CDs Are No Subsitute For Vinyl For DJs
Alex L. Pace
I find it quite amusing that there are so many totally clueless people who
suppose that professional quality mixes can be produced with CDs alone. As
far as DJs are concerned, there is absoluely no subsitute for a pair of
1200s and a couple of crates of vinyl. Period.
Being a DJ and having a lot of friends in this business, I am quite certain
that even the best pitch control CD players can only supplement a DJs
performance. Just tonight I was talking to one of my DJ friends and it
turns out that his manager just bought him a Denon 2000, he spent the
afternoon playing with it and has already decided it was a worthless
investment. The reason? While beatmixing is the most fundamental of DJ
skills, all experienced professional DJs do much more than merely match the
beats. There are certain things such as the unique sound created when the
auto-stop button is pushed, the sound the record winding down when power is
switched off, the tricks that can be done with two records that just cant
be duplicated with the CD player.
I've used one of the CD gadgets on occasion and been in many a booth where
they were in use in clubs in various cities and I've only heard ONE guy
that could really do some interesting things with a Numark dual CD player
but even he preferred to use vinyl.
For all of you consumers out there that want to listen to your favorite
music at home or in the car, buy CDs. DJs dont have (or want) that option.
Alex Pace
alex...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
Vitamin B (Brian Behlendorf)
>I find it quite amusing that there are so many totally clueless people who
>suppose that professional quality mixes can be produced with CDs alone. As
>far as DJs are concerned, there is absoluely no subsitute for a pair of
>1200s and a couple of crates of vinyl. Period.
I find it quite amazing that there are people who are so set in their ways
that they don't realize that the digital format opens up new ways of doing
things, new "tricks" that are only beginning to be utilized. CD's and a good
mixing deck are _different_, yes, than a pair of 1200's and a crate of vinyl,
and there _are_ things that DJ's can do with vinyl that will never be able
to be done with 1's and 0's. (at least nowhere as easily). But the converse
is true as well.
>Being a DJ and having a lot of friends in this business, I am quite certain
>that even the best pitch control CD players can only supplement a DJs
>performance.
An artist is only as good as his paintbrush? C'mon....
>Just tonight I was talking to one of my DJ friends and it
>turns out that his manager just bought him a Denon 2000, he spent the
>afternoon playing with it and has already decided it was a worthless
>investment. The reason? While beatmixing is the most fundamental of DJ
>skills, all experienced professional DJs do much more than merely match the
>beats. There are certain things such as the unique sound created when the
>auto-stop button is pushed, the sound the record winding down when power is
>switched off, the tricks that can be done with two records that just cant
>be duplicated with the CD player.
Well, not yet that is. But you can do things with a CD players that you can't
do with vinyl - like making the CD player a virtual sampler, looping over a
length of music of _any_ size. Sound worthless? Talk to Dr. Patterson.
I know this is a wanted feature, because so many mixers have samplers built
in, but they only hold 10 seconds (some more) of sound. Imagine being able
to take one of those Simon Harris (or another) beat CD's, and while that's
looping laying Les Voix Bulgares on top, and on the turntable mix in some
melodies... and you can still do your mixer console tricks like transforming,
adding echo, etc.
>I've used one of the CD gadgets on occasion and been in many a booth where
>they were in use in clubs in various cities and I've only heard ONE guy
>that could really do some interesting things with a Numark dual CD player
>but even he preferred to use vinyl.
Maybe if you stopped thinking of them as gadgets and started to work out
original things you can do with it, you'd come up with some really interesting
effects. Right now most DJ's prefer vinyl because that's
what they've been working with for such a long time, most of their stuff is
on vinyl, etc., and the switchover to CD's just isn't worth it for them
in the short term. A complete switchover would be expensive, yes, and the
sense of timing and knowing your way around a dual-CD player is
different that a pair of 1200's, so it would take as much time to re-learn
how to use the technology (remember how long it was before you could
actually mix beats with a pair of 1200's? We aren't "born" with it). But
I think many DJ's could do quite well by having both turntables and the
CD players, and until they've collected a large amount of digital material,
use the CD players as sound-effects or melody samplers.
>For all of you consumers out there that want to listen to your favorite
>music at home or in the car, buy CDs. DJs dont have (or want) that option.
There is something to be said for the sheer _ruggedness_ of vinyl - you can
scratch the vinyl to hell and with some noise gates and a good amp it can
still come out sounding somewhat clean; 1200's are built like tanks, while
CD players still are (and probably always will be) sensetive to water, sand,
dirt, etc; and there is a certain romanticism to a DJ having his hands on the
slab of wax, carefully manipulating it, tweaking the mixer and the rotation
of the records just so... but what CD DJ's lack in hypnoticism and mysticism
can easily be made up with the sheer quality and precision of their work.
Who knows? Maybe the technogeek craning over a massive array of knobs and
sliders and liquid-crystal displays and shiny metal discs will become a new
romantic figure.
