Tips for finding the right 'next song' in the heat of DJing
Moderators: Mr Awesomer, JesseMiner, CafeSavoy
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:11 am
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA
- Contact:
All good points folks. For me selecting tunes for a set of music with my band- I have the following options to consider:
Instrumental
Vocals- who is going to sing since we have 3 different people in the band who sing.
Tempo
Style
Key.
I think for a DJ you can easily vary all but the last one.
FYI- there was a post about songs with the same chord progression. That is also something I try to vary. For the music geeks- I try to select tunes that have a very different bridge, or one that has a bridge and then one that has no bridge and then a blues etc. I also try not to play 2 songs in a row that are in a minor key. There are many more major keyed songs, and 2 or more in a row in a minor keys would be noticeable.
There can also be a problem for DJ's who use a lot of 50's stuff and Rockabilly because most of those tunes are based on a 12 bar blues progression. Everything starts to sound the same after a while.
Even with classic swing, you would not want to play 2 or 3 songs in a row based on a blues chord progression: One O'Clock Jump, Hamp's Boogie, Sent for you Yesterday, etcetcetc. Unless of course you are playing for a blues dance.......
Instrumental
Vocals- who is going to sing since we have 3 different people in the band who sing.
Tempo
Style
Key.
I think for a DJ you can easily vary all but the last one.
FYI- there was a post about songs with the same chord progression. That is also something I try to vary. For the music geeks- I try to select tunes that have a very different bridge, or one that has a bridge and then one that has no bridge and then a blues etc. I also try not to play 2 songs in a row that are in a minor key. There are many more major keyed songs, and 2 or more in a row in a minor keys would be noticeable.
There can also be a problem for DJ's who use a lot of 50's stuff and Rockabilly because most of those tunes are based on a 12 bar blues progression. Everything starts to sound the same after a while.
Even with classic swing, you would not want to play 2 or 3 songs in a row based on a blues chord progression: One O'Clock Jump, Hamp's Boogie, Sent for you Yesterday, etcetcetc. Unless of course you are playing for a blues dance.......
Really, Paul? As a DJ, I can imagine trying to get sideliners back on the floor with several 12-bar-form songs in a row.
Of course, the style, band, era, type of band, etc. might vary, but I feel like several 12-bars in a row could create a thought: "Ooooh, I liked that last one, but all the good dancers were taken, but now, man, this has got me going the same way...I wonder why?"--which could then lead to: "...maybe I'll get up off this chair and onto the floor."
I mean, those 120-220 bpm 12-bar songs can really get the gut thumping.
I can totally see myself starting with groovy 12-bar stuff, going through an old version of Rushing singing "Sent For You Yesterday" (because groove-inclined people still seem to recognize & like that song), and then topping it off w/ Woodchopper's Ball if I had been asked by an organizer to keep the music "old school" yet wanted to seduce everyone into participating in the dancing.
Of course, the style, band, era, type of band, etc. might vary, but I feel like several 12-bars in a row could create a thought: "Ooooh, I liked that last one, but all the good dancers were taken, but now, man, this has got me going the same way...I wonder why?"--which could then lead to: "...maybe I'll get up off this chair and onto the floor."
I mean, those 120-220 bpm 12-bar songs can really get the gut thumping.
I can totally see myself starting with groovy 12-bar stuff, going through an old version of Rushing singing "Sent For You Yesterday" (because groove-inclined people still seem to recognize & like that song), and then topping it off w/ Woodchopper's Ball if I had been asked by an organizer to keep the music "old school" yet wanted to seduce everyone into participating in the dancing.
I'm starting to add tags to all my music. After a recent computer crash and a decision to move away from itunes (I use j.river now), my music library is kind of a blank slate. I used to have a bunch of old playlists and category lists that I would use to help pick songs while dj'ing. Working without those for the first time felt kind of naked, yet exciting in a way. Now I'm going through the rather painstaking process of adding tags and creating smartlists on the side.
Can anyone tell me what fields in the id3 tags are considered "standard"? I know that's a tricky question, since these things seem to be changing all the time. I've been trying to a list online without much luck; my google-fu must be weak.
Other than BPM, I find that I'm shoving all my tags into the comment field. I'm currently putting in dance (lindy, balboa, waltz, etc), malevocal, femvocal, some types like gospel or Christmas, etc all into the comment field.
I'd also like to categorize things by region, such as Canadian (so I can fulfill CanCon requirement when I'm on the radio), or list which music is from France or Ireland etc, but I don't know what field to put those in.
Can anyone tell me what fields in the id3 tags are considered "standard"? I know that's a tricky question, since these things seem to be changing all the time. I've been trying to a list online without much luck; my google-fu must be weak.
