Category: Philosophy

Are DJs artists?

In light of recent challenges to various dance music performers’ abilities (term used lightly, see Why old-school DJs are complaining), it has been demonstrated that there is still quite a bit of misunderstanding as to what a DJ does, should do, and how to tell the difference between the skilled and unskilled. I think this merits a bit of examination, as do these topics when applied to producers.

The good, the bad, the jukebox

Some argue that all a DJ need do is play whatever the crowd wants and make them dance. This view is clearly held by certain groups, who say, buy bottle service and feel DJs like Mark Farina, Dennis Ferrer, and Calvin Harris should be thrown off the decks when they don’t hear what they want, when they want and how they want. Let’s call this crowd the ‘crybaby douchebag’ group for short. Crybaby douchebags consider the DJ their personal jukebox. There are plenty of DJs that make a living as a jukebox, focusing on playing the top hits and playing requests, I have nothing against them personally, but let’s keep the perspective clear. As this action can be fully automated by a mechanized jukebox, this brand of DJ really is at the bottom of the artistic spectrum. In fact, being a living jukebox can hardly be considered a DJ in the modern sense, but for sake of argument we can call this a DJ by technical standards, or ‘jukebox’ for short. Crybaby douchebags generally have this definition in mind when they think of the word DJ.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is much more artistry and creativity involved. At the artistic top end, DJs can really be considered musicians, live remixers, and live producers as they take sounds, layer them, program them, and present them in such a way that it becomes something entirely new from the original pieces used. The original songs are used like instruments in a orchestra, they cease to be ‘just playing other people’s music’. They can take a song and make it a hit, they can take noises and turn it into music, they can make you dance when they want to, and make you stop and think when they want to. There is often a message and a purposeful idea in their sound, there is a creation of a new song by connecting disconnected pieces. DJs on this end of the spectrum are artists.

Now I know there is a natural tendency to cry out that art is subjective. Yes, there is quite a bit of subjectivity, mostly on the receiver’s end in terms of whether you like it or not. There is however, quite a bit of objectivity as well. For example, you can’t drop a book on the ground and call it a painting. Nor could you call yourself an artist after filling in a paint by numbers piece, or in DJ terms, playing a pre-recorded set that was put together using computer automation to arrange and mix it for you. There has to be a certain amount of manual labor, purpose, effort, and representation for something to be considered art. I know a lot of people are going to cry about how I am professing an anti-technology stance and I’m not keep up with the times, blah blah. I am not anti-tech, I embrace it, I use it, but I use it to enhance my art, not to increase convenience. I am anti-convenience at the price of artistic vision and intent. That isn’t to say that tech can’t create new opportunities for artistic expression, but like I always ask, are you pressing start or creating art? Are you just playing other people’s music, or are you re-imagining it and creating something new with purpose and a message?

There are a lot of elements that come into play between the spectrum of jukebox and artist, each having a different level of value based on its difficulty to perform manually and live. For example, beat matching is an element of the art, but of lesser value than say, beat-juggling which requires much more effort and skill to do well. Good programming is essential for an artistic DJ, but pre-programming a set is of less value than being able to program on the fly and adapt to the moods of the crowd in front of you. A good place to start when you are evaluating where in the artistic spectrum a DJ is, is to ask yourself, are they creating something new with the songs/sounds they are playing and are they doing it themselves or is it automated? A DJ that does live what a DJ does automated or pre-programmed, is just artistically better. Now if you don’t care about art, just money, then none of this need apply to you. But believe it or not, there are a lot of people that care about art over money. I also think people should be rewarded for the pursuit of art over the pursuit of money (see Hate vs Education). What would you rather pay for, the paint by numbers piece or for the same (or even a lesser) dollar amount get an original piece of art?

