On Demand

[mousethief]

I think it's a little bit of a false dichotomy - I've heard argentine tango djs with vastly different styles.

A DJ isn't a replacement for a band because they can create art, and all we can do it "hang it on the walls", so to speak.

Your comment seems to me to show a common misconception that I used to run into when I did radio, that because we're playing music from dead people, it's somehow in limited supply compared to modern pop music.. but how many pop vocalists do you have to add together before you equal the recorded output of ellington? 300 people? 400?

wow. false divisions?
I'll be looking for the tickets to the: 1932 Ellington only event featuring outakes and previously unreleased recordings from January 3rd-6th as opposed to hearing an evening of Kevin's selections for swing dancing.

What? Always nice to come at another DJ, jack.

Come to think of it, I've never heard you DJ either.

Kalman

[Lawrence]

But I would love it if DJs would keep in mind two things: 1) bands don't care about flowing tempo and 2) switch styles up more often than every half hour or hour. That's just my preference.

1) Yes, they do. Indeed, the musicians in the custom-made Austin Exchange bands told me that one of the primary things that gave me credibility with the musicians was my ability to create a setlist from the available songlist that "flowed" well in style, energy, and in tempo. All good bands pay attention to it, even if you might not notice it. Indeed, the times when you are most likely to notice "the flow" as a listener is probably when it is absent because the band is just playing random songs without regard to maintaining a balanced "flow."

2) I suspect you might be responding to a particular person or a few particular persons and thus have a misimpression of what we mean by "flow." You seem to be arguing against something that is quite different from what we are describing. "Flow" does not entail monotony or any of the other problems you cited. Moreover, just because you might not like the flow that a DJ has created (or music s/he's selected), that does not mean that the entire concept should be discarded and we should be as unselective as a "shuffle play" button on a CD player. Call it what you want, but the ORDER of song selection is almost as critical as the song selection, itself.

I agree almost completely with Kevin's post that Jesse quoted, which is not surprising because it manifests lots of the things that he and I and other Chicago DJs at the time occasionally discussed back then. The only caveat is that sometimes an essential tool for "playing that absolutely right song at the right time" is to completely change it up and commit the sin of putting the crowd through the "musical bends." Change it up and hit them with a pleasant surprise. Somewhat like the Rolling Stones kicking into "Start Me Up" right after playing a ballad like "Wild Horses."

[Soupbone]

But I would love it if DJs would keep in mind two things: 1) bands don't care about flowing tempo and 2) switch styles up more often than every half hour or hour. That's just my preference.

1) Yes, they do.

Got to agree with Lawrence here. I've been a musician since 1987, and it was something of a full time job for me for a while in the mid-90s. I've played in a wide variety of genres, and without fail the idea of "set list flow" was a factor in all of them.

[julius]

i'm unclear on whether the bands mentioned are flowing _tempo_ or not.* i've never noticed a band going from slow to medium to fast to very fast and then back down, or repeating the cycle, but maybe that's just a matter of the bands that i tend to hear live. Duke Heitger's band played two slow drags (The Mooch and something else I forget) in a row, then a couple of uptempo numbers, other random tempos, but it all worked anyway.

I guess my point is that when I dance, I'm existing in that moment, for that song. Whether the next song is slow or fast is kind of immaterial to me, as long as it's GOOD. Maybe that isn't true for most dancers. Since I'm not the most empathetic guy in the world, that comes as a bit of a surprise to me.

*oops, just noticed austin band was. OK.

