The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
Cosign. I don't think I would be effective with 1000 songs to choose from.
That's only an issue if all 1000 songs are the same... I mean, will you be that tempted to play Keak The Sneak after, say, "You Made A Believer Out Of Me"?
That's only an issue if all 1000 songs are the same... I mean, will you be that tempted to play Keak The Sneak after, say, "You Made A Believer Out Of Me"?
No, I just know how ADD I get, and I like to have a somewhat limited pallette is all. It's all a matter of context and preference in the end. I don't like the idea of bringing my laptop to the club, and the reason I buy dance and hip hop 12"s is to play them out.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
I don't think that diff. profiles are really necessary (USER: ROSS HOGG/USER: DUPPY RANKS), but well-organized crates are oh . That goes for creating specific crates for specific gigs, too. I just wish it were easy to sort within crates (read: choose the order I want mp3s in).
Having said that, I'll sometimes just go to ALL, sort by BPM and figure it out like that. When I bring records, I usually have them in my crates by BPM anyway, so it's more natural.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
Too true... I also find myself running through songs too fast (after the first chorus) sometimes because I have so much shit I want to play.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
Too true... I also find myself running through songs too fast (after the first chorus) sometimes because I have so much shit I want to play.
That's sometimes a good thing though
I think I have like 10-15 different crates. Not just "disco" but "classics", "lounge", "dancefloor"... not just hip-hop but "club hop", "down south", "hyphy", "THAT REAL SCHITT"...
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
What I was saying about that crate structure is that it changes from gig to gig, based on the audience. So what might be fire to one audience might not be to another.
Please to list some songs in "Fire" category.
The only potential drawback to having 3000 songs at your disposal is that, at those times when you really don't know what you wanna play, the decision process is much more difficult. When you have 70 records with you, you tend to make choices much more quickly.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new **classics **early **fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
Not much different that buying a shady bootleg with questionable mastering. My point is that if you're ripping stuff yourself with iTunes/LAME, you can be assured of a high quality conversion. If you're pulling stuff off the internet via Limewire/Acquisition/Soulseek, you need to check how that mp3 sounds before you play it in the club.
Slow your roll-- it's a little more complex than that. If I manually recorded everything from 12" vinyl, I would be confident that most things were properly ED'd and I wouldn't have to tweak much to make the mp3s sound good. However, it's still time-consuming and there's a ton of shit I want to play that isn't on vinyl yet or may not even make it to vinyl. When I rip from CD (which I do pretty frequently), (1) things generally aren't mastered to knock in a club and (2) there isn't even any standardization in the mastering comparable to what you find on most 12"s.
Slow your roll-- it's a little more complex than that. If I manually recorded everything from 12" vinyl, I would be confident that most things were properly ED'd and I wouldn't have to tweak much to make the mp3s sound good. However, it's still time-consuming and there's a ton of shit I want to play that isn't on vinyl yet or may not even make it to vinyl. When I rip from CD (which I do pretty frequently), (1) things generally aren't mastered to knock in a club and (2) there isn't even any standardization in the mastering comparable to what you find on most 12"s.
All I know is that I have over 7,000 mp3s - of ALL genres. Of these, around 1500 are used in Serato. Of those 1500 or so, 90% are ripped by me in iTunes, the rest are downloads. I play 4 nights a week in the major clubs here in South Beach (and before that in NYC) and I have NO aural (no ayo) problems with ANY of them. The reason? I listen to every track before it reaches my Serato laptop to make sure it sounds good. But that's just me I guess...
Batch normalization built into Unix. I did not know this until right now:
Equalizing volume levels This program will change the volume settings of each audio file so that they will all be around the same without affecting the dynamics of any of the files in question. Using the program is very simple. Open up the terminal and type normalize . Make sure to include a space after the word normalize. Then all you have to do is drag all the audio files you wish to normalize into the terminal and press enter. Just make sure the files are in .aiff or .wav format. MP3 files will not work with normalize.