Not all producers are artists

Just as there has been a recent saturation of DJs, so has there been of people creating dance music. Just as there is a spectrum of artistic value for DJs, there is also one for producers, in fact they share many of the same elements. A producer on the bottom end of the spectrum takes pre-made loops, samples, and synth presets, slaps them together and calls it a song when really it is more of an extended loop. We can call these ‘drag and drop producers’ for short. On the other end of the spectrum; thought, representation, structured pieces, carved sounds, layers, arrangement, purpose, original sounds and note composition are key elements of work found on the artistic end of the spectrum. These are ‘electronic musicians/artists’. Some of them even play traditional instruments, truly making them artists in a classical sense.

There is also a difference in artistic value between a producer that can make music in a studio and then play it for a crowd and a producer that can write music in a studio then perform it live. Certain producers may make crowd pleasing music in a studio, but others of a higher artistic caliber can please crowds while creating and performing that music live. Live, manual efforts that have a higher difficultly of skill to carry out and that are performed well always have higher artistic value than automated and pre-recorded efforts. Just because the masses like it doesn’t make it art, but to be fair, just because it’s art doesn’t mean people should like it.

And just to be especially clear on the matter, if you are creating a “mash-up” of two or more songs, don’t kid yourself into thinking you are a producer. At best you are a pre-recorded DJ which would put you near or even below the ranking of jukebox as you aren’t even doing the most basic of DJ tasks, mixing, live.

DJ vs Producer

There has also been some recent dialogue of some producers calling DJs middlemen, and DJs calling producers hacks and sellouts. The truth of the matter is that DJs and producers need each other. Producers make the music that DJs play; DJs help get that music to the people. There is a natural symbiosis, whether or not you are making and playing the music yourself.

Can’t we all just get along? No. Nor should we, DJs that pursue artistic goals should support producers that seek artistic goals and vice versa. Let’s all work to push the artistic end of the music spectrum further and further from the jukebox and the drag and drop end. Let’s make millions off of art, not convenience and hype. Let’s give the people something meaningful and beautiful and not just fill their lives with more and more inferior products led by profit margins. Art over convenience. Let’s be amazing together.

Do your homework

If you are still skeptical that DJs are or can be artists, check out any one of these guys (keeping in mind this is a very short and incomplete list of artistic DJs, in no particular order) and compare them to your average top 40 jukebox:

John Digweed
Z-Trip
Jeff Mills
X-ecutioners
Sasha
Mark Farina
DJ Shadow
RJD2
Cashmere/Green Velvet
Richie Hawtin/Plastikman
Josh Wink
Deep Dish
DJ Swamp
DJ Sneak
Chuck Love
Q-Bert
Colette
Frankie Knuckles
Juan Atkins
Derrick May
Carl Cox
R.A.W.
Terry Mullen
Jo-S
Nick Warren
Ralphi Rosario
DJ Dan
Stanton Warriors
Doc Martin
Sven Vath
DJ Heather
Barry Weaver
Norman Cook/Fat Boy Slim
Armin van Buuren
Pendulum
Bad Company
Frankie Bones
James Zabiela
Jazzy Jeff
Mixmaster Mike
Kool Herc
And countless other artists.

It’s education not hate, so quit whining

Clearly my last article (Why old-school DJs are complaining and you should too) struck a nerve. I am glad it did because these are important issues that need to be brought to the public and discussed. Clearly a great many of you agree. A few people didn’t, but based on their arguments it was primarily because they either missed a key point or defaulted to a standard reply. I think it is important to flesh out some of these ideas a little more so the discussion can take a more productive course.

It’s not about hating

Yes, naturally, there are always examples to the contrary and some old-schoolers are in fact hateful and bitter, but by and large there is no real hate or bitterness. Really it is about passion, love, education and a call for people to demand and expect more. There is such a tremendous amount of passion and love when it comes to music (any genre) that discussions about how it should be done, what people are doing what, and what is and what isn’t art can get quite animated. That doesn’t default it to coming from a place of hate or bitterness, it just means people are passionate, as it should be.

