The Pull of "Industry Standard"

[dj matt blaze]

I think a little too much emphasis is being put on the difficulty of getting used to a Pio mixer. Simply, its not difficult, its not rocket science, so why should anyone spend $1000+ on something they don't like? A mixer is a mixer, meaning the function of a mixer is essentially the same on all mixers, with faders and knobs and EQs. I would say that there is more of a difference in different companies CDJs than there are in mixers. The point about a flanger being a flanger is while the effect may sound different with different gear its not hard to engage the effect without spending a few min on the gear, you know the idea you are trying to get across in the mix. A good DJ will be able to adapt fairly easy to any mixer or CDJ. Will the mix be as "fantastic" as if it were on your own personal preferred mixer? Maybe, maybe not. We are all human, everyone has great nights, crap nights, just OK nights, so who is to say that your mix the night you used a unfamiliar mixer would have been any better anyway? I know you're talking about what gives you the best advantage and the best chance to have a "fantastic" mix but even using your familiar gear you can still have an off night, and what excuse would you have then...there is no garuntee.

I think the mixer is the most easily adaptable piece of gear. Much easier than a CDJ or different software.

[mostapha]

@Mostapha
Fair enough. If you're not using filters or effects, one mixer is functionally more or less the same as another. That said, I take it you won't be buying a DB4 then?

There's nothing about the DB4 that I find the least bit interesting. I'm sure it sounds awesome. I'm not convinced any effects in a DJ mixer will ever sound good, though, and it only has 4 analog input pairs, which would run my home setup…but won't in a few months.

One mixer, however, is not the same as another. Not by a long shot. When I started, the DJM-600 existed…or was it the 500. Whatever. But it was, AFAIR, the only "pro" mixer that had effects. And there were still a lot of debates about what was better. And if you're not using effects, you can get a much better mixer than anything Pioneer makes by shopping somewhere else.

I think a little too much emphasis is being put on the difficulty of getting used to a Pio mixer. Simply, its not difficult, its not rocket science, so why should anyone spend $1000+ on something they don't like?

Agreed. CDJ-2000s are awesome…they're just insanely expensive. DJMs kind of just suck for the price. There are a pile of $1000 mixers that I'd buy first. And if I did want to spend that, might as well spend twice as much and actually get something I like.

[keeb]

Your reading comprehension is terrible.
They also don't cost anywhere near as little as $1000 for a pair. What's 2 + 2?

And Denons do? You can get a CDJ 850 online new for $50 more each than a new 3700. You might be able to find a used 3700 cheaper than a used 850, but it's also a fair bit older. I won't be surprised to see the 3900 be more expensive than the CDJ 900 when it comes out, either. So your point about affordability versus dated technology is a bit off. You can argue that you're not getting the flagship Pio player for the same price as the Denon, and features-wise you are getting more with a 3700 than an 850. However, acting like you can only buy decade-old technology from Pioneer compared to brand new technology from Denon is a joke. I'd go further into this but it's OT anyway - we're talking about mixers.

I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything here. You're basically saying that being used to a mixer with the features of a DB4 - that could potentially "change how you mix" - means you're in trouble if you're forced to use a mixer that doesn't possess those features. You shouldn't be... There shouldn't even be an issue. You should be able to adjust accordingly. I'm saying you don't need to own the mixer to know how to use it effectively. There is nothing on the DJM800 that would take more than an hour to become an "expert" on. Are you kidding? What does that even mean anyway?

Watch someone like James Zabiela, Roger Sanchez, or Laidback Luke spin on a Pioneer mixer. To pre-empt your trolling: obviously owning one does not put you in the same league as one of these DJs - that's not my point. These DJs push the Pioneer effects units in often non-intuitive and rather creative ways. Simply because you can mix on a given mixer, that doesn't mean you're going to mix at peak performance. Perhaps I'm too much of a perfectionist, but I do like being practiced on the gear that I'm actually going to use when I'm playing out.

Are you serious? You first, pal. You say that no one's attacking me as if anything I said sounded defensive, but to me, you're the only one that sounds defensive here.

I'm completely serious. Just look at what you wrote:

Fuck industry standard. Learn and play on what you want to during your free time. If you can't adjust to limitations when the need arises, that's your problem.
Buying a mixer simply in order to get comfortable with it is ridiculous. That shouldn't even take more than an hour on most mixers anyway.

Vulgarity, "that's your problem," "buying a mixer... is ridiculous." Are you trying to act like you didn't word that with a completely unreasonable amount of hostility? You could easily have approached this as "I prefer other mixers at the price point and don't find it difficult to get comfortable on industry standard gear so I didn't buy a DJM." And no one ever said anything about "feeling helpless when your DB4 is replaced by a DJM 800." You're still missing the point - instead, you resort to mockery in an attempt to prove your point without bothering to consider the accuracy of your statements or the opposing viewpoint.

