Over aired DJ’s

[Bob the Builder]

Over aired DJ’s

How healthy do you believe it is for some DJ’s to Spin? I bring this up as I know an event there a DJ is almost definitely spinning every week. They have a limited collection, thus things start to get a lot of duplication, from week to week.
Now, I’m not saying they are a bad DJ, it’s just from a dancers point of view hearing the same songs week in, week out, even if they are great songs, starts to get tiring and uninteresting.
Would it be worth telling them, that if they are to reduce the amount of gig’s they accept their DJing would sound better?
How many gigs do you do a month, and if you DJ weekly, how much duplication songs do you recon you spin?
Generally at the moment I only DJ once a month, so it’s not much of a problem, but on the occasion where I do a lot of gig’s in a short period, I do go over my past play list to ensure I don’t duplicate songs. I also make sure I don't spin songs that other DJ's are genearly spinning, but I’m also lucky that I have a large collection.
I actually feel if you are spinning to the same Audience twice a Month with a good collection to back you up will keep you sounding fresh.

Brian

[Platypus]

As the DJ coordinator for one of the few weekly venues in town, it is my job to ensure that the DJs who play at the swing club are pleasing the crowd. I praise often, but I also have made it clear that I will nudge someone if it becomes necessary. I have even had people try to get me to nudge DJs who are spinning at OTHER venues! If it isn't my venue, I redirect the commenter to the organizers.

OF course, if that person is the key organizer of the event, then you might have to come up with an alternate plan. Is there anyone they trust or respect who is good at politicking and can give them a nudge in the right direction?

[PitchTheWoo]

Interesting topic, Brian. I run a weekly venue in Oakland, California (www.200Grand.com) that focuses on classic swing era music for Lindy and Balboa, so I spin at least once a week. I also guest DJ a various Bay Area venues. At my busiest, I've DJed 3 times a week. However, there are several factors that (I hope) prevent me from getting stale:

First, it's rarely the same crowd across the various venues. Sure, there are dancers that drive all over the place multiple times a week, but I think the scene is pretty segmented by geography, night of the week, musical taste, style of dancing, and venue atmosphere. So this is a freebie... I don't actively do anything to have this working to fight overexposure or boredom. Might this be working in your friends favor?

Second, I know what the norm is for any particular venue in terms of tempo and style, so I tend to self censor my selections a little bit toward that "expected" sound. In an extreme case of his, at the Verdi Club on Tuesday nights, I spin almost exclusively Jump Blues for Stompy Jones band breaks and après-band at the encouragement of the venue and band. Of course I happened to like this style of music too, and have plenty of it. So this tailoring of my selections is something I actively do, both to fulfill some of the expectations of the venue regulars as well as to have a fresh sound.

The biggest thing I actively do is to DJ from laptop and set up a filter to guarantee that I don't play any songs more than once every 4 weeks. I have even more stringent self imposed requirements for band breaks at my own venue, since I have bands at least once a month, and some people only come out for bands. I don't repeat band night songs any more frequently than every 3 band nights (like once every 8 weeks).

Sure, there are proponents of repeating touchstone songs almost every week so dancers can perhaps explore their musicality when they are super familiar with all the breaks and solos... I just don't happen to subscribe to that theory. Besides, this issue is being discussed in the familiar vs. unfamiliar music thread.

OK, and I almost forgot to mention because it's so obvious, but I keep buying "new" music. I guess that's the bottom line in terms of advice to give your friend. Just get more music. Otherwise, sooner or later, their gigs will stop coming once they get a reputation that essentially they can be replaced by a 2 cd compilation set. I can't imagine any enthusiastic music loving new DJ turning down the opportunity to spin, though, even for the good of his/her dancers or reputation, until it's too late and they are faced with small crowds or few gigs. So I'd push the collection building advice.

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Toon Town Dave]

You must be doing something right. A friend of mine in SF thinks 200Grand has the best music/DJ'ing.

I agree with your entire post, particularly this point:

Sure, there are proponents of repeating touchstone songs almost every week so dancers can perhaps explore their musicality when they are super familiar with all the breaks and solos... I just don't happen to subscribe to that theory. Besides, this issue is being discussed in the familiar vs. unfamiliar music thread.