When you have been around long enough you start to see certain patterns emerge. There are certain trends and behaviors in the dance music world that have occurred in other genres that ultimately played a big roll in the over saturation, monetization, and over consumption that led to their downfall. The reality is that ultimately these behaviors and trends are avoidable. Just because an old-schooler is bringing this to light doesn’t mean they are stuck on the past, afraid of change, or bitter that they aren’t in the headlines. Time just gives you a kind of experience and perspective that is hard to understand until you have seen it first hand.

More than likely the source of complaint is coming from a place of passion. The majority of us built the dance scene with certain ideals, not everyone shared them, but it was the majority nonetheless. Now those ideals seem to be reserved for the minority, which isn’t unexpected given todays sheer volume of people that attend dance music based events. The problem is that without a strong enough core of ideals and passion, a culture cannot survive.

Why the money conversation matters

Again I want to make it clear that I am NOT saying that money is inherently evil. It is a tool, neither good nor bad on its own. I also have no problem with people making money or getting notoriety from their art or passion. People have every right to be compensated and appreciated for their hard work and for the benefits they provide others. But I also believe that consumers have the right and the duty to be informed. I believe that people should be aware of what they are paying for so they can decide for themselves what they want instead of being limited to what someone else thinks they should have.

To say the market will decide who should be out there or who is the best just isn’t a complete concept. Throw enough money out there and you can drown out competition resulting in the market not having a fair shot at making a truly unbiased decision. There are six companies that control the majority of the world’s music and how it is distributed, you don’t think they are doing whatever they can to make money on their investments?

In a perfect world the market would be able to purely decide, but in reality, the market doesn’t always get a fair playing field. Consumers often only get to choose from a selection that’s already been decided for them and it’s usually based on how much money can be made from that product. One can argue that they make money on it because it sells and it sells because it’s good. Well that isn’t entirely accurate either. Marketability and branding plays a huge role as well. Licensing, merchandising and product placement are part of that dollar figure and generally independent on how good the product actually is.

There is a certain amount of group think involved as well. This is why we see artists paying people and PR firms to gather likes, votes, or buying their own tracks to climb sales charts. There is even a disturbing trend of DJ’s PAYING large sums of money in order to play events in order to get on good billing. If something is perceived to be well liked, a person is more likely to check it out sand with an open-minded. Except maybe for hipsters.

Even repetition plays a big part in what people like and consume, especially musically. This is why record companies have spent millions of dollars dominating the airwaves and paying (yes paying) ridiculous sums to make sure what hits the top 40, not to mention for just good old-fashioned exposure. I bet you can think of at least one song you didn’t like the first few times you heard it, then one day after the hundredth time, you put it on your iPod. Do consumers have a fair shot at deciding between someone who has no money for marketing to someone backed by millions?

You may very well legitimately enjoy this hypothetical artist, but don’t think for a second they are on that top-40 list purely because the market decided it, no matter how talented or artistic that person may actually be. And don’t think for a second that the market has complete control over what is considered popular. Talent alone is not what dominates a market or gets you to the top, especially when someone in the chain values the dollar over talent and art.

When music becomes a product there are limits imposed on the artist in order to maintain profit status quo. How many artists have left major labels for this reason? Again, there is nothing wrong with making money or fame from your passion, in fact I encourage it. My point is that when passion for money leads you to music and fame, art tends to suffer and the people’s freedoms are limited.

What are you paying for?

If you bought a Mercedes-Benz at full price, but it had a Geo Metro engine, wouldn’t you want to know? If you never knew, you might very well be happy cruising along believing that you had a Mercedes, but that doesn’t change the reality that you got ripped off. It’s a completely different story if you knew it was a Geo Metro engine but you just wanted the flash and the image and you didn’t care about the actual performance.

If you are paying for a live performance, shouldn’t you get one? Is it right to pay for a live performance and get lip-syncing, soundtracks, and pre-recorded sets instead? If you knew for a fact that your favorite singer would be lip-syncing the night you planned on going and you would have to pay the same price as a live show would you? The same standard should be held for DJs and producers selling a ‘live show’. You may not care that you are paying for a premium for something that you aren’t actually getting, you may still enjoy the flash, that’s fine. You should at the very least have the knowledge and the power to choose.

