SwingDJs

mousethief wrote:

gatorgal wrote:

mousethief wrote:Yeah, most DJ battles are not as spectacular as the hype around them. If the DJs are too close in philosophy or style, it's like having the same guy all night. If they're too far apart, you end up alienating half of the room half of the night.

Kalman

*ahem*

What have I told you about this??

Tina

I cain't recall. Was it before or after I asked for that sammich?

*ducks*

Kalman

Why don't women wear watches?

They don't need one...there's a clock on the stove!


*******ducks*******

What is your opinion if someone did a battle in the following format, it done it would be on a Friday night of an exchange:

A tournament ladder with 8 DJ's from different regions of the country. Each battle would be a 1 on 1 contest with the winner moving on and the loser eliminated from the contest. The first round has 8 djs, the second round 4 and then a final with 2. The winners are decided by audience applause. The DJ's are kept anoumous to avoid star power playing apart of the contest. There will be a cash prize of several hundred dollars for the winner.There would be a total of seven, 1 on 1 battles to determine the winner each would take 30 minutes and then a brief stop for audience to determine the winner. This would take a little over 3.5 hours to complete.

I personally have some mixed feelings about this type of format, but I need some honest feedback on what you would think if you were apart of this? Is it a good idea? bad idea?

It sounds very similar to the format at Lindy Summit, which seemed to work well.

yedancer wrote:It sounds very similar to the format at Lindy Summit, which seemed to work well.

How was it received by the dancers?

Who were the DJs that competed?

how do you determine who you vote for? its easy to see who's bad and who is good. however, how do you decide between good DJ set and slightly "better" DJ set?

Drew wrote:

yedancer wrote:It sounds very similar to the format at Lindy Summit, which seemed to work well.

How was it received by the dancers?

Who were the DJs that competed?

If I remember, the DJs were Giselle, Tonya, me, Justin, Jenn, and I'm blanking on the others. The audience seemed to enjoy it, and the only thing about the format that didn't work was that an applause was hard to judge. An applause meter would have helped. Also, concealing the identities of the DJs might have helped some.

Incidentally, the subject of DJ battles has been discussed in a thread with the exact same title as this one:

http://www.swingdjs.com/phpbb2/viewtopi ... sc&start=0

mity wrote:how do you determine who you vote for? its easy to see who's bad and who is good. however, how do you decide between good DJ set and slightly "better" DJ set?

By deciding which one you liked better.

Drew wrote:

yedancer wrote:It sounds very similar to the format at Lindy Summit, which seemed to work well.

How was it received by the dancers?

Who were the DJs that competed?

Here's the thread on that one:
http://www.swingdjs.com/phpbb2/viewtopi ... 22&start=0

djstarr wrote:as a DJ I think they are interesting, but for the average dancer an actual battle is not that interesting, and sometimes it results in worse music if there is a temptation to showboat.

I think it's better to have two DJ's play off each other, ala Kevin and Kevin, rather than have an actual battle.

Nobody can do
That Kevin and Kevin voodoo
like they do
so well

What does everyone think of a DJ battle, weakest link style?

Voting off the weakest link. The favored DJ's will play longer. Have each DJ privatly vote the weakest link and any dancer who wants to come up and write in a vote also count, no stopping for audience applause. no stopping at all except at the beggining to announce the format and a 15 second stop 3 times to announce the weakest link and the final winner.

If we have 7 DJ's involved and each plays up to 3 songs per round with a maximum time limit of 15 minutes. We eliminate 2 DJ's per round so 1st round there would be 7, next 5, next 3, and out of the 3 a final winner. Total time would be 3 hours and 45 minutes. Haing 3 in the finals would also eliminate the possibilty of the 2 finalist not wanting to compete against each other.

so at the end would you continue the Survivor format and have the DJ's who have been ousted vote for the winner?

I like the idea, but realistically you'd only have the DJ's voting; we tried a DJ battle with getting people to vote, and it seemed too much effort for something they didn't care that much about.

So if you are cool with being judged by your peers I think it's a good idea.

djstarr wrote:as a DJ I think they are interesting, but for the average dancer an actual battle is not that interesting, and sometimes it results in worse music if there is a temptation to showboat.

I think it's better to have two DJ's play off each other, ala Kevin and Kevin, rather than have an actual battle.

I agree completely.

Lindy Summit was done in the "survivor" way

It was one on one battles, and the person who got more applause stayed and challenged the next one in line.


THe problem with every battle I have been apart of or seen is two things. One, as mentioned, the audience cannot be able to see the DJ's. Star power is too strong in those situations. Making it anonymous is the only way for the DJ's to be judged on their music rather then their face. The other thing is that battles are often too short. 30min for 2 DJ's sounds like a long time, but break it down. 30min, 3 min/song, that is 10 songs total, 5 songs per DJ. that is hardly enough time to gague the crowd, get in a groove, and/or show your stuff.

There needs to be a longer period of time to have the battle. more commitment by the club/event for this battle.

It has been thrown around many times in LA, at least by me, to have an extended battle over several nights, similar to what SD did. So far, LA has not responded to this style of battle