DJ'ing with MP3's.

[TRohr]

This is an extension of Sammyhkhan's thread on DJ'ing with MP3's.... I got sick of reading through your piss fest so I started this new thread to get my view across.

 

And guys I understand the art behind mixing music. I am not suggesting that everyone go out and buy MixMeister so that they can let a computer do all of the physical mixing... it's just a really great tool to categorize your music. I'm also just giving alternate views to why MP3's are really great, and why MP3/laptop DJ's shouldn't be looked down upon.... Maybe in the end i'm just pointing the obvious to you all... i'm not quite sure yet. Sorry if I am, i'm only human, it's 4:00 in the morning, and I have the flu.

 

I think anyone that disses an MP3 DJ obviously isn't thinking about the big picture. Sure there are a lot of little 13 year olds out there using MixMeister and WinAmp to "remix" tracks but when a DJ uses MP3's I really don't think they should be labeled as such. In the bigger picture it's all about the audience, and folks, the audience usually can't tell the f'ing difference between 128kb's or 300kbs or vinyl or CD's or whatever else you have (partially because they're usually really f'ed up).

 

MP3's are the future. Vinyl is practically dead already except for turntablists, hiphop dj's etc and CD's are on their way and face it, who the hell wouldn't want to be able to pack their setup into a bag that weighs no more than about 30lbs?

 

Also, think about this. Instead of having to spend months and months categorizing your music and hours and hours or days and days putting together the perfect mix you could have a computer generate a list of tracks that will mix beautifully even if they are just stacked on top of each other without any EQ'ing whatsoever. You could take that list, pick out the songs that fit the mood/feelings that you want and have them all placed back to back in a nice neat playlist. Now, I am completely against using programs such as MixMeister to tack tracks together, but using these programs to categorize your music and beat match everything saves you so much f'ing time which actually lets your creative side out. NOT ONLY THAT BUT YOU CAN ACTUALLY LOOK UP AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE AUDIENCE IS ENJOYING YOUR MIXING/TRACK SELECTION INSTEAD OF HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT WHERE THE HELL YOUR CD'S WENT!

 

When your able to pull your head out of your damn techniques and things, and when you use MP3's, you can take the time to piece together some wicked ass effects or instruments samples etc. (hardware can't compare to VST's these days) or completely re-work tracks on the fly and fuse them so tightly together with all sorts of effects that you could never guess what track will be coming next. You can watch the audience suffer as their brains begin to melt and when you think they can't handle it anymore you can blow their minds away with the original track itself but with such intensity it's like re-listening to it for the first time again. Not just "oh hey! I've heard this loop before! Oop! OOP! YEP! IT'S LSD BY HALLUCINOGEN, WOW!"

 

Also, thinking way into the future... I don't know if any of you have ever heard of the mass music dome (http://www.massmusicdome.com/) or sensory domes but I can see clubs evolving into full on audio/visual sensory experiences with ridiculous 150:50 surround sound or something like that... an enormous sphere of speakers, not just some nice stacks, amps, and a few lasers and fog machines.... If something like this were created I sure as shit can tell you that they wouldn't be using vinyl or cd's along with it.

 

Just a few cents....

[Anoebis]

In the bigger picture it's all about the audience, and folks, the audience usually can't tell the f'ing difference between 128kb's or 300kbs or vinyl or CD's or whatever else you have (partially because they're usually really f'ed up).

Only 2 remarks... it's not only about the audience, but also about the music, the artists and the labels... because without them working with good material... no folks and audience

 

second remark: for you dj-ing is mathematics on a computer, for me it's a form of art... i always look at it as a "collage" (or patchwork), which means you take different pieces of art (the tracks) and you make a new thing (a mix) out of it, that is your expression... But to make good art you need days and months and years for practicing... You have to listen each track 5 times to understand mood, and with what it fits... you have to know the technique to mix perfectly and when you manage to do that... You may be able to create a perfect artwork for people once in a while (because sometimes artwork fails as well)!

 

This is UNTHINKABLE with a PC, you don't even need skills, my grandmam can do it...

[TRohr]

second remark: for you dj-ing is mathematics on a computer, for me it's a form of art... i always look at it as a "collage" (or patchwork), which means you take different pieces of art (the tracks) and you make a new thing (a mix) out of it, that is your expression... But to make good art you need days and months and years for practicing... You have to listen each track 5 times to understand mood, and with what it fits... you have to know the technique to mix perfectly and when you manage to do that... You may be able to create a perfect artwork for people once in a while (because sometimes artwork fails as well)!

 

This is UNTHINKABLE with a PC, you don't even need skills, my grandmam can do it...

