What do you guys consider "mixing"?

DJ Life & Community General Discussion
1

What do you guys consider “mixing”?

Hi, I’m quite uncomfortable on the way I mix, most DJ’s do this at festivals but is this actually mixing?

  1. Playing song 1, selecting song 2.

  2. Song 2, at the beginning making a loop. Adjusting trimp and BPM, then beatmatching.

  3. Song 1 almost ends, continuous beat (Extended mixes)

  4. Removing loop on song 2 and start putting the EQ’s down on song 1 and putting the fader up on song 2.

  5. Now I am on song 2, song 1 fader down.

This is pretty much how I do it on my pioneer. What do you guys think? I dont even think this is considered mixing, thats what I think.

2

There is nothing wrong with that! Still, to do a seamless mix is pretty difficult to learn. But yeah, once you have learned this it is pretty easy :slight_smile: After which you can extend by applying some effects, or keeping a loop of the old track running while mixing a third track.

3

This is mixing, but it’s not what most DJ’s do at festivals cus the stuff’s already mixed lol

PS: DJing is not rocket science, first of all you should focus on your tracks and on your ability to read the crowd. After mastering this two skills then you should start the process of considering doing more than what you wrote above.

4

@

I always thought when you mix, the current song must be played as short as possible.

Well, I guess I was wrong. So its normal that a song can last 3 and a half minutes then you mix the other one in?

5

tbh, id say it depends on venue and genre being played AND of course crowd energy

6

It is normal for a song to last 6+ minutes before mixing in another. :wink:
Mixing is not a competition of how fast can you beatmatch the next tune or how to rotate your top100 songs in the 1h set.

7

Personal choices, really. People like Jazzy Jeff and Z-trip like quick cuts and creating mashups with classic tunes. This is more the Hiphop style of DJing. Then you’ve got DJ’s on the other end of the spectrum that play tracks that are 8+ minutes in length but they mix the next track in somewhere after 4+ minutes but mix two or more tracks for extended periods of time. Another “mixing” style is my least favorite which I refer to as the A.D.D. form of mixing which SlayforMoney touched on. I can never get into a groove dancing to a DJ whose jumping from song to song to fast without letting the groove of any track take me somewhere. I feel like newer DJ’s do this a lot because they get bored or something but if you’ve spent years/decades curating your collection then you should have amassed tracks that deserve to be played nearly all the way through.

8

depends on the track but i would not play each and every song from intro-outro… that can get seriously boring and kill the vibe.

9

I knew a DnB DJ who said he mixed about 100 songs in 2 hours. He was basically going drop to drop.

I mixed some house and techno for a 2 hour radio show last week and played 25 songs.

Both are “mixing” but it’s just down to preference really. I think if you really want to break it down, there’s “functional” mixing where it’s simply outro to intro and there’s “artistry” mixing which involves more mixing in the middle of songs at starts of phrases, involves looping, EQing, effects, etc.

10

Sure sounds like mixing to me! All depends on your style and the vibe you’re looking to create or maintain!

11

Theres only a few reasons to play a track for less than that.

  1. The track is garbage in the first place
  2. The track is extremely short
  3. You are getting creative with layers and samples and enhancing the mood by doing so.
  4. You are doing a “controllerist” or “performance” set

IMHO of course.

12

haha true

13
  1. DJ is bored
14
  1. Track lacks a cowbell