140 bpm?

yong · Post by **yong** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:28 pm

NilsFG wrote:
yong wrote:
NilsFG wrote:
yong wrote:I produce at 140, but I ALWAYS spin in the range of 142-145.
Why?
I get bored when I mix at 140.

No, really.
But isn't it the same?
Like you put a 140 bpm track at 145, and you blend in another 140 bpm, it's just setting the pitch on turntable B the same as on turntable A.

Well, I'm not talking about the mixing itself. I mean when it's at like 145 I start bouncin instead of at 140 where I'm slowsteppin.

pidge · Post by **pidge** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:52 pm

yong wrote: instead of at 140 where I'm slowsteppin.

I believe the correct term is skankin

constrobuz · Post by **constrobuz** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:07 pm

pidge wrote:
Constrobuz wrote:
yong wrote:I produce at 140
WHY

no one else does this, no other genre does this

so fucking stupid...
No one wants to hear a tune pitched up/down over 10bpm when you're mixin it, it sounds shit. If you make a tune at 125 no one is gonna play it because it will sound shit being mixed. This music is not designed for home listening, its made to sound good on a massive soundsystem being mixed in a set.

Are we gonna have a thread about why tunes are more then 4minutes now?

thats why people are fearing dubstep's future. everyone's making 2 bar loops at 140 bpm and and playing them for 6 minutes, 4 minutes too long since the loop is so boring. dubstep CAN be for home listening, i dont think too many djs are playing burial tracks in the club. people just make their 140 microwave wobble dubsteps tunes because it's easier and they think they're talented because their own track sounds similar to the stuff they're hearing made by "professional" or "big" producers. experimentation is the only way to keep a genre alive, you should know that.

such a shitty attitude towards music.

jason burns · Post by **jason burns** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:33 pm

human? wrote:

lol, anyone can beatmatch. it means nothing. all about selection...

this

rob sparx · Post by **rob sparx** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:12 pm

jason burns wrote:
human? wrote:

lol, anyone can beatmatch. it means nothing. all about selection...

this

Anyone can beatmatch but keymatching is a different story!

sonar · Post by **sonar** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:28 pm

i sort of apprechiate a mega tight set though, cos you can think of it the other way, ANYONE can be a master selecta, it doesnt take practice.

well not as much practice as being technically as tight as a nuns pork hole.

as as.

NilsFG · Post by **NilsFG** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:50 pm

Rob Sparx wrote: Anyone can beatmatch but keymatching is a different story!

If you use that silly camelot wheel or w/e it's quite easy. I think.
I just play what I think should be played, and 70-90% of the times it's a good pick (imo, and that 70%-90% doesn't include good mixing)

FSTZ1 · Post by **FSTZ1** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:27 pm

bagelator wrote:JOOONYA SPEEEHHHHHHHHHHHHSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

DIS MAN KNOWS!

deadaelus · Post by **deadaelus** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:56 pm

Finally some good dialogue in here

anyway, i apologize for the elitist comment at the start of the thread. Never meant to hurt any ones feelings or piss people off, it was more to evoke a response and a good dialogue. And here you have it 7 pages later.

human? · Post by **human?** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:14 pm

sonar wrote:i sort of apprechiate a mega tight set though, cos you can think of it the other way, ANYONE can be a master selecta, it doesnt take practice.

i disagree with this, but let me say, anyone CAN be anything lol...

selection takes ALOT of practice... and its practice you cant only do in your bedroom... to be able to tell the future, and know whats gonna make a crowd of people go nuts, or to know how to calm them down just to build them back up, or whatever the case may be, to rock a spot properly with selection is way more complicated than beatmatching. some people have a innate ability to select dope music, others just understand how to beatmatch from the get go, but give me a selector over a flawless mix&blend of the same old tracks anyday.

beatmatching is imho mechanics. selection is design.

JazzyJazzy · Post by **JazzyJazzy** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:13 am

320 ??

killer b · Post by **killer b** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:10 am

I DIG THESE WORDS!

[/quote]

selection takes ALOT of practice... and its practice you cant only do in your bedroom... to be able to tell the future, and know whats gonna make a crowd of people go nuts, or to know how to calm them down just to build them back up, or whatever the case may be, to rock a spot properly with selection is way more complicated than beatmatching. some people have a innate ability to select dope music, others just understand how to beatmatch from the get go, but give me a selector over a flawless mix&blend of the same old tracks anyday.

beatmatching is imho mechanics. selection is design.[/quote]

SickMan D · Post by **SickMan D** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:32 pm

I never start a mix thinking about tempo, I always crank the pitch up at least 2 on the first track then go from there... This really is a pointless thread unless you just play burned CD's of all your tunes set at 140, then it might get boring (digital mixing aside).

Let the time old DJ discussions roll.....

deamonds · Post by **deamonds** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:47 pm

Constrobuz wrote:and every fucking tune at same tempo = boring as shit

i can't believe people are defending this rigid tempo rule. let's compress all of our tunes and make them all the same volume. and let's make sure they're all in 4/4 and the key of C major too eh?

Is this thread for real haha!

steppa · Post by **steppa** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:04 pm

deadaelus wrote:Why do so many producers make there tracks at exactly 140bpm?

This makes it way to easy for people to mix, and subsequently drawing the wrong type of people toward mixing dubstep.

Thoughts?

cus its easy to mix it attracts the wrong people? What like spasdics and mentally retarded people? What are you saying you silly silly japseye. I dont think ive seen anything more redonkulous since I found out annie mac was mixing dubstep. DUBSTEP IS DEAD! STANDARD. wateva+645451+230305
65+64+d65asdd--54-6-4--8-37-r-87-1r474
w0f wf sdf
0sdfd
=
safeeeeeeeeeeeeeee dan

awful · Post by **awful** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:06 pm

deadaelus wrote:Why do so many producers make there tracks at exactly 140bpm?

This makes it way to easy for people to mix, and subsequently drawing the wrong type of people toward mixing dubstep.

Thoughts?

LOL

sticky feet · Post by **sticky feet** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:33 pm

I'm sorry, can you repeat what you just said?

johnthethird · Post by **johnthethird** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:38 pm

pidge wrote: No one wants to hear a tune pitched up/down over 10bpm when you're mixin it, it sounds shit. If you make a tune at 125 no one is gonna play it because it will sound shit being mixed.

EXACTLY. One of my favorite "dubstep" tracks... EL-B's Colleen Remix... tune is at 125. Good luck playing that one out... if you try you ain't gonna beatmatch it in or out, or it'll sound like SHIT.

♫♪♫ · Post by **♫♪♫** » Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:50 pm

Nice to see someone mention how important Keymatching is.

Nothing makes me cringe more than hearing 1+ minutes of a mashup of two tunes that absolutely do not complement each other musically.

This is why I think a bpm standard is ultimately a good thing. In order to really know your selection and know what blends well together, you've got to listen to them a good amount outside of mixing.

Now, if you get it into your head that Track A and Track B complement each other greatly, but then you go to mix them and one is 135bpm and one is 142bpm, all of a sudden the pitches are off and you've got a discordant clusterfuck on your decks.

Having all the tracks be the same bpm makes it much easier for the melodically inclined DJs to make a mental note of songs that blend together key-wise. If you want variety in your mix you can adjust the bpm of the entire set, but then all the tracks still blend together melodically since they're still technically all the same bpm, and all pitchshifted the same amount.

My 2 cents.

140 bpm?

Re: 140 bpm?

Re: 140 bpm?

Who is online