>Alex Pace
>alex...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
Brian
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"This isn't one of those RAVE parties, is it?" - Nat'l Park Service
representative while I tried making "camping" reservations. ;-)
Howard Berkey
were destructive to music because they lacked the 'warmth', 'expression',
(insert more musical buzzwords) of pianos. (it also reminds me of the piano vs.
harpsichord debate few hundred yrs. ago). New technology implies new forms
of creativity.
-H
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Howard Berkey how...@netcom.com
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time
to reform.
-- Mark Twain
edd70...@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au
>
>
> I find it quite amusing that there are so many totally clueless people who
> suppose that professional quality mixes can be produced with CDs alone. As
> far as DJs are concerned, there is absoluely no subsitute for a pair of
> 1200s and a couple of crates of vinyl. Period.
>
>
> Alex Pace
> alex...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
This boy KNOWS what time it is!!!
neXus.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jase (aka. Nexus) edd70...@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au OR |"Always imitated, |
edd...@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au |never equalled!" |
------------------
"The nightmare has only just begun...<The ORIGINAL techno groove writers>"
FUSE (Further Underground Sound Experiments)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Hebditch
up a whole load of new opportunities. With the technology I don't think
there's any problem.
What is a problem is the availability of material. A deejay in London
who relied purely on CDs would be weeks or months behind the rest of the
crowd. They'd also cut themselves off from the huge mass of material
that never finds its way onto CD.
I don't see the situation changing in the immediate future either.
Pressing up a coupla hundred white labels is going to be cheaper than
CDs for some time to come - and there wouldn't be much point in doing
CDs as few of the DJs who might buy your record would want that format
anyway.
--
Stephen Hebditch TQM Communications ste...@orbital.demon.co.uk +44 836 825962
Pete Ashdown
>> I find it quite amusing that there are so many totally clueless people who
>> suppose that professional quality mixes can be produced with CDs alone. As
>> far as DJs are concerned, there is absoluely no subsitute for a pair of
>> 1200s and a couple of crates of vinyl. Period.
>This boy KNOWS what time it is!!!
Unfortunately, you both think it is 1983.
--
orb be in u, orb be out u
DISCLAIMER: My writings have NOTHING to do with my employer. Keep it that way.
Pete Ashdown pash...@slack.sim.es.com ...uunet!slack.sim.es.com!pashdown
Daniel M. DuBois
>[stuff deleted reafirming his subject line]
>they were in use in clubs in various cities and I've only heard ONE guy
>that could really do some interesting things with a Numark dual CD player
>but even he preferred to use vinyl.
>For all of you consumers out there that want to listen to your favorite
>music at home or in the car, buy CDs. DJs dont have (or want) that option.
>Alex Pace
>alex...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
But... maybe they like vinyl so much because they're used to it and have
been doing it that way for years. My mind is clear, I have no preferences,
and I have no abilty to DJ.. spectacular effects or otherwise.
-Dan
Aaron Grier
>There is something to be said for the sheer _ruggedness_ of vinyl - you can
>scratch the vinyl to hell and with some noise gates and a good amp it can
>still come out sounding somewhat clean; 1200's are built like tanks, while
>CD players still are (and probably always will be) sensetive to water, sand,
>dirt, etc; and there is a certain romanticism to a DJ having his hands on the
>slab of wax, carefully manipulating it, tweaking the mixer and the rotation
>of the records just so... but what CD DJ's lack in hypnoticism and mysticism
>can easily be made up with the sheer quality and precision of their work.
>Who knows? Maybe the technogeek craning over a massive array of knobs and
>sliders and liquid-crystal displays and shiny metal discs will become a new
>romantic figure.
Much has to be said for a guy manipulating an oil derivative on
a couple of mechanical devices.
I like the hybrid approach, and I have a feeling that's where I'm
headed. Of course the dual 1200s and vinyl will be heavily used, but there
is simply some stuff that just can't find except on CD. This is how I plan
my collection...
All singles will be purchased on vinyl. All albums will be purchased
on CD. Sounds logical right? Well it does to me. Seems you would be using
more singles to mix around with, and scratch with, and do all those cool DJ
things with, while CDs could be used to get ideas for mixes, and figure out
what you want to get on singles! :)
Someone needs to either post a FAQlist or maybe write one on DJ work:
IE what it takes, the basics (beatmixing, scratching, transforms), and maybe
how to do it. How did you guys learn how do DJ anyway? Pete?
Thomas Grant Edwards
>What is a problem is the availability of material. A deejay in London
>who relied purely on CDs would be weeks or months behind the rest of the
>crowd. They'd also cut themselves off from the huge mass of material
>that never finds its way onto CD.
>I don't see the situation changing in the immediate future either.
>Pressing up a coupla hundred white labels is going to be cheaper than
>CDs for some time to come - and there wouldn't be much point in doing
>CDs as few of the DJs who might buy your record would want that format
>anyway.
I see the problem here is that groups produce digital music,
and then press it.
