New format for digi dj's

[Littlefoot]

Sounds like a heavy idea, if there was a way to do this for say mastering aswell, it would give the engineer alot more flexibility (slightly off topic but im thinking advanced apps), on the other hand, it would be a hell of a lot easier to sample tunes if they are seperated, although people will sample regardless of the state the tune comes in.

There is, its called Stem Mastering. It's a lot easier to mess up but can make much better masters in some cases

[rogue star]

Sounds like a heavy idea, if there was a way to do this for say mastering aswell, it would give the engineer alot more flexibility (slightly off topic but im thinking advanced apps), on the other hand, it would be a hell of a lot easier to sample tunes if they are seperated, although people will sample regardless of the state the tune comes in.

There is, its called Stem Mastering. It's a lot easier to mess up but can make much better masters in some cases

cool so i imagine they route it through a desk?

[Pada]

No.

As a producer the track as a whole is what I want to sound good, I don't want to have to make each part good on it's own. Music is a feeling.

[abZ]

Sounds like a heavy idea, if there was a way to do this for say mastering aswell, it would give the engineer alot more flexibility (slightly off topic but im thinking advanced apps), on the other hand, it would be a hell of a lot easier to sample tunes if they are seperated, although people will sample regardless of the state the tune comes in.

There is, its called Stem Mastering. It's a lot easier to mess up but can make much better masters in some cases

I know a lot of mastering engineers that will mixdown your track for you and then master. It cost a lot more money but is worth it if you aren't very good at mixdown yet have good ideas. Personally I don't think you are ready to release commercially if you aren't good at mixing down.

[dubsteptim]

im not a producer but let me ask this

if it were done the way you were talking, wouldnt that allow any person who purchases a tune in that format basically give them what they needed to remix the hell out of a tune?

i may be wrong on that again, i dont produce so i dont really know. but if the answer is yes i could imagine some producers would be hesitant because they wouldnt want their work to end up in 28 different shit remixes (not saying all remixes would be bad, but i know all of them wouldnt be good). or hell, even being able to make "mash ups" of two tunes on the fly?

[rogue star]

Sounds like a heavy idea, if there was a way to do this for say mastering aswell, it would give the engineer alot more flexibility (slightly off topic but im thinking advanced apps), on the other hand, it would be a hell of a lot easier to sample tunes if they are seperated, although people will sample regardless of the state the tune comes in.

There is, its called Stem Mastering. It's a lot easier to mess up but can make much better masters in some cases

I know a lot of mastering engineers that will mixdown your track for you and then master. It cost a lot more money but is worth it if you aren't very good at mixdown yet have good ideas. Personally I don't think you are ready to release commercially if you aren't good at mixing down.

This is true, you should be aware of what you need to do to make your mix sound as top a top as possible. Its all well and good having a good idea but if the mix is muffled or too loud in the wrong areas, this will severly hamper the impact of the overall ryddim

[hxdb]

.....

[cure]

I think its a cool idea... but I dunno how many people are gonna want to bounce parts...its time consuming and a bit of a pain in the ass for the return...unless it is made worth their while..

[Cosine]

I think it's a sick idea! Mixes would sound so much better if you could bring in parts of different tracks when you needed them

[abZ]

im not a producer but let me ask this

if it were done the way you were talking, wouldnt that allow any person who purchases a tune in that format basically give them what they needed to remix the hell out of a tune?

i may be wrong on that again, i dont produce so i dont really know. but if the answer is yes i could imagine some producers would be hesitant because they wouldnt want their work to end up in 28 different shit remixes (not saying all remixes would be bad, but i know all of them wouldnt be good). or hell, even being able to make "mash ups" of two tunes on the fly?

Well not only that but producers won't have those signature sounds anymore. People after a certain artists drum sounds or basslines or what have you will be free for the taking on your own productions. For the last 20 years producers have written their tunes making sure they don't give you a clean spot to rip their sounds. If it takes off it will take a loooong time imo. Most producers are not going to want to participate. Once x producer and y producers are doing it they might think about joining in. But like I said if the producer stands to make a lot more money from the tunes than they normally would I could see it happening. The majority of releasing artist are hardly making anything off of tunes as it is. That said I could see the b and c list artist jumping on it but guys at the top will just be content to do what they are doing now.

[kidlogic]

There are already a lot of people in other scenes doing this with their own tracks, I cant see it being a bad thing.

Honestly, Ive been waiting for this to catch on since Sascha did that album with the same concept what, 4 or 5 years ago? He developed the whole "Maven" hardware ableton controler around the concept as well. Hawtin has been doing it since ableton came out, even longer with hardware samplers and midi controlers.