My personal feeling is that if there really was value in paying for the fake, Milli Vanilli and Ashlee Simpson would still have vibrant careers. Regardless, I’m still going to push for the truth, people should know what they are paying for so they CAN decide how the market develops instead of driving a Mercedes with Geo Metro engine just because that is their only option.

Stay tuned for the next installment: DJ vs DJ vs Producer vs don’t care

Why old-school DJs are complaining and you should too

After a slow and difficult push, the Electronic Dance Music scene is exploding exponentially in the United States. Not long ago DJ’s were confined to dark rooms hidden from view and were looked down upon by most of the music community. Now they are the new rockstars and headliners; main stage and front and center. EDM is now a billion dollar commodity, but that in itself is not such a bad thing. I remember dreaming of the day I could live off of music, that is more possible now than it has ever been.

There are more opportunities to play our music, to get paid, and to make a name for ourselves doing what we love. How can anyone be mad about that? What’s the problem? Well…

Like any industry, when the money starts flowing in it attracts people that are after it as their priority. Add attention and fame to the mix and you can get a pretty nasty breed of person mucking up the works. At one time art and passion for the music was overwhelmingly the motive of DJs and producers (for promoters it is a little more debatable), but now we see more and more that money, fame, and less than admirable intentions are what drive a lot of people to our EDM world. The balance is shifting and the art of the music and the dance floor are suffering as a result.

Beat matching tech, gimmicks, and reliance on playing popular music have become the common definition of what a DJ does. It is no wonder that this seems like an easy source of money and fame. The truth of the matter is that these qualities are irrelevant to the art of the mix and in what makes a DJ worth seeing and worth the ticket price. To better understand, let’s take a look at some of the bigger complaints coming from the old-school and why the new-school should care.

David Guetta and Swedish House Mafia

It doesn’t take much digging to find out how old-school head DJ Sneak feels about these guys. He’s called them out for their showmanship antics, elaborate stage setups, and more importantly, for getting caught playing pre-produced sets and not actually DJing during their shows.

First of all it is important to separate the concept of DJ from producer, they are not the same thing. While I applaud these guys for their production skills and developing an accessible sound that attracts lots of people, this does not mean they have the right to charge massive amounts of money to see them press play while they jump around. This would be like paying ridiculous sums to James Cameron to jump around on stage while watching Avatar (actually maybe I would pay to see that). Seriously though, producers either need to put on a live show like Orbital, Daft Punk, Chuck Love, etc., or develop actual DJ skills before they step on stage. Unless, of course, you like paying a premium for gimmicks instead of music and talent.

**Disclaimer – I have seen Steve Angello of the Swedish House Mafia on his own play a great 8 hour set and actually mix, so I know he is at least capable, again it’s about what you are paying to see, demand more. I also know playing pre-recorded sets is nothing new and has been a ‘necessity’ now and then for DJ’s playing nightly on tour (not that I approve), but to use this as a default is unacceptable.

DJ X Factor

Now, in all fairness the verdict is still out on this one as we don’t really have all the details or what the contestants will be judged on, but based on Simon Cowell’s propensity to monetize talent it’s likely this show will do more damage than good. It will further push and expose people to the idea that DJing is more about the show than it is about the music and the art. At one point DJing was about bringing new sounds to the floor and making them hits, now DJ’s play the popular tracks to make themselves hits. They are glorified jukeboxes in fancy packaging with laser shows, not artists.

Just to be clear, I am not anti-showmanship. It’s all part of the bigger artistic package when done correctly, but there has to be art at the core. I am anti-showmanship to cover up a lack of talent. Hopefully this show won’t support that, but I am skeptical. We’ll have a better idea when the judges are selected.

Paris Hilton

I will try to keep the vulgarity to a minimum on this one. Remember not long ago when there was a bit of a scuffle with Paris and a certain house DJ because he wouldn’t play a hip-hop song? Remember all those top-40/hip-hop clubs she was frequenting (even when she wasn’t being paid to be there)? Remember how she has never once mentioned or was seen at any house related event until recent press surrounding her new publicity ploy boyfriend Afrojack? Now all of a sudden house music has always been a passion of hers? What does Paris Hilton and a cow’s colon have in common?