This a peeve of mine with some of our local clubs/DJs. There are great songs that just simply get overplayed and the audience gets tired of them. The common arguments I've usually heard (especially from a couple of ballroom clubs here) are:

"you have to play familiar music [songs] because that's what people want"
"we play it because <person X> requests it/complains when we don't play it"
"beginners like it"
"beginners want to dance to stuff they might hear on the radio or already know"

Like others, I try not to repeat stuff very often at local venues and incorporate at least a few if not several "new" tracks into my set.

I've DJ'd at a few out of town events in small-ish scenes and have kept everyone dancing most of the time playing on the order of 90% new (to them) music. The last out of town gig I did, in Winnipeg, the crowd just wasn't digging classic swing (it's not played much and there were lots of newbies that don't dance fast) but they were keen on Rhythm and Blues and more contemporary jazz. Fortunately I brought a wide variety of music so I managed to keep the dancers engaged. My set was late-night at their first exchange (lots of newbies) which everyone figured would last until maybe 2AM ... I managed to keep the dancers engaged until 4:30 with new music in a familiar style/genre.

The other thing with DJ'ing that's been touched in this and other discussions is to pay attention to the audience dancing or not. I pay as much if not more attention to the people sitting down and try to work stuff in that they seem to want to dance to so no one is sitting out a long time because I'm not playing music they like.

[Lawrence]

The problem is not overexposure, if the DJ is up to it. The problem is his limited collection or his limited perception of what works. Redundancy is one of the worst traps a DJ can fall into, because it not only bores the dancers, it bores the DJ out of caring whether he's doing his job or not. MANY DJs have enjoyed stellar debuts with lots of accolades only to fall into complacency, let it go to their heads, and not take that initial success as a starting point instead of an endpoint. Many others stick only with what has worked previously, without daring to take a risk to try something different to keep it fresh.

Also, as with most things, the way in which you approach giving him feedback it is MUCH more important than whether you approach it or not. Respectful and positive vs. disrespectful and condescending.

It also depends on how experienced the DJ is: the more experienced, the more deference you might want to pay in that he might actually know what he is doing more than you know. A bit of redundancy might actually work for the venue if it does not have a lot of regulars who will get bored. By the same token, more experienced DJs (more mature people) also (should) understand that accepting criticism and feedback is crucial to success, as is placing any criticism in proper context and not just fixing the squeaky wheel (in this case, not just appeasing the vocal minority).

[julius]

The more often you play, the larger your collection should be and the broader your tastes, in my opinion.

As long as you play good music and not crap or novelty, limited amounts of repetition is OK.

I also think that as a DJ you should be constantly soliciting the opinions of the people you play for, and in a way that encourages brutal honesty. Just because people are dancing doesn't mean they necessarily enjoy what you are playing.

[Toon Town Dave]

Despite Lawrence's not so thinly veiled poke at another member of this forum, I generally agree with the comments in the first two paragraphs.

To avoid getting complacent by just replaying my best stuff all the time, I lump my collection into a few A list recordings and lots of B list stuff. My A list stuff is the universal winners that always fill the floor. I generally try to stick to my B list stuff and use the A list to get out of a jam if I feel I'm losing the audience. I still have to make sure I avoid overplaying B list stuff but it avoids overplaying a few really good tracks.

Julius, I agree that it would be nice to get the brutal honesty but I don't find it practical. My close friends are the only ones with the balls to say something negative about my DJing so getting an honest opinion representative of the overall audience is difficult. I think it's easier to get feedback through a go-between, usually the organizer or promoter. Of course this also assumes that the organizer is not the DJ as well.

Feedback or mentoring from other, more experienced and successful DJs is probably one of the more valuable assets a new DJ could have. I've found discussions here and in person with other DJs have helped me grow my knowledge, collection and skills to avoid becoming a one hit wonder.

[Lawrence]

Despite Lawrence's not so thinly veiled poke at another member of this forum, I generally agree with the comments in the first two paragraphs.

I honestly don't know at whom I not so thinly veiled poked, and was speaking generally based on years of both giving and receiving feedback. The more uppity I am in giving feedback, the less successful I am at conveying the point, even if I am right but it might be more entertaining or efficient at the moment to be blunt or brief. The more I overreacted to third-hand reports/criticism from vocal minorities in passing on feedback to others, the less credible or reliable my comments or criticisms were.