Other than BPM, I find that I'm shoving all my tags into the comment field. I'm currently putting in dance (lindy, balboa, waltz, etc), malevocal, femvocal, some types like gospel or Christmas, etc all into the comment field.
I'd also like to categorize things by region, such as Canadian (so I can fulfill CanCon requirement when I'm on the radio), or list which music is from France or Ireland etc, but I don't know what field to put those in.
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:11 am
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA
- Contact:
Kitkat- I agree with you. That sounds like a pretty good set. And again, you could do it by changing artists, vocalists etc. And you are correct- those type tunes do tend to get everyone one the floor including reluctant people and newbies. I could not really do that live as well....
As I said, it becomes more problematic when you are playing 50's r&b and rock and roll stuff where everything is a 12 bar. I have heard DJ's do that and it gets really tiresome.
As I said, it becomes more problematic when you are playing 50's r&b and rock and roll stuff where everything is a 12 bar. I have heard DJ's do that and it gets really tiresome.
-
- Posts: 661
- Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:52 pm
- Location: Saskatoon, Canada
To a large degree, it really depends on the audience. While not as common as the late 90's/early 00's, some scenes dance to lots of (mostly?) high energy upper mid-tempo R&B/RnR/Jump Blues. That style of music also goes over well where there are a lot of ballroom or country dancers who have rarely (if ever) danced a swing dance to swing music.
To me it would get tiresome but to new dancers who haven't had much exposure to that type of music, they can have a grand time.
The other big thing that a live band can provide that a DJ can't is a great stage presence. A huge plus for an mixed audience with non-dancers or an event with lots of newbies who dig the music and the atmosphere but don't necessarily have the confidence to get out on the dance floor. Face it, dancing is an entertainment activity for many people. Give them a good show and it's easier to forgive other mistakes.
To me it would get tiresome but to new dancers who haven't had much exposure to that type of music, they can have a grand time.
The other big thing that a live band can provide that a DJ can't is a great stage presence. A huge plus for an mixed audience with non-dancers or an event with lots of newbies who dig the music and the atmosphere but don't necessarily have the confidence to get out on the dance floor. Face it, dancing is an entertainment activity for many people. Give them a good show and it's easier to forgive other mistakes.
- Cyrano de Maniac
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:11 pm
- Location: South Saint Paul, Minnesota
- Contact:
I have little more to say on this front than "Amen!" I enjoy the occasional rockabilly or 50's song, but even two in a row starts the trip down boredom lane. One or the other about once an hour is about right for me.Albert System wrote:There can also be a problem for DJ's who use a lot of 50's stuff and Rockabilly because most of those tunes are based on a 12 bar blues progression. Everything starts to sound the same after a while.
Worse yet though is when you're the house sound guy and a rockabilly band is playing. You don't even have the option of leaving; you're stuck until the end of the night. I constantly find myself thinking "Didn't they already play this?" Truly, they could play the same song all night long and it'd be about the same experience for me.
Brent
-
- Posts: 661
- Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:52 pm
- Location: Saskatoon, Canada
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:11 am
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA
- Contact:
So refreshing (and relieving) to see a few people share this view with me too. I often default to thinking I am musically ignorant when I realise I have an opinion such as this - seems that may not necessarily be the case!
It don't matter if your clock is broke - it's the right time somewhere : Slim Gaillard
SoundInMotionDJ wrote:The problem of finding the next song is one of "being in the moment." Attempting to be too technical destroys the "artistry" and "inspiration" and "intuition" that is the only way to create something that is truly "awesome."
Just had time to read your long post properly Stan. Thanks for these excelent pointsSoundInMotionDJ wrote:For every event I prepare a set of "panic" songs. Songs that I know will go over well with the audience at hand. In general, these tend to be "familiar favorites" for the guests at whatever the event is. I will sometimes use these, even if I don't "need" them - just because they are "familiar favorites." In the event that I get stuck, I always have this list to fall back on.
In general, at any given point I am thinking 3 to 5 songs ahead. I have *never* actually played the 5th song. Because I am responding to changes in the room, the 5th song would never be right. Heck, 4 songs is 10 to 15 minutes of time. It is impossible to predict what that room will be like in 15 minutes.
--Stan Graves
This has been a fascinating thread so far, and very very helpful. (even with the tagging systems in place, how some of you guys cope with such huge and varied music collections is impressing me no end)
I posted earlier that I was starting to tag my collection - I was working on this again last night for an hour or so, and ended up throwing out the whole thing - I didn't think things through well enough at the outset, and it just wasn't going to be good enough. On the plus side, it was a very useful process to go through, and I should be able to plan it much better next time around.