This is the epitome of jumping on the decks for the money and the fame bandwagon. Everything she has done to date has been because she saw it as popular and a way to be famous for the sake of being famous. Do we really expect to believe that passion and art will play any part in this catastrophe in the making? At least I have a new term to call people who aren’t DJing for passion and art. Paris Hiltons. Don’t be a Paris Hilton.

The Point

For all you music consumers out there, I appreciate you, I really do. I just want you to be an educated consumer. Know what it is your hard earned dollars are supporting. Be patrons of art, not ATMs for the money hungry.

You would be DJs, producers and promoters: Create art, don’t just press start. Contribute something to the world and to the people, don’t just look to take their money and attention. Let’s be amazing together.

Analog vs Digital vs Digital: Are we killing our dance culture?

I’m not opposed to change by any means. Change is crucial to life and growth.  It’s just sad when valuable perspectives, experiences, and lessons get lost as a result.

There is a lot of discussion in dance culture around vinyl vs digital, cd vs laptop, mixing vs programming, etc etc.  Those who embrace the new defend it, those who have mastered the past defend it, insults are thrown, pride is put to the test, but most importantly, there is a key discussion being ignored.

For those of you who are too new (and by new I really mean anyone in the scene for about 15 years or less) to really have experienced the history of the dance culture and electronic music scene there are some things you need to understand (don’t worry I have some words for the old-timers too).

Most of us in the early years of the scene had to constantly fight. We had to fight for space, for sound, for music, for a voice, for validity. Many of us didn’t even know we were fighting, we were just deeply connected to the music and had to express it, whether making it, playing it, or dancing to it. It was even a fight just to get the music.  It was expensive, limited, and you had have the hook-up to get the choice new releases in your area before someone else did.

The music was a necessity for us, the very essence of us. We were mocked, we were told it was garbage, it wasn’t real music, that it was a passing fad.  Because we were so connected to the music and identified ourselves through it, this meant they were calling us garbage.  We banded together, we built communities, philosophies, and we danced our asses off because it was who and what we were.

Every record was special, it was a weapon in the battle for validity.  Every scratch, imperfection, and skip was a memory of a party, an experience, a good time, a bad time.  We didn’t replace our music every week, we played it until it wouldn’t play anymore.  And even then we might try to play it a couple more times hoping that it had somehow magically healed itself through our pure love of the song. Long story short, we weren’t just connected to the music, we were the music.

Things are different now. People interact with the music differently, they relate to it differently, they express it differently.  There are a lot more people in it for money and fame as opposed to the pure need to express and connect with the art. Because of the foundation that was built, there isn’t nearly the fight for validity there once was (proven by the fact that dance music is in the top-40 mainstream).  There is a mass consumption of a product that we spent decades forced to keep underground.

This is something the old-timers need to recognize beyond the obvious.  These newbies aren’t connected to the music they way we were/are. They aren’t seeing the house built from the ground up, they are inheriting the family property. That’s not to say it is better or worse, just different.  We fought so they didn’t have to, they explore new ways to express it, some good, some bad, some down right insulting to those of us who have spilt blood, sweat, and tears. We can’t expect them to get out of it what we did because they aren’t building the scene, they are inheriting the scene.

The discussion should not be about what equipment they express on, or what medium they use, but rather do they have talent at what they do?  Is there effort, art, passion, connection, and most importantly, respect? That is what is important here. Are they pressing play or are they creating art? We old-timers can learn some new tricks from you newbies, and newbies we can show you some foundations and perspective that make this meaningful and an art form, not just a revenue stream or a way to get laid.

The reason I implore all of us to switch the focus of the discussion is because we are at a delicate turning point in our culture.  As something becomes consumed on a mass scale, there is danger of that thing being consumed to its extinction.  How many forms of music, fashion, art, etc., have been destroyed because it was over-consumed and the meaning, art, and specialness were forgotten and lost?

