>it is sad to see that the some of the surviving members of these innovators >are now playing dj sets that barely cross a couple of genres, in a boring >"smooth mixng" style.
That is so on the mark. Anyone who heard (fill in with any lauded techno favourite) even as late as the mid-'90's will remember how sheer 'riffing' a good techno set could be. The pressure of the advent of late-'90s tribal techno - which I embraced at the time I admit (but for the sake of variety not for the sake of *exclusivity*!) meant almost everyone soon succumbed. Luckily it seems nearly everyone I speak to is now heartily sick of that style and the monotonous mixing that tends to go with it and already people are pushing the boundaries ... I can't wait to see Aphex at Lost he has been decrying flat mixing (& exclusive 4/4 sets) for years. My 'most funky dj' at the moment?: DJ Shufflemaster (aka Tatsuya Kanamori: http://www.discogs.com/artist/DJ_Shufflemaster k >-----Original Message----- >From: Rc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:45 AM >To: Matthew MacQueen; [email protected] >Subject: Re: [313] Baby Ford / Zip > > > >I couldn't agree with Matt more. > >as i listen to my old wizard, hotmix 5, ron hardy, derrick may mixes it is >difficult to overlook the fact that their innovative status and >their unique >sound came from their style of mixing a diversity of often elusive records >in a creative way. > >it is sad to see that the some of the surviving members of these innovators >are now playing dj sets that barely cross a couple of genres, in a boring >"smooth mixng" style. > >perhaps this a result of the commercialsim of the music; forcing >djs to play >sets that are perhaps easier to swallow for the musically shallow minded >consuming majority......who knows; it's weird that some djs have >left behind >the skills which made them popular in the first place. > >claude young is an example of someone that is not afraid to cross >genres and >to try virtually everything on the decks. everytime i've seen him here in >sydney.....he plays with doubles of every record, he hardly lets a bar pass >without doing some sort of beat juggling or scratching (using virtually >every appendage he has). he f***cks up a small portion of the time but he >always walks away saturated with sweat. The man earns his money. > >sometimes it seems the art of djing within the house/techno community does >not assume skill and creativity as a barrier to entry. > >on 17/5/02 10:09 AM, Matthew MacQueen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> I'd still be interested in other theories as to why a culture >>> of skilled, performing DJs is strong in the US and not so >>> strong in Europe - I know mine is pretty flawed, but in >>> the absence of alternatives (other than "euro-faggots suck" :) >>> I'm generally confused as to why it is the way it is. >>> Although I guess another theory could be explained in only >>> two words - "hip hop"... >> >> and 'battles', yeah. >> >> I've been following this thread with a lot of interest and >actually trying to >> put some thoughts toward an explanation. Bear with me.... >> >> Contributing factors from a roots perspective are (as far as >Detroit jocks go) >> when you grow up listing to the Wizard 'quick mix' style on the >radio, you >> benchmark that as quality skills, something as a kid you think >in your head >> "now that is what a stellar DJ does." Or booty jocks, etc. it's >part of what >> you hear on the radio or in your environment, and influences >you, as obviously >> a lot of that (even Mills) influenced and by pop dance of the >80s of which >> hip-hop and Mojo's eclecticism is a big part. A whole >generation of people in >> Detroit who heard 'hot-mix' and/or "quick mix" style shows and >the Wizard on >> the radio learn that skills = more than selections and more into >the realm of >> "what creatively/aggressively can you do with 2+ records"... >including early >> experimentations by Derrick May and even Richie with what could >you do with a >> Reel-to-reel machine during a radio show or DJ gig, etc. Also what the >> HotMix 5 were doing in Chicago was all about cramming as many hot 'street >> tracks' into a show, and that also means stuff like doubles, drop-ins, >> phasing, cut-n-scratch, EQs, 33/45 tricks, effects, etc. And >Yes I am talking >> about with (proto) techno and house music, italo, etc. >> >> I'm with the camp who would rather see someone try and fail at >something more >> 'reaching' and funky and experimenting with really CREATING more >than the sum >> of an intro and an outtro of 2 records that flow seamlessly >together. Yes >> there is a time for that, but to me it's a lot easier and >'safer' than really >> trying to ask yourself as a DJ "how can I go beyond just these 2 >records, as >> the artists intended them?" >> >> Esp. when you have records that are maybe hard as nails and 'straight' >> techno.. you have to inject some funk into them with the way you >play them in >> a mix, because on their own, (just cleanly mixing one into the >other) tends to >> be pretty funk-less, or at best just a tad boring or >uninspired... That is >> why to me I love hearing Claude Young, because what he plays tends to be >> harder than I'd buy/play, but the crazy funky stuff he does in >the mix really >> ads that funk that's IMHO missing from some of the individual tracks >> themselves. Rob Hood and Jay Denham are less tricky than >Claude, but without >> a doubt their DJ styles also adds trenemdous soul and funk >beyond what the >> records themselves were 'born with'. IMHO, far too many DJs >select a set by >> what is easy to mix, not by how great the tracks really are *on their own >> merit*. >> >> I guess to me the idea of just smoothly blending 2 great tracks >is an average >> way to play, (the cost of entry to DJing, if you will) but what >really set up >> you up as a creator / crowd mover became what you could do beyond that... >> either with experimental selections (cross-genres/years/styles!!) or more >> aggressiveness or experimentatin through other various techniques. >> >> So - in summary? - there's new generations of DJs who never were really >> exposed to that as an archetypal kind of radio aggressive Hot >Mix DJ, and I >> think they have newer/different influences and DJ 'role models' than the >> previous generation who grew up wishing you were The Wizard, who >was for most >> people (who heard him) the guy you wished you could DJ like. :) > So not >> saying one style is right or wrong, but that might explain some of the >> US/Detroit style of really getting aggressive and 'tricky' in a >mix, without >> it coming off as mere novelty, but elevating the art of what a >DJ *DOES* as an >> artform, more than what a simple machine or software can do now. > DOes anyone >> know what I'm trying to say? >> >> While "we may equate machines with funkiness", you also can't >program ProTools >> to 'inject funk' in a mix. Well, not yet. ;) >> >> peace, >> Matt MacQueen >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