Hell, I'll even concede the point that for a bedroom or mobile DJ, there isn't a whole lot of point to buying industry standard. I'll also freely admit that the DJM mixers are pretty easy to walk up to and mix on even if you're not familiar with them; had you read my previous post where I talked about an S4 user being able to use a DJM instead of just the thread title and whatever you skimmed on your way in here, you would have noticed that. It's not about being able to mix on a DJM, it's about being able to create an extraordinary mix on the equipment you'll use at an event. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather not waste energy, time, and focus on "adjusting" to the equipment I'm using for the show. I'd rather use that energy to add some interest and creative flair to the mix I'm playing. I don't doubt that a DJ who doesn't own a DJM 900 can walk up to one and figure out how to turn on the flanger. I do doubt that a DJ who doesn't own a DJM 900 could walk up to one and manage to pull off the kind of trickery that the likes of the DJs I mentioned previously can. Again, I point them out not out of idolization, but because they're easy examples to point to of the advanced usage of the Pio effects I'm talking about. I want to know the equipment I'm using for a show inside and out because I'm not satisfied with being adequate, and trading potential expertise in exchange for a better sounding mixer for my bedroom seems an equally "ridiculous" idea to me as buying Pio mixers does to you; the point of my creating this thread was to try to learn other people's viewpoints on the matter so that I could see if I hadn't considered something since it seemed pretty cut and dry to me. Still, I haven't insulted anyone for choosing to purchase a different mixer - instead I've been asking questions and clarifying my statements; keys to a good discussion.

There are different qualities of mixers to value. This is not an exhaustive list, but you have:

• Sound Quality
• Sound Coloration
• Ergonomics/Ease of Use
• Effects Routing
• On-Board Effects/Quality
• Number of Channels
• Crossfader Quality
• Will I Be Able To Use This At Shows?
• Etc.

My point is that of that list, the penultimate item, "Will I Be Able To Use This At Shows?" has far more value than you're giving it credit for. Again, what is the point of buying a different mixer? You want better sound quality? Better effects? None of those items matter if you're not going to use it in your performances. So feel free to troll more and try to derail the thread or get it locked - wouldn't be the first time I've seen it happen. Or, you can try to join us in an intelligent conversation and leave your hostility at the door.

Speaking of said conversation; what I gather from your post is that you think Pioneer gear is too expensive for the features included, and that you see no value in being familiar with the equipment you use at clubs. Your seeing no value in being able to practice on a DJM this leaves me with the impression that you either A) have been using DJMs for years and thus are already familiar enough with them that owning one wouldn't really help or B) you haven't tried to push the DJM effects much to try to get interesting/varied results. If you're only using the effects in their obvious implementations, it makes sense that you would see little value in practicing more with them. Do you use the timing knob much on a DJM? How about the effects channel selector (not just to assign the effect to a specific channel and leaving it there)? What about the x pad effect manipulation on the DJM 900 (no, I don't just mean for timing changes)? Can you use the noise effect and reverb to make an actually decent sounding build? Can you adjust spiral's timing without it sounding like a trainwreck? That's the type of thing I wouldn't want to learn how to do in the middle of a club set. But, like I said, I guess I can be a bit of a perfectionist...

Is there anything you'd like to clarify about your previous post that I'm just not getting?

And if you'd care to notice - not once in there did I insult you. I called you out on your behavior for your lack of social graces, but I did not personally attack you. Feel free to disagree with me on my viewpoints, but let's keep this civil.

[keeb]

One mixer, however, is not the same as another. Not by a long shot. When I started, the DJM-600 existed…or was it the 500. Whatever. But it was, AFAIR, the only "pro" mixer that had effects. And there were still a lot of debates about what was better. And if you're not using effects, you can get a much better mixer than anything Pioneer makes by shopping somewhere else.

Oh I agree completely. I was saying one is functionally more or less the same as another. I didn't imply that they would sound the same by any means.

[dope]

You're basically saying that being used to a mixer with the features of a DB4 - that could potentially "change how you mix" - means you're in trouble if you're forced to use a mixer that doesn't possess those features.

There is a huge difference between

1) Being able to pull out a decent mix
2) Being able to pull out an exceptional mix, very personnal and researched.

Of course, all mixers mix, and they all have faders and eq. Cool, thank you for the info. Still, as mostapha said, they're all different.
We are not talking about kids going for the flanger fest for 2 hours straight. We're talking about subtleness.

It depends on what you see the mixer as. If you see it as a simple tool to blend your track A with your track B, ok.
If you see it like an instrument and a way to express yourself, you might want to know it fully, how to use this effect or that one so that it sounds the way you want it to.