I love this music, these people. I want it to last as long as possible.  I want it to remain a meaningful culture.  Not just some ‘in’ product that will be thrown to the wayside because it becomes a gutted shell. Let’s keep dance music a meaningful art form, a culture with a rich history and that focuses on talent and passion.  Being in the top-40 realm isn’t inherently bad, but unless we maintain a level of quality, an understand of the roots, and pure connection to the passion and art of our culture, we will lose it. And rightly so.

Friends don’t let friends become a DJ Pauly D.

Just say no.

Death at EDC: Not as bad as you might think.

While the deaths of the 19-year-old man this year and the 15-year-old girl last year at the respective Electric Daisy Carnival events are tragedies in their own rites, and certainly to the friends and families of each, these deaths are not the outrageous horrors that the media often portrays them to be.

The media, and some self-serving politicians, are often quick to suggest or directly point blame at events like EDC as the cause of death, that these events are a social evil and a killer of our youth. Obviously this is not the case. People die all the time for all kind of reasons. It is not uncommon for people to die during large events for a variety of reasons, exhaustion, heat, age, alcohol or drug related causes, violence, accidents, etc. Aside from various political, economic, and social reasons one of the big reasons these electronic music events get a bad rap is the association and expectation of the involvement of drugs. While it is true that there are those that take drugs at these events (of course drugs are taken everywhere, including Disneyland) not all the attendants are on drugs and the number of drug related deaths and injuries are way below the societal norm.

Every year in the US, for every 100,000 people .15% of deaths are drug related and .16% are alcohol related vs. the .00001% of people who have had drug related deaths at EDC in the last two years. Clearly these events are not the problem when we look at the numbers. Further, every year in the US, for every 100,000 people 4.4% die as a result of an accident (41% of which is vehicle related). You are 1681 times more likely to die in an auto accident than you are from a drug related incident at EDC. And yet, I don’t ever see any talk of banning automobiles.

Finally, these deaths resulted from the choices that the individuals made, not because the event or the promoters made them do it or provided the drugs. These choices could have been made anywhere, the resulting deaths could have occurred anywhere, they just happened to have occurred at EDC.

While any death is a tragedy, don’t buy into the hype that these events are some great evil plague upon children. The media and politicians are self-serving and hype up anything they can to improve their numbers. But the real numbers are there.

That being said, for those of you attending these things, be smart, please. Moderation is always the best route. Drink water, avoid drugs (or at least keep it to a reasonable level of moderation), take rest breaks from dancing, eat, sleep, live.

So, you want to be a DJ?

20110429-115736.jpg

Having been a DJ for nearly two decades now, I’ve picked up a thing or two. I often get asked for advice on the art of DJing (where to start, tips, tricks, etc.) so I’ve decided to lay out some of my more consistent tips and lessons for people in the beginning and intermediate stages of DJing. They may seem harsh at times, but if you don’t have a thick skin, this is the wrong industry for you.

Tip One: Don’t.

Seriously, don’t start. Not only is it an over-saturated market with people constantly getting undercut and bumped by people who, in all honesty, don’t deserve to be in the industry, but it is being flooded with people who really just don’t have the chops for it. Over the last few years it has become the hip new thing and seen as an avenue into easy fame and fortune.

If you are looking for popularity, to be cool amongst your friends, get laid etc., stick to your own house parties, turn your garage into a dance floor whatever, just stay out of the professional realm. There is nothing easy about this industry if you are doing it correctly. You need to have an unhealthy obsession with music to ride it out the long run. DJing will ruin the life you have as you know it. You will lose friends, lovers, sleep, work, it will be impossible to lead any kind of ‘normal’ life. There are benefits, don’t get me wrong, but most of them result out of having the sort of obsession with music required to be a professional DJ.

Two of the biggest factors that have kept me surviving and growing in this industry are that I absolutely can not live without music and I am too stupid to know when to quit.