And now with pretty much every DVS system having a sample player (serato just added a 6 channel, midi and pitch controlable sample player, would be perfect for this concept), it only makes more sense. Think about being able to drop just the melody of a certain tune over two tunes in the mix on an especially long, building transition, or using the drums from one tune with the bass from another and mixing a whole tune in on the free turntable deck... the reason I havent really gotten into an ableton setup yet myself is all the prep work involved to tear other peoples tunes up in this way and only being able to get bits and pieces of basslines and melodies instead of the whole thing clean.

To those worried about "shit remixes" or the integrity of the tune being lost, dont make your tunes available in this way. Remixes will always happen, this will actually make it easier for those who are good at them to do them better. If you suck at remixes, you suck at remixes regardless of weather or not you got the stems or the instrumental and accapella or however you do it.

Yeah, you're gonna have heads who shouldnt necessarily be putting bassline A with melody B because they're out of tune and they dont hear it or whatever, but you have that now with traditional DJs - thats been there since the day I started and long before. Granted, theres a lot more room for error in this format, but also the opportunity to go to hear a DJ spin and know that you may only hear these certain combinations of sounds in that exact way once - to me thats pretty amazing.

I highly doubt this would become the standard, its just another tool for people to express themselves with. It will make lots of things easier and present new challenges for those who want them. I welcome it whole heartedly and have been waiting for it for years.

[kidlogic]

im not a producer but let me ask this

if it were done the way you were talking, wouldnt that allow any person who purchases a tune in that format basically give them what they needed to remix the hell out of a tune?

i may be wrong on that again, i dont produce so i dont really know. but if the answer is yes i could imagine some producers would be hesitant because they wouldnt want their work to end up in 28 different shit remixes (not saying all remixes would be bad, but i know all of them wouldnt be good). or hell, even being able to make "mash ups" of two tunes on the fly?

Well not only that but producers won't have those signature sounds anymore. People after a certain artists drum sounds or basslines or what have you will be free for the taking on your own productions. For the last 20 years producers have written their tunes making sure they don't give you a clean spot to rip their sounds. If it takes off it will take a loooong time imo. Most producers are not going to want to participate. Once x producer and y producers are doing it they might think about joining in. But like I said if the producer stands to make a lot more money from the tunes than they normally would I could see it happening. The majority of releasing artist are hardly making anything off of tunes as it is. That said I could see the b and c list artist jumping on it but guys at the top will just be content to do what they are doing now.

Why would you give out your signature sounds though? Certain songs, elements, patches, etc you keep to yourself and create sounds and ideas specifically for the format - "mini songs" like Hellfire was talking about.

And trust - theres ALWAYS a way to get what you need from a song if you want to remix it. I dont care how much the artist tries to make it so theres no clean part - where theres a will, theres a way. Melodyne 2 anyone?

[madmax]

Is this MT9right? Does look good, would lie to see it in action.

http://hothardware.com/News/New_MT9_Dig ... _Channels/

[Littlefoot]

No.

As a producer the track as a whole is what I want to sound good, I don't want to have to make each part good on it's own. Music is a feeling.

Im more with this opinion!

would be ok for a few tracks, but there is ZERO quality control with releases in this day and age.

[hellfire machina]

No.

As a producer the track as a whole is what I want to sound good, I don't want to have to make each part good on it's own. Music is a feeling.

Im more with this opinion!

would be ok for a few tracks, but there is ZERO quality control with releases in this day and age.

So if there is zero quality control as you say, then surely this will not change anything in that respect.

I've always been an advocate of it's not what you use it's how you use it, I'll gladly release tracks in this format, if it's for the dancefloor then this format will just increase creativity in the clubs/parties/raves. I think it will keep people on there toes more too which can only raise the standard of things as a whole.

[AFL]

sounds like a lot of HARD WORK for the dj... why are they trying to make so difficult to be a dj, and why do I have to make a unique mix everytime I want to listen to a track?

I would say that there should be one release as the full tune and then one as the "parts" release (sold seperately) therefore making a bigger revenue stream for the artist involved and allowing people who just want to listen to the tune (or to have some inspiration of what to do with the "parts").

my 2cents.

seems like it could be a really innovative idea, definitely not for everyone but for some it would be awesome.

[♫♪♫]

I don't like the idea.

It will increase the amount of copycat music out there exponentially.

[adam_john]

I'd be interested in something like that. Basically be buying the stems for tunes. All depends on quality though - if it's shit, then no - i wouldn't buy anything.

[hellfire machina]

I don't like the idea.

It will increase the amount of copycat music out there exponentially.

Not if there was a legal clause attatched to the purchase, basically a disclaimer saying you won't use the parts for commercial product, performance only.

[boomstix]

I don't like the idea.

It will increase the amount of copycat music out there exponentially.

Not if there was a legal clause attatched to the purchase, basically a disclaimer saying you won't use the parts for commercial product, performance only.

do you mean like the one they put on cds about how you're not allowed to copy them or play them for a crowd?