You can also "batch" normalize ??? i.e., you can preserve the relative sound values of a group of sound files so that the dynamic range is preserved between them. This is useful if you are combining files from a single CD or album with other files. To quote the normalize "man" page:
In batch mode, all the specified files are considered to be part of a single album and their relative volumes are preserved. This is done by averaging the volumes of all the files, computing a single adjustment fromthat, and applying the same adjustment to all the files. Some analysis is also done so that files with volumes that appear to be statistical aberrations are not considered in the average. This is useful if you have albums (like many of the author's) in which there is one "quiet song" that throws off the average.
Using the batch mode is very easy. Simply use the "-b" option with every file you wish to be part of the batch. Then cease using it for files not part of the batch. For example, suppose you have five files you wish to normalize, file1.wav, file2.wav, file3.wav, file4.wav, file5.wav. Suppose further that the first three files are from the same CD. You commence your normalizing festivities with the following command:
normalize -b file1.wav file2.wav file3.wav
Then conclude with this command:
normalize file4.wav file5.wav
And you're finished! Normalize is the easiest of command-line programs.
Honestly, looks like it's a waste of time and resources on their part (shocker), since I don't see how they could be successful without overturning the established precedents on fair use concerning blank VHS and cassette tapes.
RIAA/major labels are just as afraid of change as some of the folks in this thread.
Hm, the only fear I see in this thread is that of the near-extinction of new vinyl releases... and seeing as how the one thing that brings us all together here is our love of the format I think thats wholly justified
As I said, for the foreseeable future there's no need for me to switch to a digital deejay setup... I've never even played a CD out, and I listen almost strictly to vinyl at home...
All I see is my fellow analog heads mourning the inevitable...
I mean, I love the format because it's so ingrained into music culture, having great memories directly attached to it from childhood to today, and maybe it's fueled by me only being a hobbyist collector and it not being connected to my financial livelihood, but it just seems like a natural evolution for me, just like when people were freaking out over the very notion of recording music. Hard drive space is getting larger and cheaper, and lossless compression formats like FLAC are just getting a bit better and better. (Although the limiting factor is definitely on the compresion algo -- you can only fit so much into a byte). Things that we attribute to vinyl like warmth/nearness is just recording error that could be replicated digitally if desired. Shit's heavy and dominates my bedroom, too. I'm looking forward to new formats (particularly a multi-channel one beyond stereo) and see people adapt and come up with new ways to manipulate. Music is dead, long live music and all that.
(Besides, like people said, vinyl will definitely be around in at least a boutique/niche shop capacity for quite awhile. All new music could cease today and I still have enough to scan and search for for the rest of my life and then some.)
I am still shocked at how quickly dildo took over the game. But it is what it is.
Wait till they make a computer program that can rock a club better than you. We will have to have some space age battle like the time that ibm computer beat that grandmaster at chess.
Comments
Cosign. I don't think I would be effective with 1000 songs to choose from.
No, I just know how ADD I get, and I like to have a somewhat limited pallette is all. It's all a matter of context and preference in the end. I don't like the idea of bringing my laptop to the club, and the reason I buy dance and hip hop 12"s is to play them out.
I can't agree with you more. In those moments when you need some direction, having more actually hurts more than helps. More defined crates definitely help this. I'm pretty much setting up a couple of crates specific to the gig nowadays.
**new
**classics
**early
**fire
Then I got the regular crates that are basically unchanging. What I'd like to see in Serato is like profiles, where you can say swwitch between your reggae / hip hop / electro / etc indentities.
DUDE GET WITH THE FUTURE RAERZ STATUS!!!
I don't think that diff. profiles are really necessary (USER: ROSS HOGG/USER: DUPPY RANKS), but well-organized crates are oh
Having said that, I'll sometimes just go to ALL, sort by BPM and figure it out like that. When I bring records, I usually have them in my crates by BPM anyway, so it's more natural.
Too true... I also find myself running through songs too fast (after the first chorus) sometimes because I have so much shit I want to play.
That's sometimes a good thing though
I think I have like 10-15 different crates. Not just "disco" but "classics", "lounge", "dancefloor"... not just hip-hop but "club hop", "down south", "hyphy", "THAT REAL SCHITT"...
