks


 - Original Message -
 From: Craig Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Fred Heutte [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org
 Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:07 PM
 Subject: RE: (313) re: best decks


  Had a play along time ago on a set of gold-plated Technics. The shop
 keeper
  wasn't too happy when I put 5-pence pieces on the back of the carts tho.
 
  I think they were something to do with their anniversary (mid-90's).

 Were they black as well? I seem to recall seeing some gold plated 1210's
 when they first came out. I think it was some kind of promotion or limited
 edition, as you say.

 Tristan
 =
 Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com
 Music: http://www.mp313.com
 Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for
 a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com

Re: (313) re: best decks