Wouldn't it be nice if we had a machine with enough memory so that it
could load up an entire song off of CD, and enough speed so that the
computer could do the scratching etc., say with a little hand wheel
device. And beat-macthing could be done automatically (under human
supervision).
For DJ's who have to be newer than CD's, they could just snag DAT
versions of songs, directly from the groups. Or perhaps snag them
via ISDN lines. DJ's could have a deal with groups to have songs
uploaded to their machines as soon as they are done, ready to hit
the rave that night.
Yeah, dream big!
-CyberTom
Master of the affine wavelet transform
Sunil Gupta
> >
> > Wouldn't it be nice if we had a machine with enough memory so that it
> > could load up an entire song off of CD, and enough speed so that the
> > computer could do the scratching etc., say with a little hand wheel
> > device. And beat-macthing could be done automatically (under human
> > supervision).
>
> It'd be nice, but: CD-ROM disk is 650M. A second of music is about 150K. To p
> a five minute song on you'd need roughly five megs of RAM. Probelm
> two:uploading to the RAM: you'd need a fast CD player to load it into memory.
> don't know.
Technically, none of what the original poster proposes is very difficult.
Five megs of RAM is a fairly trivial amount of memory these days, and the
facilities exist to read CD's on a computer (it really doesn't have to
read in real-time). I could probably cook something up in a couple of
weekends.
Sunil Gupta
Monsoon Software, Inc.
s...@monsoon.com
Cyberpreppie
> Wouldn't it be nice if we had a machine with enough memory so that it
> could load up an entire song off of CD, and enough speed so that the
> computer could do the scratching etc., say with a little hand wheel
> device. And beat-macthing could be done automatically (under human
> supervision).
It'd be nice, but: CD-ROM disk is 650M. A second of music is about 150K. To put
a five minute song on you'd need roughly five megs of RAM. Probelm
two:uploading to the RAM: you'd need a fast CD player to load it into memory. I
don't know.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Charles Barilleaux III occasionally know at Miami Univ
CBARI...@MIAVX1.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU as Cyberpreppie
"Aren't you tired? You've been sitting all day!"
-My mom, 14 hours into a 20 hour car ride.
Cyberpreppie
> cbari...@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Cyberpreppie) writes:
>
>> >
>> > Wouldn't it be nice if we had a machine with enough memory so that it
>> > could load up an entire song off of CD, and enough speed so that the
>>
>> It'd be nice, but: CD-ROM disk is 650M. A second of music is about 150K. To p
>> a five minute song on you'd need roughly five megs of RAM. Probelm
>> two:uploading to the RAM: you'd need a fast CD player to load it into memory.
>> don't know.
>
> Technically, none of what the original poster proposes is very difficult.
> Five megs of RAM is a fairly trivial amount of memory these days, and the
> facilities exist to read CD's on a computer (it really doesn't have to
> read in real-time). I could probably cook something up in a couple of
> weekends.
>
song. What if it were longer?
The bigger issue is the uploading. I realize that you can read CD's into a
computer (my job involoves those). Yes, it doesn't have to be done in real
time. But, each time you want to load up a song, you have to download the five
megs. The speed the data is transfered from the CD to the RAM becomes the
issue, more specifically the speed of the player. If you want to upload a
bunch, you need a bunch RAM to hold it all if you wish to use this machine
several times in a row.
In short: if I wanted to upload an hours worth of stuff into ram in advance, I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Charles Barilleaux III occasionally know at Miami Univ
"A paperless office is about as usefull as a paperless bathroom"
would need like 650
Sunil Gupta
> Well, I do realize 5M is trivial. However, that is assumking a five minute
> song. What if it were longer?
Get more RAM!
> The bigger issue is the uploading. I realize that you can read CD's into a
> computer (my job involoves those). Yes, it doesn't have to be done in real
> time. But, each time you want to load up a song, you have to download the fiv
> megs. The speed the data is transfered from the CD to the RAM becomes the
> issue, more specifically the speed of the player. If you want to upload a
> bunch, you need a bunch RAM to hold it all if you wish to use this machine
> several times in a row.
> In short: if I wanted to upload an hours worth of stuff into ram in advance,
Well, each tool has its limitations. The question would be, would a composer
put up with whatever delays the process dictated? I think being able to
perform real-time digital effects would be worth a few minutes of load and
save time. With more horsepower (faster machines), you'd be able to process
more data in a shorter time-span, and with solid-state memory technology
advancing as fast as it is, we should be able to hold a whole CD in RAM
sometime by the middle of the decade.
Thomas Grant Edwards
>Well, I do realize 5M is trivial. However, that is assumking a five minute
>song. What if it were longer?
>The bigger issue is the uploading. I realize that you can read CD's into a
>computer (my job involoves those). Yes, it doesn't have to be done in real
>time. But, each time you want to load up a song, you have to download the five
>megs. The speed the data is transfered from the CD to the RAM becomes the
>issue, more specifically the speed of the player.
Yeah, I'm curious, does anyone know max data xfer rates from CD ROMS?
(Time for the optical fibre output from your CD player :)
-CyberTom