But doesn't that in some way support my points?Toon Town Dave wrote: mr. e, I also want to say that even though I may be coming off as a Nazi, I used to share your viewpoint. If you look up some of my first posts on swing DJs back when it was still a naive newbie, you can see how my view at one time was similar to yours. Here's a few embarrassing nuggets from 2002:
...
Largely what changed my opinions was finding great music thanks to swingdjs and they yehoodi radio show.
- a beginners music taste will often be different from ours
- music taste changes with your understanding of the music
- it can still evolve into a solid understanding of "real" swing music even if you started with a rather bad taste
I havn't heard a convincing argument so far on why not to (also, not exclusively) use "modern/neo-/not-really-swing stuff" as long as it is directing people towards where we want them to go to. Many of the replies were like "if you use that stuff, they'll never be able to dance to real stuff" which obviously doesn't hold.
P.S.
Very good point. I'll have to keep that in mind. To a certain degree it also applies to the classics though: if people have been hearing them in classes over and over again, they also can become overplayed for them. And a DJ at an event might not even notice if he doesn't know about that. Just like "Wade in the water" isn't overplayed in our scene here, so a DJ might get away with it just fine.remysun wrote:If a Neo-swing song happens to be hot, it's a good choice, although you'll probably want to save it for open dancing. Otherwise, it dates itself more readily than a timeless classic.