I understand where your coming from and well said but I think you didn't quite understand what I was getting at with the whole "save time" deal. I was just saying that instead of having to spend a ridiculous amount of time categorizing all of your music, you could let a computer do it for you, then whip up a list of tracks that are harmonized and fairly guaranteed to mix well. Then, from that list, you can select tracks that have the feeling/ color that you want to portray to the audience and be fairly sure that you can't go wrong. It's to help you along a bit.... THEN~ your music expression/ expertise/ art can kick in. You can take those tracks, maybe add a few others, and go to town on creating something really unique. When you have several thousand CD's to look through, it's a bit harder to get down with your creative side.... And I don't know about how much music you have but everyone in my family is huge music fanatics and with all of us combined we have a server with terabytes of music on it. It's everything from old, old 50's rock to Native American chants, to... pretty much everything.... I think we even have some porn music with moans and SFX's included.

[sammyhkhan]

[HaHa, I cannot believe that we are going to do this again]

 

I buy much more CDs now anyway, but I still buy the occasional out of stock 320kbps track from audiojelly.com.

 

I can hear no difference between 320kbps and CDs, but when it comes to even 256kbps, I hear the difference. I really do not believe in VBR encoding for professional DJing, but that is just me and I am not professional so it really does not matter…

[TRohr]

[HaHa, I cannot believe that we are going to do this again]

Ahahaah, maybe I shouldn't have posted this but in your thread it seemed that a lot of people were bashing MP3/laptop DJ's (sounded more or less because they were turntable fanboys) and I think it's wrong. These things need to be thought of critically! Expand your mind! Also, really, no one has to read, or reply to this thread ^ ^... it's just me getting my opinions and feelings across.

[sammyhkhan]

Ahahaah, maybe I shouldn't have posted this but in your thread it seemed that a lot of people were bashing MP3/laptop DJ's (sounded more or less because they were turntable fanboys) and I think it's wrong. These things need to be thought of critically! Expand your mind! Also, really, no one has to read, or reply to this thread ^ ^... it's just me getting my opinions and feelings across.

Yeah quite a few bashed laptop/MP3 DJs, but many of the people on this forum who I know are good DJs (Nemo and Profane) had a more positive attitude towards MP3s and laptops. I agree with you, it is the future, but it might take I while before we get there... However, I do not agree that there is no difference between for example 192kbps and 320kbps. There is and it is noticable!

[moni]

This is an extension of Sammyhkhan's thread on DJ'ing with MP3's.... I got sick of reading through your piss fest so I started this new thread to get my view across.

 

And guys I understand the art behind mixing music. I am not suggesting that everyone go out and buy MixMeister so that they can let a computer do all of the physical mixing... it's just a really great tool to categorize your music. I'm also just giving alternate views to why MP3's are really great, and why MP3/laptop DJ's shouldn't be looked down upon.... Maybe in the end i'm just pointing the obvious to you all... i'm not quite sure yet. Sorry if I am, i'm only human, it's 4:00 in the morning, and I have the flu.

 

I think anyone that disses an MP3 DJ obviously isn't thinking about the big picture. Sure there are a lot of little 13 year olds out there using MixMeister and WinAmp to "remix" tracks but when a DJ uses MP3's I really don't think they should be labeled as such. In the bigger picture it's all about the audience, and folks, the audience usually can't tell the f'ing difference between 128kb's or 300kbs or vinyl or CD's or whatever else you have (partially because they're usually really f'ed up).

 

MP3's are the future. Vinyl is practically dead already except for turntablists, hiphop dj's etc and CD's are on their way and face it, who the hell wouldn't want to be able to pack their setup into a bag that weighs no more than about 30lbs?

 

Also, think about this. Instead of having to spend months and months categorizing your music and hours and hours or days and days putting together the perfect mix you could have a computer generate a list of tracks that will mix beautifully even if they are just stacked on top of each other without any EQ'ing whatsoever. You could take that list, pick out the songs that fit the mood/feelings that you want and have them all placed back to back in a nice neat playlist. Now, I am completely against using programs such as MixMeister to tack tracks together, but using these programs to categorize your music and beat match everything saves you so much f'ing time which actually lets your creative side out. NOT ONLY THAT BUT YOU CAN ACTUALLY LOOK UP AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE AUDIENCE IS ENJOYING YOUR MIXING/TRACK SELECTION INSTEAD OF HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT WHERE THE HELL YOUR CD'S WENT!