One of the problems I ran into is that I work in a very 'feeling' way - while I am basing decisions on the obvious factors (speed, style, variety etc), the key thing that decides it is the vibe I'm picking up from the floor, vs. the way particular tracks make me feel. It's a way of working which sometimes has me doing a panic-change-of-plan ten seconds before the last track ends... but if I go against that instinct, it usually results in the wrong track being played, so it seems it's best just to go with it.
What I'm wondering is whether there's any way to devise a tag system that involves this more instinctive aspect, or whether it's better to tag tracks along more quantifiable lines, so I can whittle down to a selection based on those, then let my instincts go to work on the results.
This is going to take some experimentation, I think...
I posted earlier that I was starting to tag my collection - I was working on this again last night for an hour or so, and ended up throwing out the whole thing - I didn't think things through well enough at the outset, and it just wasn't going to be good enough. On the plus side, it was a very useful process to go through, and I should be able to plan it much better next time around.
One of the problems I ran into is that I work in a very 'feeling' way - while I am basing decisions on the obvious factors (speed, style, variety etc), the key thing that decides it is the vibe I'm picking up from the floor, vs. the way particular tracks make me feel. It's a way of working which sometimes has me doing a panic-change-of-plan ten seconds before the last track ends... but if I go against that instinct, it usually results in the wrong track being played, so it seems it's best just to go with it.
What I'm wondering is whether there's any way to devise a tag system that involves this more instinctive aspect, or whether it's better to tag tracks along more quantifiable lines, so I can whittle down to a selection based on those, then let my instincts go to work on the results.
This is going to take some experimentation, I think...
It gets complicated. Read more, http://www.id3.org/. From what I understand, MP3v1 is universal, that is the original MP3 format, but it has limited character limits and field selections.Surreal wrote: Can anyone tell me what fields in the id3 tags are considered "standard"? I know that's a tricky question, since these things seem to be changing all the time. I've been trying to a list online without much luck; my google-fu must be weak.
Over time, different versions and flavors v2 MP3 tags came into play. Depending on what program you are using to play your MP3s. The player may or may not easily read your tags. The best solution I have found is to run your collection through a tag editing program to clean things up, standardize the tags. It is a trial and error proccess.
Personally, for DJing, I stick with an older version WinAmp to keep things simple. But, I might need to clean and standardize my tags every so often to make them show up on iTunes (for iPod listenting and playlisting) or in Windows Explorer (for general file maintenance).
I also throw most of my key "Search" info into the comments tag of MP3 v2.x(x=whatever version WinAmp uses) , that comments tag field is pretty universal (although, the tags may not always be intially viewable in your program).
There are people on this board who can do much better job of explaining it than me.
Still better than just building a bunch of playlists and loosing them all once you change computers or programs.
Nathan
I've found it's best to go with instincts as well - somehow trying to relate to the changing feelings of the people in the room. I recognise that feeling of having a track cued up, and then, with 29 seconds to go, suddenly thinking of something that would work much better (and then the panic of trying to find it and cue it up in time ). Sometimes I get too self-indulgent though, thinking "Now I'm going to try that track I've always wanted to play" and it usually goes wrong - I think this is because I'm not 'connecting' with the other people, I'm just thinking about myself.straycat wrote:One of the problems I ran into is that I work in a very 'feeling' way ... the key thing that decides it is the vibe I'm picking up from the floor, vs. the way particular tracks make me feel. It's a way of working which sometimes has me doing a panic-change-of-plan ten seconds before the last track ends... but if I go against that instinct, it usually results in the wrong track being played, so it seems it's best just to go with it.
What I'm wondering is whether there's any way to devise a tag system that involves this more instinctive aspect, or whether it's better to tag tracks along more quantifiable lines, so I can whittle down to a selection based on those, then let my instincts go to work on the results.
So I think getting to the feelings of the dancers is the key thing. I've started using the 'Grouping' field in iTunes to categorise songs by feeling. When doing this, I think of going on an adventure ride in the mountains. I try to work out whether a song feels like you are going 'UP' the mountain, 'ALONG' the plateau, or 'DOWN' the other side (these aren't the actual tags I use, but this is the idea). I've heard lots of DJs talk about 'the wave', and the mountain ride tagging idea seems to fit with this. Using iTunes Smart Playlists, I can then have 'UP' 'ALONG' and 'DOWN' playlists. I'm hoping that this will help when DJing.
-
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 8:27 pm
Hmmm...I wonder if this is just a terminology thing. When I talk about playing a "wave" I'm referring to tempo. I want to start slow, then go to fast, then go back to slow. So that the tempo is "a few" beats faster/slower on each song in a set. That helps to create some predictability to the mix for the dancers who are there.Haydn wrote:I've heard lots of DJs talk about 'the wave', and the mountain ride tagging idea seems to fit with this.
I'm not sure how I would go about placing a song on the "up" side instead of the "down" side of the wave. That is something I will need to ponder.
--Stan Graves