I wish all booths in the world had DB2 or DB4, but it's not the case, and if you want to step out your bedroom, and play for a crowd, you have to think about them, and how good you should perform.

As far as i know, the only way to reach that top level of comfort and skills with a piece of gear is to own it, meaning following the industry standard, even if it is overpriced and not the best available.

[SirReal]

dope,
I'd agree with that statement if you're planning on being a journeyman club DJ as it's probably best to practice on what you'll see most of the time in the places you'll play but that argument falls apart if you set yourself above being just a journeyman DJ and get to the upper tier where you can ask for any mixer you want in your "rider". I'm not discounting your point, just saying that if "DJ what's his name" starts off by buying what he thinks will be best for him and can manage to make a name for himself to the point where he needs a "rider" to play out then he can presumably ask for whatever mixer he wants. That being said MOST but not ALL DJ's only attain that status by coming up through the "ranks" and playing on industry standard mixers.

[NathanWard]

We are not talking about kids going for the flanger fest for 2 hours straight. We're talking about subtleness.

What's subtlety? I play Dubstep. Flanger on every drop after 5 airhorns, that's how the pros do it right?

[mostapha]

Oh I agree completely. I was saying one is functionally more or less the same as another. I didn't imply that they would sound the same by any means.

Fair enough.

It depends on what you see the mixer as. If you see it as a simple tool to blend your track A with your track B, ok.
If you see it like an instrument and a way to express yourself, you might want to know it fully, how to use this effect or that one so that it sounds the way you want it to.…As far as i know, the only way to reach that top level of comfort and skills with a piece of gear is to own it, meaning following the industry standard, even if it is overpriced and not the best available.

Get over yourself. There is nothing you can do with a DJM-900 that sounds good enough to warrant that kind of work. The control just isn't there. And what you can do is played out garbage that barely sounded good the first time……then every fucking DJ in the world figured it out and kept doing it because Pioneer hasn't given them their next innovation yet.

You want to sound individual and express yourself by practicing with the same tools as everyone else, probably getting your techniques from forums, help videos, and watching other people mix? Good grief.

That's great if you want to sound exactly like every other half-competent DJ on the planet. Meanwhile, you're only impressing the punters who've never seen a DJ before……think they're going to come back just because of you?

Sorry…pissed off. Been accidentally seeing a lot of really lousy DJs lately. If I hear that damn color filter one more time, I'm probably going to start throwing drinks.

[keeb]

See, Mostapha, I look at effects more as just tools in my best. Sort of like I have a list of possible ways to transition. I can

-Gradual EQ transition
-Abrupt EQ Transition
-Cut the track in and out rhythmically
-Slow volume fader reduction
-Filter out
-Echo fade
-Xfader slam
-Reverb trail
-Beat repeat into a breakdown
-Etc.

That doesn't mean I have to use the effects every time or that effects are the only way to make a transition sound good. It's more that if I choose to say, xfader slam it over - I can have a post-fader reverb on the track so that the volume adjustment isn't so sharp. Not every track lends itself to long, drawn out blends - I can do that with deep house and techno all day, but electro house is a different beast. I look at effects as simply giving me another option to alter the sound of my mix. I know a lot of DJs out there are terrible with using effects and I'm sure that even I occasionally fall into that trap. However, I like to make my transitions a little more varied than EQ and volume adjustment alone allow for; that's my style of mixing. I don't just throw in effects because I can, but I do utilize them to occasionally make interesting transitions or add to builds.

So, you don't like it when DJs who don't know what the hell they're doing use effects - that's fair enough. There are plenty of Traktor heroes out there who don't feel right if they're not hammering on the beatmasher/gater in-between syncing their tracks while Jesus-posing; I get that. What do you have to say though about the likes of Carl Cox or Roger Sanchez or Richie Hawtin using effects? Are they destroying their mixes by not solely using EQ and volume faders?

I'd agree that effects are largely overused in DJing. I also agree that a lot of the effects out there sound like crap. However, this idea that effects don't belong in a good DJ set period is a bit too absolutist for me to swallow.

[MaxOne]

OK.

Pioneer haters gonna hate. That is (industry?) standard.

FX haters gonna hate. Standard.

There is no way to convince them otherwise.

But the truth is, it makes sense if you got the money to get the gear you are gonna use in a club. And that is the DJM900.

According to the guys in decks.co.uk they are selling like hot cakes compared to the DB4, I guarantee that.

I'm not mad on FX but i reckon it'd take more than an hour to get totally up to speed on the djm900 / cdj2000 combo. That shit looks pretty deep.

And anyway, most won't have an hour to get super comfortable on gear they don't have.

I had a look on youtube for 900 fx tuts and this was basically 1st one i came across.

Sounds ott but ok to me and you know most punters (not other wanker djs) would love a bit of this



some more tuts from mixmag

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...4&feature=plcp