Tip Two: Study the History

If you are still reading these tips then you either have an unhealthy obsession with music or your ego is so bloated that you think you are good enough and deserve to be a DJ. You probably think you have some new perspective or new way of doing things. Back here in reality, odds are you don’t.

With any subject matter or trade it is critical to know the history. Where did it come from, who were the pioneers, what worked, what didn’t, etc. Without knowing where it started you probably aren’t going to be able to take it to any sort of new level, you’ll just be repeating what’s been done, and trust me, it has been done. Watch the documentaries, read the books and blogs, listen to the old sets and sounds, etc. Talk to and LISTEN to those that have been doing it for a long time, there is a reason they are still around, despite how much better than them you think you are. If they are working, getting paid, and making people dance, they have done something right to get there.

Respect is often a missing component in the industry these days, but absolutely critical for the industry to survive and thrive. Don’t kill the industry with your lack of respect and ego. Study, learn, respect.

Tip Three: Practice and Record

Practice all the time. This is a skill, and though you either have the foundation skill or you don’t, you still need to develop and improve that skill by actually doing it. A good starting point is to start with two copies of the same song and mix it every possible way you can think of. It doesn’t matter what song, just something you really love and know, so you can hear clearly when the mix is on and when it is off.

Record everything you do and listen to it. You need to develop your ear, not just for beat-matching, but for programing, song keys (just because you can match two beats doesn’t mean the keys the songs are in go together). Technology has changed a lot of things, we can mash up songs that could never have gone together before, but again, just because you can do a thing, doesn’t mean you should do a thing.

Develop your ear; listen, record, and repeat until you don’t feel you are making progress, then start asking for feedback. Don’t make everyone listen to everything you do, especially in the beginning. For one, it’s annoying, your mom may like to put your scribbles on the fridge but others don’t. Secondly you will want to avoid having people’s first impression of your work be poor intro level stuff. It will stick with them longer than you would expect.

Tip Four: Learn the Gear

There are a lot of ways to DJ now. Learn as many as you can. Seriously. The technology will only continue to change, what is standard at an event now will not be later. Not to mention that different venues have different gear and different sound systems. Ask around, everyone is a DJ now anyway so it won’t be hard to find different gear to practice on, and who knows, maybe they are good enough to show you the proper way to use it.

Learn vinyl, not just Traktor or Serato, but vinyl. You may be naive enough to think it is an out-dated and dead format, but there are valuable lessons to be learned by using it. There are elements and lessons you can learn by using that vinyl that can never be replaced. Vinyl has a certain soul and history that you have to take part in if you really want to be serious in this industry. All the new tech is trying to maintain the principle and feel of vinyl while offering new tools that vinyl doesn’t provide. Think there might be a reason for that? Plus, honestly, it just takes more skill to DJ vinyl, all you have is you and the music, no bpm counter, no key meter, just you and your (hopefully existent) skill. In fact, vinyl can be a good judge of whether or not you should even be a DJ. If you can’t DJ on your own, why should you be considered one? If the technology is doing all the work for you, your computer is a DJ, you are not.

When you buy your own gear don’t skimp, you will only be sorry when you replace it for better gear. This isn’t a cheap industry to get into (cheaper now than it was, granted), but you want stuff that will last and when you do eventually play out at a decent venue, you will know how to use the gear and not get nervous because it is way more advanced than you are used to.

Tip Five: Produce

If you want to get anywhere in this industry you need to be making music. I’m not talking about cutting and rearranging someone else’s music and calling it an ‘edit’ or trying to pass it off as a ‘remix.’ And I’m not just talking about making some mediocre stuff and putting it out on your friend’s label or even worse starting your own label because no one is picking up your music. I’m talking about making good music, music that other people buy and play. If you don’t have the music making talent, you can still DJ, but don’t expect to make it to the top.

To learn my tips on producing, refer to the above tips, same principle.

These are by no means all my tips, but if you want more you will probably have to prove to me that you are not just another douche bag trying to be cool and looking for an easy fix.

Old, but still valid:

Drugless drugs! … wait… what?

