Beatmatching by ear

[DJDoubleYou]

i normaly just look at the BPM of the other track, match those two and then beatmatch them (by ear ofcourse)

[Liambo]

It's simple.. Cover or hide all forms of information for beatmatching e.g. waveforms, tempo, BPM etc.

And just practice manually trying to get it. Years ago back in the vinyl days if you were a DJ that was solid at beatmatching you were classed as a good DJ but that practice could have taken months if not years to master. Now a days on a CDJ you can learn beatmatching quite well in a week or two.

Just practice and you should be fine and remember it WILL take time. If it doesn't take you long, i need some tips from you for my mates that are learning lol.

[backtothefront]

But by relying on BPMs you aren't really training your ears or learning to beatmatch at all, it's basically a slower version of sync. If you can beatmatch someone could just give you two random tunes (obviously within range) and a set of turntables/cdjs and you should just be able to mix them straight up. Challenge yourself a bit more dude if you really wanna learn. I've never once manually counted a BPM... that seems crazy.

This, exactly. Beatmatching by ear is just that, there is absolutely no reason to know the BPM of the tracks. Music from a similar genre will generally be in the similar range in any case and anything outside of +-8% (for TTs in general) you'll have to be a bit clever how you mix the tracks. For example, the only cues you have using vinyl is the audio itself and colour depth change which you can use to identify breakdowns etc.

[backtothefront]

The old method of "blindfold yourself, throw two random tracks on, and slap the pitch fader until it works" is a relic from the vinyl days. You'll never play on analog vinyl, and the above method is standard, and extremely easy, for CDJs.

You are joking I presume?

That is certainly not the way either myself or peers learned to beatmatch on vinyl.

[Shishdisma]

i'm not talking about limiting anything to anything (tho not entirely sure that phrase makes sense )

a pitch indicator wouldn't help on a 1200 - unless u mean a bpm auto detect gizmo.

it's not "by ear" if all you're doing is looking at the bpm's - tho i guess u are talking about using your ears to be able to hear when they're in phase. the OP was asking about how to really beatmatch by ear anyway which isnt quite what you're talking about. tho i do see your point.

bpm readouts and sync buttons are great tools - but personally i like knowing that if something goes wrong i'm not going to end up with a train wreck.

oddly enough there's another thread atm that seems to be the usual "you're not a dj unless u can do it manually" verses "sync"... these seem to come around way too often. as with most things in life the truth is somewhere in the middle

No, I mean a pitch indicator, +/- a % value. Assuming we were thrust back into the 70s and BPM indicators weren't on every single piece of hardware imaginable, you would very easily get by with just a % change value and a tempo value written on the label.

The reason why this discussion is ridiculous, is that people in this thread have a definition of "by ear" stuck somewhere in the 70s, whereas actually beat matching by ear on modern equipment entails one less arbitrary step. Is using a pitch fader using something "other than your ears?" What about a pitch reset? Or an accurate tempo adjustment? Including blind tempo matching in "beatmatching by ear" is extremely arbitrary, because the basis is that 1200s didn't have a tempo inidcator, so all DJs wanting to call themselves able to do so must follow that heritage, even though the actual technique is exactly the same and just as "by ear" on CDJs.

[oliosky]

No, I mean a pitch indicator, +/- a % value. Assuming we were thrust back into the 70s and BPM indicators weren't on every single piece of hardware imaginable, you would very easily get by with just a % change value and a tempo value written on the label.

The reason why this discussion is ridiculous, is that people in this thread have a definition of "by ear" stuck somewhere in the 70s, whereas actually beat matching by ear on modern equipment entails one less arbitrary step. Is using a pitch fader using something "other than your ears?" What about a pitch reset? Or an accurate tempo adjustment? Including blind tempo matching in "beatmatching by ear" is extremely arbitrary, because the basis is that 1200s didn't have a tempo inidcator, so all DJs wanting to call themselves able to do so must follow that heritage, even though the actual technique is exactly the same and just as "by ear" on CDJs.

fuck off out of this this thread mate. its obviously got nothing to do with you and the way you operate.

[deevey]

I'm just happy that when my eyes fail to the point i need reading glasses to see a LCD display or are just too plastered drunk to focus on one i'll still be able to match the beats hehehe :thumb up:

[Jack Bastard]

The reason why this discussion is ridiculous, is that people in this thread have a definition of "by ear" stuck somewhere in the 70s

No, they have the correct definition on 'by ear', and they are on topic. Believe it or not there are plenty of times where a BPM counter can't be trusted, and you may have heard of this thing called a DVS.

It's quite clear you're young and inexperienced at gigging, let the people who have experience give advice.

[ToOntown]

I play "Name That BPM" on my iPod all the time. My wife thinks I'm a total nerd on car trips. A song will come on and I'll be like "95!" Then I'll go back and check it later to see if I'm correct. Most of the time I'm damn close.

This is the point the OP is trying to get to. Removing much of the guesswork or reliance on the technology.

[Otacon]

I ususally line up bass hits and if its off, you can easily hear it. Just put two songs on and turn your laptop around or something.