1. Dylan
2. Dylan
3. Dylan
4. Dylan
5. Dylan
"I spit hot fiyah!"
Slow your roll-- it's a little more complex than that. If I manually recorded everything from 12" vinyl, I would be confident that most things were properly ED'd and I wouldn't have to tweak much to make the mp3s sound good. However, it's still time-consuming and there's a ton of shit I want to play that isn't on vinyl yet or may not even make it to vinyl. When I rip from CD (which I do pretty frequently), (1) things generally aren't mastered to knock in a club and (2) there isn't even any standardization in the mastering comparable to what you find on most 12"s.
All I know is that I have over 7,000 mp3s - of ALL genres. Of these, around 1500 are used in Serato. Of those 1500 or so, 90% are ripped by me in iTunes, the rest are downloads. I play 4 nights a week in the major clubs here in South Beach (and before that in NYC) and I have NO aural (no ayo) problems with ANY of them.
The reason? I listen to every track before it reaches my Serato laptop to make sure it sounds good.
But that's just me I guess...
Do I need to open up a school on Serato?
Mac version please!
Been using it for over a year now:
http://homepage.mac.com/beryrinaldo/AudioTron/MacMP3Gain/
There's volume logic, but doesn't actually change the file itself.
Batch normalization built into Unix. I did not know this until right now:
Equalizing volume levels
This program will change the volume settings of each audio file so that they will all be around the same without affecting the dynamics of any of the files in question. Using the program is very simple. Open up the terminal and type normalize . Make sure to include a space after the word normalize. Then all you have to do is drag all the audio files you wish to normalize into the terminal and press enter. Just make sure the files are in .aiff or .wav format. MP3 files will not work with normalize.
You can also "batch" normalize ??? i.e., you can preserve the relative sound values of a group of sound files so that the dynamic range is preserved between them. This is useful if you are combining files from a single CD or album with other files. To quote the normalize "man" page:
In batch mode, all the specified files are considered to be part of a single album and their relative volumes are preserved. This is done by averaging the volumes of all the files, computing a single adjustment fromthat, and applying the same adjustment to all the files. Some analysis is also done so that files with volumes that appear to be statistical aberrations are not considered in the average. This is useful if you have albums (like many of the author's) in which there is one "quiet song" that throws off the average.
Using the batch mode is very easy. Simply use the "-b" option with every file you wish to be part of the batch. Then cease using it for files not part of the batch. For example, suppose you have five files you wish to normalize, file1.wav, file2.wav, file3.wav, file4.wav, file5.wav. Suppose further that the first three files are from the same CD. You commence your normalizing festivities with the following command:
normalize -b file1.wav file2.wav file3.wav
Then conclude with this command:
normalize file4.wav file5.wav
And you're finished! Normalize is the easiest of command-line programs.
Honestly, looks like it's a waste of time and resources on their part (shocker), since I don't see how they could be successful without overturning the established precedents on fair use concerning blank VHS and cassette tapes.
RIAA/major labels are just as afraid of change as some of the folks in this thread.
As I said, for the foreseeable future there's no need for me to switch to a digital deejay setup... I've never even played a CD out, and I listen almost strictly to vinyl at home...
All I see is my fellow analog heads mourning the inevitable...
(Besides, like people said, vinyl will definitely be around in at least a boutique/niche shop capacity for quite awhile. All new music could cease today and I still have enough to scan and search for for the rest of my life and then some.)
Wait till they make a computer program that can rock a club better than you. We will have to have some space age battle like the time that ibm computer beat that grandmaster at chess.
Vinyl Wax is REAL music to my ears.
The whole natural fun of DJing was taken away with Serato. Its like Disneyland.
What's wrong with Disneyland?
Please being to be quiet.
yes all mp3's are digital, just being descriptive.
Disneyland is fake and unnatural, created by mankind to be something it really isn't.
Oh ok, now I get it - but still what's wrong with Disneyland???
You could say the same thing about vinyl, re: created to capture music from being a strictly live affair for one's listening conveinence.