 

When your able to pull your head out of your damn techniques and things, and when you use MP3's, you can take the time to piece together some wicked ass effects or instruments samples etc. (hardware can't compare to VST's these days) or completely re-work tracks on the fly and fuse them so tightly together with all sorts of effects that you could never guess what track will be coming next. You can watch the audience suffer as their brains begin to melt and when you think they can't handle it anymore you can blow their minds away with the original track itself but with such intensity it's like re-listening to it for the first time again. Not just "oh hey! I've heard this loop before! Oop! OOP! YEP! IT'S LSD BY HALLUCINOGEN, WOW!"

 

Also, thinking way into the future... I don't know if any of you have ever heard of the mass music dome (http://www.massmusicdome.com/) or sensory domes but I can see clubs evolving into full on audio/visual sensory experiences with ridiculous 150:50 surround sound or something like that... an enormous sphere of speakers, not just some nice stacks, amps, and a few lasers and fog machines.... If something like this were created I sure as shit can tell you that they wouldn't be using vinyl or cd's along with it.

 

Just a few cents....

The phrase with bold: VERY WRONG. The audience CAN make a difference between low quality and high quality. Don't underestimate your audience, ever... some of it might listen to music more than you do.

 

Are you a dj? Are you speaking from experience? If yes, do you apply what you preach? Does it work, if yes?

[Lauryn]

In the bigger picture it's all about the audience, and folks, the audience usually can't tell the f'ing difference between 128kb's or 300kbs or vinyl or CD's or whatever else you have (partially because they're usually really f'ed up).

Sorry but there is a really big difference between a 128kb mp3 and original CD quality. When played out on a proper sound system this is extremely apparent. DJs who play a mix of mp3's at 128, 256, 320, and CD quality sound horrible as well. Listen to a 128kb mp3 and notice how its got this piercing hissing high end....and weak low end sound and then tell me its ok. I don't think anyone is advocating against the laptop djs, however, with the availability of larger harddrives at such inexpensive prices these days, there is no reason for them not to play wav files.

 

Also, think about this. Instead of having to spend months and months categorizing your music and hours and hours or days and days putting together the perfect mix you could have a computer generate a list of tracks that will mix beautifully even if they are just stacked on top of each other without any EQ'ing whatsoever. You could take that list, pick out the songs that fit the mood/feelings that you want and have them all placed back to back in a nice neat playlist. Now, I am completely against using programs such as MixMeister to tack tracks together, but using these programs to categorize your music and beat match everything saves you so much f'ing time which actually lets your creative side out. NOT ONLY THAT BUT YOU CAN ACTUALLY LOOK UP AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE AUDIENCE IS ENJOYING YOUR MIXING/TRACK SELECTION INSTEAD OF HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT WHERE THE HELL YOUR CD'S WENT!

After reading this statement, I'm also wondering if you are a dj yourself, whether you have any idea of what you are talking about. A good dj doesn't need days and days of putting together the perfect mix, in fact, every time i dj, i have no clue which tracks i'm going to end up playing until i see the crowd, the party, the overall mood and atmosphere- and this is something a computer can never decide for you. Organization is easy- I choose to alphabetize my cds ....i've seen people who organize according to sound, or roughly bpm....

 

 

Only 2 remarks... it's not only about the audience, but also about the music, the artists and the labels... because without them working with good material... no folks and audience

 

second remark: for you dj-ing is mathematics on a computer, for me it's a form of art... i always look at it as a "collage" (or patchwork), which means you take different pieces of art (the tracks) and you make a new thing (a mix) out of it, that is your expression... But to make good art you need days and months and years for practicing... You have to listen each track 5 times to understand mood, and with what it fits... you have to know the technique to mix perfectly and when you manage to do that... You may be able to create a perfect artwork for people once in a while (because sometimes artwork fails as well)!

 

This is UNTHINKABLE with a PC, you don't even need skills, my grandmam can do it...

+1 ....btw i loved this set you did that went from downtempo to melodic full on......

[slyman2.0]

If you have been around long enough this is the exact same stupid arguement that went on when we were transitioning from vinyl to cd.

"cds sound cold, sterile, the auidence can tell the difference, i would never spin cds"

"real djs only spin vinyl"

 

in 5-10 years no one will spin cds anymore, just like most people don't use hardware synths to make this music anymore.

 

its pretty damn obvious

[Towelie]

I do not agree that there is no difference between for example 192kbps and 320kbps. There is and it is noticable!