Indeed, I even might have (ahem) inadvertantly offended (and thereby alienated) some on this board who had more knowledge and experience than I gave them credit for having (not to mention failing to consider their feelings or pride), which understandably worked into their "who the f-ck does he think he is?" reaction.

I've also had that same "who the f-ck does he think he is" reaction to criticism, myself, that, upon reflection, was counterproductive, self-righteous, and immature, even if my reaction was (in some sense) "justifiable" and predictable given the way in which I was treated.

But I never, ever, ever do either of those things, anymore.

[CafeSavoy]

To avoid getting complacent by just replaying my best stuff all the time, I lump my collection into a few A list recordings and lots of B list stuff. My A list stuff is the universal winners that always fill the floor. I generally try to stick to my B list stuff and use the A list to get out of a jam if I feel I'm losing the audience. I still have to make sure I avoid overplaying B list stuff but it avoids overplaying a few really good tracks.

Interesting to categorize most of the songs you play as B-list. Are you using the categories essentially as measures of much you've played the songs and not necessarily as a measure of how good you rate the songs? Do songs go from the B-list to the A-list once they've been proven good and have gotten a fair amount of playtime? Is there also a C-list of songs you're considering but aren't sure about yet?

[Toon Town Dave]

My A/B classifications are based on audience (dance floor) response rather than music quality. If I'm not keen on something musically or I don't consider it dance-able or something empties the floor, it just doesn't get played no C classification.

Basically I use my A/B classification as a way of identifying the my best stuff and avoid playing it disproportionately often so that it becomes overplayed.

[CafeSavoy]

My A/B classifications are based on audience (dance floor) response rather than music quality. If I'm not keen on something musically or I don't consider it dance-able or something empties the floor, it just doesn't get played no C classification.

Basically I use my A/B classification as a way of identifying the my best stuff and avoid playing it disproportionately often so that it becomes overplayed.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm always interested in how people organize their collections.

[Nate Dogg]

I do something similar to the A/B/C. I don't call those specific letters though.

There are lots of really good songs that have been played for many years that will get the floor moving on a reliable basis. However, I get bored as DJ playing too many of them. So, I mix in newer (to me) songs to keep it interesting.

When deciding what the "A" songs are, I factor in how much I play a track, as well as how much the other local DJs play them. Some of the other local DJs don't have very much variety and they can overplay a song for the whole scene.

It is always a balance though, you don't want to go too far one way or another. However, I would rather a DJ be too conservative (and dancer responsive) than too experimental. You can be experimental on your own time.

Sometimes the only people who really appreciate the nuances of my sets are the other DJs (as I appreciate the nuances of their sets), as well as some of the dancers who have dancing for awhile. I figure this is true for most swing DJs. By "nuance", I am mainly talking about mixing in alternate versions, new tracks, variety, subtle themes, all the little extras that we do.

Nathan

[CafeSavoy]

It is always a balance though, you don't want to go too far one way or another. However, I would rather a DJ be too conservative (and dancer responsive) than too experimental. You can be experimental on your own time.

Sometimes the only people who really appreciate the nuances of my sets are the other DJs (as I appreciate the nuances of their sets), as well as some of the dancers who have dancing for awhile. I figure this is true for most swing DJs. By "nuance", I am mainly talking about mixing in alternate versions, new tracks, variety, subtle themes, all the little extras that we do.

Nathan

That's a really good point. I find that sometimes it's easy to focus too much on playing for other djs or dance cognoscenti and forget to play for beginners and regular dancers.

[SweetLowdown]

That's a really good point. I find that sometimes it's easy to focus too much on playing for other djs or dance cognoscenti and forget to play for beginners and regular dancers.

Sometimes it is just amazing how much those two groups can be so diametrically opposed in taste. By way of anecdote: I remember playing a 1945 Sidney Bechet version of "Summertime" at a late night event . . a song so perfect it just crushes my damned soul every time I listen to it, for me it is an example of the hottest most genuine kind of blue. It seemed the more jaded folks were off their feet and enjoying themselves, people seemed to be having a good time, and then somebody came up to me and asked "um, hey, do you have any blues, you know, like real blues, like Lou Rawls." Stuck between a rock and a dumb place, what are you supposed to do?

--Kelly

[Toon Town Dave]

Argh! That's such an awesome version of Summertime. Lou Rawls is cool in a funky groovy soul kinda way but he aint no "real blues"