I was recently asked what I thought about binaural beats and more specifically i-dosing. Now, I know there is a trend of interweb goers to be a bit on the ADD side, so I will try to keep my thoughts on this matter simple and brief.

Can music get you high?
Simple answer no, complex answer yes, sort of. Drugs physically and directly alter your brain chemistry in various ways and with varying levels of intensity as to produce the effects that are associated with each of them, their respective “highs”. As a result of the alterations and intensity thereof, people often have very intense and traumatic experiences (both positive and negative). Under these circumstances, people have been known to develop post-traumatic stress disorder. PTSD can lead to what both hippies and war vets (and some divorcees) call “flashbacks”. A flashback usually occurs when something triggers a memory related to a traumatic experience, this could be physical stimuli or even a thought or emotion. Flashbacks can be so intense, that people can relive the event to a very powerful degree, experiencing anything from “tracers”, fear, euphoria, or intense war related events, which are commonly associated with Vietnam vets.  Like-wise, people can become so addicted to the physiological effects of the drugs that they can develop behavior altering addictions. We tend not to see the same results (at least in any similar intensity) from music.

So are the binaural beats altering brain chemistry like a drug or inducing some sort of flashback? My guess is the latter. Though music can alter the brain chemistry temporarily, I don’t think that is what the key element in what is happening here, at least not with any intensity to be akin to the “high” received from drugs. I acknowledge that there have been studies suggesting that music can cause the release of endorphins and even create a kind of addiction, but so does chocolate and we can hardly call eating a snickers bar getting high. Music on its own just doesn’t seem to have the level of intensity that drugs have. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence of long term effects or physiological side-effects generally associated with brain altering drugs. In reality, binaural beats themselves are more like an auditory illusion than some sort of mythical mental “brown note“. What I think is more likely happening is that, in some cases, these frequencies are triggering some kind of flashback or are triggering some kind of pre-existing chemical imbalance.

Don’t get me wrong, I very much believe, have witnessed, and have experienced first hand the powerful effects music can have. For example, in my late teens the song “No Quarter” by Led Zeppelin triggered some genuine fear in me the first few times I heard it. It was quite some time before I could bring myself to listen to it all the way through. Now it is one of my favorite songs. The question is do I think the song itself was altering my brain chemistry like a drug to produce the fear or triggering something like a repressed memory or some kind of teenage hormonal issue that was pre-existing? The simplest and most likely answer is that it was triggering something already there and not altering my brain directly to produce the effect of fear.  This is one of the important distinctions, indirect effect vs. direct effect. Some of you will naturally want to argue that “well, if the effect is the same then it is the same blah blah blah…”, no. Experiencing the traumatic event itself and having a triggered flashback or memory related to that event are not the same.  The sources of stimuli are very different, not unlike seeing an actual body of water and seeing a mirage of one.

One last quick point on the matter, people (especially youths) can be very suggestible. If you tell them they will experience something a certain way, there is a real chance they will. The brain can play some messed up tricks on us, isn’t it likely that several of these cases are the result of suggestion? Look at it this way, if you really could consistently and directly make people react this way by sound alone, don’t you think the government and ad agencies would already be using it to control us? (That’s a free one for all you conspiracy theorists, but I better not read anything about how the government used binaural beats to make us believe 9-11 happened when it really didn’t or binaural beats were what killed JFK or anything like that.)

Conclusion
Are people really getting high (in the sense of a drug high) from binaural beats? Not likely. Some of you may not care because if it seems like you are on drugs then that is good enough for you. Like that one girl at every party that is sooo drunk even though she has, unbeknownst to her, been drinking O’douls all night.  If you are brave enough to try it, go for it. Let me know how it worked out for you, let me know if you get flashbacks in the long term.  But ultimately, philosophically speaking and physiologically speaking for that matter, there is an important distinction to be made.  Music can effect you, trigger moods, be addictive, trigger the release of endorphins, etc., but it doesn’t seem to be doing it in the same direct manner or on the same level that drugs do.  At best it is an indirect catalyst, not a direct cause.