You cant hear the difference

[Basilisk]

I both agree and disagree. One statement I take issue with is "MP3s are the future." Wrong. MP3s are the past. The only reason we have MP3s is to save on bandwidth and hard drive space--both of which we have plenty of, nowadays. Spinning MP3s is lazy, cheap, and even downright disrespectful at times. I don't mean that DJing off a laptop is inherently evil or something--in fact, I suggest completely separating the tools of production from the quality of the media. And really, the quality is what I take objection to--even if you can't hear the difference, some people can, especially on a good sound system. MP3s sound vapid and flavourless, depending on the bitrate. Sure, 320k can pass most hearing tests, but what is being gained from the use of compressed media? Disk space, bandwidth, convenience, and a bit of money. Frankly, if you are willing to sacrifice quality for these things then I don't think you should be in this already over-saturated business...

 

The use of laptops is a completely different matter. In fact, over the summer I have nearly digitized my entire music collection. I have well over 1TB of WAV files sitting on a few external drives, ready and primed for the day when I purchase the necessary gear to go truly digital. The thought of walking into a gig with my entire music collection contained in a little box is quite appealing to me, and the creative potential of using DJing software and a midi controller excites my imagination.

 

I think this debate would flow with greater ease were the component arguments differentiated... there is the issue of quality, and the tools in use. DJing on a laptop does not necessitate accepting lesser quality media.

[reger]

i beg to differ towelie, im quite sure, on good sound system you could tell the difference, it depends quite much on what is being played at that moment

[Lauryn]

DJing on a laptop does not necessitate accepting lesser quality media.

Exactly!

Right now i think it comes down to a matter of personal preference.

It may sound silly, but i actually enjoy frantically flipping through my cd book racing against time to find the perfect track to play.

It just wouldn't be the same on a laptop. not bad, not good, just different.

[Acido Domingo]

Only 2 remarks... it's not only about the audience, but also about the music, the artists and the labels... because without them working with good material... no folks and audience

Sure. Taking a pocket-size HD to a party is one thing, doesn't mean you'd have to fill it with stuff you don't own though.

second remark: for you dj-ing is mathematics on a computer, for me it's a form of art... i always look at it as a "collage" (or patchwork), which means you take different pieces of art (the tracks) and you make a new thing (a mix) out of it, that is your expression... But to make good art you need days and months and years for practicing... You have to listen each track 5 times to understand mood, and with what it fits... you have to know the technique to mix perfectly and when you manage to do that... You may be able to create a perfect artwork for people once in a while (because sometimes artwork fails as well)!

 

This is UNTHINKABLE with a PC, you don't even need skills, my grandmam can do it...

That's like saying painting is an art and computer graphics isn't because your grandma can use MS Paint. That's true, but you can create art in different ways, there's lots of other software that lets you create art in a variety of ways---mathematically like with POVRay, simulating traditional painting like with Corel Painter (basically the same as MS Paint yet totally different in the level of skill you need and the things you can do), or different from both like with Maya.

Using a computer doesn't keep you from listening five times to each track and understanding it perfectly, does it? Now if you try to run two WinAmp instances and create a good mix with it, it will probably sound crap, but you don't have to. Though it can be an art in its own right, like writing 4K intros where you deliberately make things difficult for yourself to show your 5k1llZ0r are 1337 enough to do it anyway.

[Anoebis]

Exactly!

Right now i think it comes down to a matter of personal preference.

It may sound silly, but i actually enjoy frantically flipping through my cd book racing against time to find the perfect track to play.

It just wouldn't be the same on a laptop. not bad, not good, just different.

I agree fully with this...

 

A lap top is not bad for dj-ing if WAV files from original cds are getting played... altough I think it is easier, is it the pc that does the beatmatching for you or not?

[Goa Bill]

i beg to differ towelie, im quite sure, on good sound system you could tell the difference, it depends quite much on what is being played at that moment

On how many parties were you exactly and to decide that?

[filitico]

im taking this as you are an mp3 DJ?

 

 

honestly, its bad enough im spinning other people's music. Worse even that I would contemplate spinning anything under 256k. You see, DJs need to use turntables or CD players to legitimize what they do. otherwise it isn't art if all you do is categorize them make a string and poof there it is. My little sister can do that. Im not paying good money to go to a club that plays a human jukebox.

 

i don't mind mp3 DJs. what I have a problem with is snotty little brats with money doing gigs for free so they can play their kazaa folder and then me having to get a real job because DJing doesn't pay around here. I put a lot of work into mixing and to be usurped by one of these brats who just downloads some other DJ playlist and plays it word for word makes me want to never mix for parties.