[jmatthew]

i'm unclear on whether the bands mentioned are flowing _tempo_ or not.* i've never noticed a band going from slow to medium to fast to very fast and then back down, or repeating the cycle, but maybe that's just a matter of the bands that i tend to hear live. Duke Heitger's band played two slow drags (The Mooch and something else I forget) in a row, then a couple of uptempo numbers, other random tempos, but it all worked anyway.

that's because that's not exactly what flow means. It's a part of flow, sort-of, but it's not all of it. flow in the music is kind of like the flow of dancing. If you do super-nifty move and never do a basic your super-nifty moves don't have nearly the impact that they can have if you have a flow of moves, and then toss in the super-nifty move at just the right time. The music is the same way, if you're playing random stuff then any impact you have is completely random luck, but if you can make your songs flow (which has more to do with feel, than with tempo, although there's a definate link between the two) then when you do make that shift (and give people the "musical bends") you create a lot of excitement and energy, and that's what gets people dancing.

I'd go almost so far as to say (although I don't really have enough experience to back this up) that that is the point of flow. People dance all the time to a CD set to random and still dance, but the energy isn't there that you get with a real DJ, not because of the lack of flow, but because there's no real disruption. It's kind of like the mountains making the valley's important, because without the valleys the mountains woulnd't be as impressive.

[julius]

That's the best reason I've heard so far for the existence of flow. Darn good point.

I literally am trying to figure out whether it is typical for a band to consider tempo when playing their next song, beyond the consideration "hey we need to give the trumpets a rest". So ok, forget the fact that I said the word 'flow'. Do bands (working stiffs) routinely oscillate the tempo, or is it all over the map?

The point is immaterial by now though since people here in general don't seem to share my conception that a DJ is a substitute for a band. That's really the crux of the issue regarding tempo, for me.

[djstarr]

Do bands (working stiffs) routinely oscillate the tempo, or is it all over the map?

Yes, the bands we've been going out to dance to lately change up tempos - it seems to me a conscious decision, although I've never asked the band leader directly.

We've been going to see the Ham Carson quintet -- they play a lot of hot jazz, but also play a wide variety - they have a bluesy version of See See Rider, along with several modern swing selections.

They played for swing dancers in Seattle back in '98/'99, but the fad lounge acts were more popular then; we were trying to explain to Ham how much we love dancing to his group now - we can balboa, charleston, lindy and blues....our dance skills have grown up to the level of music he plays.

I'll have to ask him how he picks out his songs - whether he trys consciously to mix up tempo or not.

[Soupbone]

i'm unclear on whether the bands mentioned are flowing _tempo_ or not.* i've never noticed a band going from slow to medium to fast to very fast and then back down, or repeating the cycle, but maybe that's just a matter of the bands that i tend to hear live.

Well, considering the idea of tempo and/or energy flow in a set (be it for DJing or a live band) does not have to mean a concerted effort to gradually go up and/or down. Things can "flow" without being forced into gradual increases or decreases. I dislike when either a band or DJ structures a set simply by gradually increasing/decreasing tempo. DJs are more likely to do this than bands.

However, in my mind, "flow" should mean is that there *is* thought given to how the next song will play against the current song. It may mean choosing to input a sudden burst of energy, or a slight cooling out. But, that is still putting thought into how the set will flow. And this is done by bands and DJ alike.

I guess "set structure" is probably a more concise term than "set flow."

[Lawrence]

However, in my mind, "flow" should mean * * * that there *is* thought given to how the next song will play against the current song. It may mean choosing to input a sudden burst of energy, or a slight cooling out. But, that is still putting thought into how the set will flow. And this is done by bands and DJ alike.

Exactly.

I literally am trying to figure out whether it is typical for a band to consider tempo when playing their next song, beyond the consideration "hey we need to give the trumpets a rest". So ok, forget the fact that I said the word 'flow'. Do bands (working stiffs) routinely oscillate the tempo, or is it all over the map?

The point is immaterial by now though since people here in general don't seem to share my conception that a DJ is a substitute for a band. That's really the crux of the issue regarding tempo, for me.

Au Contraire, most of us merely pointed out that bands DO pay attention to "flow," just like a good DJ should. There is no distinction. Indeed, one of the most common complaints I have heard about "bad" dance bands is that they seem to only have two speeds: too fast and too slow. (i.e. not enough variety in tempo between the two speeds). I frankly have the same complaint about some DJs.