18 tracks in an hour

[Serkan Yerdan]

So you start track A at the beginning, then once it reaches 32 beats, then you push play on track B from the beginning and let that play to 32 beats, then load up another track from the beginning and start another song once that reaches 32 beats? I just tried that method, its a new type of mixing i never had experienced.

Especially when ı am making my own sets on mixmeister ı generally use this method of mixing.I mean 32 beats generally at soulful house genre ı dont know the other genres which ı dont play and cant say anything.But in soulful house ı start mixing in 32 beat and then mix in the other song.As well on live you can start on the last 16 last 8 or even the songs end is too long you can do it 64 beats as well.It s up to you and how it is sounds in to your ear.

[Flash101uk]

13 tracks an hour!? I guess I better slow down my mixing!
On a good day, with 3 decks rocking, I rinse a track a minute :s

So by the end of an hour set at a gig ive usually finished my 3 hour setlist and im digging the back catalogue for inspiration!

[backtothefront]

I play lots of deep stuff and will get 18-25 tracks in 2 hour sets. I don't play any electro. When I play deep sets I usually play about 95% of the song, but at least 50% of that song is usually being mixed with either the next song, samples from previous songs or both. I don't count and I usually don't watch the beat counter, but I do start stuff in phrase.

Ditto this, I play Deep & Soulful House which doesn't generally lend itself to quick mixing but I bring in the intros from the next track fairly early, as well as run a 3 or 4 deck with loops/samples/accapellas from upcoming tracks for example.

[backtothefront]

13 tracks an hour!? I guess I better slow down my mixing!
On a good day, with 3 decks rocking, I rinse a track a minute :s

So by the end of an hour set at a gig ive usually finished my 3 hour setlist and im digging the back catalogue for inspiration!

Hi Flash, by the looks of it you play D&B(?), big fan myself but don't play it out. Definitely agree, can certainly work through tracks very quickly. I guess it depends on the genre of dance music, some cries out for quick shifting whereas others longer transistions.

[faderswagger]

If you're asking for open opinions, honestly I think 18 tracks in an hour is way too slow to be interesting, especially with three-quarters electro. That's almost 3 and a half minutes per track, which means you're using two breakdowns/build ups of the same track the majority of the time, which I don't think is a good thing to do.

EDIT: For background, I Just checked a few of my past electro set playlists and they're all between 30 and 35 tracks, including a couple of acapellas. four decks in traktor. I don't have any of them recorded any more, but if you want an example of how electro sounds at this pace, I could spend a quick half-hour recording one.

[lethal_pizzle]

I have to disagree with the last, as I believe a track should be played out. A good track should progress over the two breakdowns and buildups and will only be satisfying as a whole. If you've had enough after a minute and a half then the track just isn't good enough. Having said that, you may want to switch up intensity during a mix and quick mixing is good for this, however I don't think it's warranted over an entire mix. That's just my personal preference though, I'm sure some people love it when you rattle through the tracks. Electro maybe, deep house not so much.

[photojojo]

I have to disagree with the last, as I believe a track should be played out.

This

[faderswagger]

differences in style I guess. Personally, traditional DJs who will let one channel play just bore me to tears. These transition DJ guys ALLLLLLLWAYS go on about how "its all about the groove" and their "slow mixing style" is way better than the newer performance-stlye, and how we have no idea what we're doing.... So I feel obligated to voice opinions from the other side. There's something to be said for actually doing something behind the decks, and not being an EDM wedding DJ. An easy way to gauge how much time someone spends letting one track play out, vs how much time they're actually doing something, is how many tracks they play in an hour.

I suppose the style of music you're playing matters a bit... But I've seen people spin just about every genre in an awesome way... If you ask me, these guys who just let other people's tracks play out by themselves for 1-2 minutes are going to be bred right out of our scene, as the randoms are much more impressed by performance-style DJs than jukebox-style DJs.


EDIT: cause sometimes I'm bad at spelling. -_-

[Emmett]

differences in style I guess. Personally, traditional DJs who will let one channel play just bore me to tears. These transition DJ guys ALLLLLLLWAYS go on about how "its all about the groove" and their "slow mixing style" is way better than the newer performance-stlye, and how we have no idea what we're doing.... So I feel obligated to voice opinions from the other side. There's something to be said for actually doing something behind the decks, and not being an EDM wedding DJ. An easy way to gauge how much time someone spends letting one track play out, vs how much time they're actually doing something, is how many tracks they play in an hour.

I suppose the style of music you're playing matters a bit... But I've seen people spin just about every genre in an awesome way... If you ask me, these guys who just let other people's tracks play out by themselves for 1-2 minutes are going to be bred right out of our scene, as the randoms are much more impressed by performance-style DJs than jukebox-style DJs.


EDIT: cause sometimes I'm bad at spelling. -_-

Disagree entirely with your comment and CNBF wasting my time to tell you why.

[elliot1106]

I usually hit 18 tracks in 50-55 minutes with my mixing style, so that comes to about 20 tracks an hour, playing electro kind of stuff, maybe some leaning towards prog.