 

DEVOLUTION

 

and people say that about me too! vinyl guys get all pissy because I use CDs. so there you go. its a matter of talent and taste over technique and medium

[reger]

how about this:

ive heard the difference, shut it

it depends on setting and audio file, shut it x2 ;)

smart ass

however, the difference was told, as in my case, only in silent enviroment when you listen to different encodings and not music itself, but repeated loops of it or loops of tracks [as in from sequencer] alone

im not talking here about music blasting where ever that would be, ie, field test, cause imo music is so saturated that unless youre total sound-freak you wouldnt probably guess a difference between 192 and 320, let alone the fact that you just couldnt, you simply wouldnt pay attention to that and wouldnt care

so for me, as long as its not weak, i dont care if its mp3, however, id rather hear wav or flac, if we talk about some quality audio setting and party enviroment[with the same good sound], just beacause i want to, thats all. mp3 is something i wouldnt want to trust the entire music industry alone to

[Towelie]

You cant hear the difference if you think you can its placebo

[filitico]

Ahahaah, maybe I shouldn't have posted this but in your thread it seemed that a lot of people were bashing MP3/laptop DJ's (sounded more or less because they were turntable fanboys) and I think it's wrong. These things need to be thought of critically! Expand your mind! Also, really, no one has to read, or reply to this thread ^ ^... it's just me getting my opinions and feelings across.

 

expand your mind. 128 and 320 and .WAV is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. underestimating and stupefying the crowd into accepting your low quality standards will go around and come around to bite you in the ass.

 

from personal experience. There are many times that people in the crowd are more knowledgeable than you are at what you do. and lets just say that this forum is your crowd since you started the topic. most people around here aren't bashing laptops. they are bashing snotty kids playing stolen 128k mp3s.

 

if you are gonna steal something and nobody can stop you at least steal some good shit so that you don't sound like you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

besides, you still haven't even mentioned that you pay for your music...

[Malevol3nt]

Everyones on drugs these days, who's there to notice the difference (jus kiddin ). The dj's playing, it's not like they're gonna feel for the 1% of the people that can actually hear the difference when you play mp3s on loudspeakers. Besides, you would really need hear the sound from top quality speakers, something worth a fortune to hear that difference + you need to have good hearing. I don't think playing mp3s hurts anyone, it's not like you go out on a party and be sad because you can't hear that 115.325246246 hz frequency sound like u do on your pricey home speaker system.

 

Don't tell me you go out on a psy/goa/whatever party and actually analyze what you can and can't hear. It's about having fun, enjoying yourself and enjoying the music that plays. Forget about the format, it's a hardly noticable thing, it would be like complaining that the temperature is 1 degree more than you're used to or the wind blowing a tad harded then u want it to.

[filitico]

Everyones on drugs these days, who's there to notice the difference (jus kiddin ). The dj's playing, it's not like they're gonna feel for the 1% of the people that can actually hear the difference when you play mp3s on loudspeakers. Besides, you would really need hear the sound from top quality speakers, something worth a fortune to hear that difference + you need to have good hearing. I don't think playing mp3s hurts anyone, it's not like you go out on a party and be sad because you can't hear that 115.325246246 hz frequency sound like u do on your pricey home speaker system.

 

Don't tell me you go out on a psy/goa/whatever party and actually analyze what you can and can't hear. It's about having fun, enjoying yourself and enjoying the music that plays. Forget about the format, it's a hardly noticable thing, it would be like complaining that the temperature is 1 degree more than you're used to or the wind blowing a tad harded then u want it to.

i like your attitude man! im torn somewhere between what you said and being a snob about music quality etc

[reger]

You cant hear the difference if you think you can its placebo

unfortunately that might be the case

[slyman2.0]

wtf seriously.. djing without even djing whats the point?

 

Might as well play a ready mixed set and leave the dj place empty..

 

yea, thats as logical as the douchebag rock guitar player who thinks electronic music isn't music because your not really playing an instrument.

 

software doesnt fucking mix the tracks for you. big deal to anyone who spent years learning to beat match. guess what, you dont fucking have to. so why not do something creative with new technology instead of bitching about like an old lady.

[Basilisk]

In my view, beatmatching is the drudgery you do before getting to anything interesting. If digital tools can help, why say no?

 

With that said, it is dangerous to become reliant or dependant on digital tools to take care of everything. Here I am thinking of the alarmingly common situation where laptop/digital DJ doesn't even realize when two songs are slightly out of phase (yet still phrased and beatmatched). When this happens, the songs can start to intersect in a bad way, and everything will sound slightly off. Time and again have I seen digital/laptop DJs carrying on as if nothing were wrong. With good reason, I suspect this is due to relying on the "sync" feature--i.e. handing off responsibility for a mix to the software. As I say, it is a concern--not an inevitability.