DJ'ing with records - Could you do it?

Message

djstarr · #31 Post by **djstarr** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 12:40 pm

Eyeball wrote:Obsessive - I've read some 1940s Jazz record collector magazines and the true 'agonizer' then was the collector who would use sharpened cactus needles as phonograph needles in lieu of some of the unforgiving steel needles of the era.

that's funny. What did they do with the cactus? Make tequila out of it? Then they'd have something to sip as they listened to Dizzy.....

Toon Town Dave · #32 Post by **Toon Town Dave** » Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:04 pm

djstarr wrote:
Lawrence wrote:The other problem most people overlooked is the time it takes to set the turntable to the correct start point.
....ha ha - I'm tempted to start a "could we DJ off of cassette tapes" thread. Could you imagine trying to cue up the right song on a tape [whirr whirr].

That's why 8-track tapes are superior to cassette tapes.

JSAlmonte · #33 Post by **JSAlmonte** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 9:34 am

The Jam Cellar does an all vinyl night here in DC every once in awhile. Instead of one DJ, there's two, one of whom is a band leader. Some nights are better than others. I don't notice the sound quality suffer because of the records since a) Jam Cellar dj's play a lot of vintage stuff on a regular basis already and b) the sound gear isn't that great for either digital or vinyl to begin with. The trade off is that we get to hear a few songs that haven't made it to digital form yet.

As for technology seperating people from the true essence of the music, John Phillip Sousa lamented the exact same thing with the development of cylinder recordings, so that observation is already over a hundred years late.

jerry

Eyeball · #34 Post by **Eyeball** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 10:14 am

Lawrence wrote:
The other problem most people overlooked is the time it takes to set the turntable to the correct start point. Although we could adjust, it would cut down the amount of time we have to find the next track, which would screw up most of our normal cadences, requiring us to settle for a less-than-perfect next song instead of take the extra time to find a better next song.

Now, *that's* obsessive. DJ's cued up turntables for years both professionally and non-professionally. It's an art and a skill.

KevinSchaper · #35 Post by **KevinSchaper** » Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:44 pm

It would be tiring, it's just a lot more work for every song.. finding the track isn't really an issue after you've been doing it for a little while.. but really, it's just a more mechanical process.

I have enough records (6 or 7 feet?), but carrying enough of them for 4 straight hours would suck.. or at least, I'd play a smaller range of artists..

On the other hand, I dj'd up in portland for the first time in a while on friday, and I really missed that I couldn't bring 20 or 30 records along.. I have music on LP that I've never taken the trouble to transfer, and it would have been handy.

I used a laptop a little too, but mixxx froze up in the middle of a song and I was glad to have 40 lbs of cds.

Lawrence · #36 Post by **Lawrence** » Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:06 pm

Eyeball wrote:
Lawrence wrote:
The other problem most people overlooked is the time it takes to set the turntable to the correct start point. Although we could adjust, it would cut down the amount of time we have to find the next track, which would screw up most of our normal cadences, requiring us to settle for a less-than-perfect next song instead of take the extra time to find a better next song.
Now, *that's* obsessive. DJ's cued up turntables for years both professionally and non-professionally. It's an art and a skill.

Yes, but we're dealing with some Swing DJs who have never even used CDs, no less never used turntables. The cadence of selecting the next song would be thrown off, entirely.

Eyeball · #37 Post by **Eyeball** » Sun Jun 24, 2007 7:47 pm

Lawrence wrote:
The cadence of selecting the next song would be thrown off, entirely.

Just as if a real band were playing! Imagine!

Also - who said every thing has to be perfect? It's obsessive DJs who might agonize about the cadence being thrown off that almost would seem to be inducing a totally manufactured enviornment.

KevinSchaper · #38 Post by **KevinSchaper** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:26 am

Isn't that the point of the whole thing, not just the dj, but the whole venue, to manufacture an environment conducive to dancing?

CountBasi · #39 Post by **CountBasi** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:45 am

I think John is saying the environment that is most conducive to dancing is not so perfectly manicured that it takes on a sterile form.

When I've seen big bands play, quite often there'll be some pause between their songs, they might mutter between themselves or blow a few notes on this or that to check that all is ship shape with said instrument(s). Obviously, it doesn't go on and on for minutes, but just enough to remind you that this is all part-and-parcel of dancing to live music. And after all, dancing to live music came before dancing to recorded music, in the chicken-and-egg stakes, so dancers shouldn't be overly upset by it.

Eyeball · #40 Post by **Eyeball** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:31 pm

sleeplessinsale - he said what I thought.

Lawrence · #41 Post by **Lawrence** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:11 pm

So even though we CAN make the transitions between songs seemless, we should still try to intentionally put unnecessary pregnant pauses between songs just to make the set sound "less manicured:" like it might have sounded when DJs played only records (doubtful), or to make it sound like it does when live bands need to rest and coordinate the next song?

I don't get it.

Eyeball · #42 Post by **Eyeball** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:37 pm

Lawrence wrote:So even though we CAN make the transitions between songs seemless, we should still try to intentionally put unnecessary pregnant pauses between songs just to make the set sound "less manicured:" like it might have sounded when DJs played only records (doubtful), or to make it sound like it does when live bands need to rest and coordinate the next song?

I don't get it.

LP -

Where does it say or suggest that anywhere on here? Nowhere.

CountBasi · #43 Post by **CountBasi** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:55 pm

Eyeball - said what I thought!

KevinSchaper · #44 Post by **KevinSchaper** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:44 am

...swing bands have been playing syrupy ballads for years too, should we start djing them?

bands can get away with both ballads and 30 second-> minute pauses because they're a band.

Try either one as a dj, and see how it goes.

Eyeball · #45 Post by **Eyeball** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:33 pm

KevinSchaper wrote:...swing bands have been playing syrupy ballads for years too, should we start djing them?

bands can get away with both ballads and 30 second-> minute pauses because they're a band.

Try either one as a dj, and see how it goes.

No one said that and no one is suggesting it except you.

Perhaps you are underestimating your audience? Some dancers like to say 'hello and goodbye and what's up later, sweetie' between songs. Try it as a dj, and see how it goes. Try it one time and see what happens.

Call it "The Social Set".