We approve of this.
When it was recently announced that Jon Gosselin (former reality TV
star personality and Ed Hardy poster boy) had attached the title of DJ to his name, I felt the eye-twitching, mouth-frothing, fist-shaking signs of one doozy of a rant brewing. I was all set for one hell of a tirade. My fury was fueled by such insightful and deep wisdom like DJing “is not easy, you have to know what you’re doing, you have to keep the flow” or expressing those universal challenges like DJing weddings and the bride’s guests “start taking pictures of me and it’s not good, it’s an uncomfortable situation.”
Yes, I was getting ready to spew forth an anti-celebrity DJ rant the likes of which even DJ Sneak would tell me to lay off. As I was translating anger, frustration, and dissapointment into words, I realized a very important aspect of the whole celebrity DJ debacle that immediately calmed my rage: douche begets douche.
Douche begets douche
In reality, the majority of people that are actual fans of celebrity DJs are either douches or just don’t know any better (or worse, both). I understand that curiosity may drive some people to personally witness one of these train wrecks of humanity from time to time, but rubbernecking aside, anyone who is a serious fan may want to earnestly examine their life goals. The sad reality is that the majority of people who continually support these fallen celebrities are really just hoping that some of the 15 minutes will rub off on them so they can get attention as well.
That being said, the celebrity DJ phenomenon has been mostly confined to its own sad, sad little world. Douche clubs book douche DJs and attract douche people. This system works to our advantage as it helps to centralize the douche community away from anywhere that matters (except for an occasional misstep in judgement, *ahem* Paris Hilton in Ibiza). At the very least, these celebrity DJ bookings let me know without hesitation which clubs and events to forever stay away from, which can be a great time and effort saver. The drawback, however, is that it can also occasionally encourage douches that wouldn’t normally take part in DJ culture to start exploring outside their own douche-majority bubble and infect a douche-minority environment. Dance music culture has enough of our own douches without adding any more.
Ok, they aren’t all bad
Though I stand by what I’ve said in the past about how the celebrity DJ devalues and mocks our culture (and not in a fun and relevant Will Ferrell kind of way), I do acknowledge that not all celebrity DJs are bad or devalue dance music culture. People like Elijah Wood and Rony Seikaly have, so far, proven to be decent role models. I give Elijah credit for maintaining a low-key profile on the matter and actually demonstrating skill, respect, and for using vinyl instead of jumping on any sync-button-look-at-me-I’m-a-superstar-DJ-so-pay-attention-to-me bandwagon. Rony, former center for the Miami Heat, has been quoted more than once with some actual insightful comments that only come from a genuine passion for the music. One of my favorites being, “EDM isn’t house music. EDM is an offshoot of radio pop that’s done with computers. The essence of house music is organic. It’s a sexier sound. It’s not classic, it’s not noisy. It’s smooth, it’s sexy, it’s groovy. It doesn’t have fake energy like EDM.”
While I am by no means advocating the idea of celebrity DJs, as long as they help keep the douches together in their little bubbles, I don’t care much about what they do. Ultimately, celebrity DJs are like glitter and herpes (glerpes), we aren’t going to ever get rid of them so we just have to kind of ignore them when they pop up. But yes, they are just as annoying all the same.
TL;DR: Not all celebrity DJs are bad and the ones that are douches are pretty much staying in their own douche bubbles, for now. They are like glittered herpes: hungry for attention, annoying, and not going away so just ignore them.
There has been a lot of writing (including our own) about the ‘clowns’ of the industry and the damage they cause to the dance music scene by way of their shenanigans, ghostwriting, overpriced ticket sales, lack of respect, lack of general talent, so on and so forth. However, there is a bigger problem that these so called celebrity DJs and producers are facilitating: the bifurcation of pay amongst dance music artists. There is an ever expanding gap between the DJs that get paid tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per gig and those that are lucky to get offered a gig for anything more than “good exposure”. A gap that will only get worse as corporate entities become more and more involved with dance music.
Advances in technology and automation as well as the ever dwindling price of gear and music have created a level of access that has made it easier than ever for anyone and everyone to call themselves a DJ. Combine this with the pop culture spotlight that is increasingly shining down on our once intimate world and we have the homogenization and saturation of DJs and producers that plagues us today. A plague that has no comparison to any other genre of music, and this includes the 80’s and 90’s when everyone picked up the guitar and called themselves a rock musician or stood in front of a microphone and called themselves a rapper.
The end result of this saturation and homogenization is a detrimental bifurcation of pay, causing the middle class DJ to disappear, which is on par with what is happening to the rest of the American population. Many argue that it is simply a case of “the cream rising to the top”, but for those that factor in corporate involvement, investments, marketing, saturation, access, ghostwriting, celebrity DJs, and a multitude of other factors, know that it is very rarely the case that someone rises to the top of the financial ladder just because their music is the best liked. When it comes to the big money in the music industry, many hits are more a product of marketing success, investments, and heavy exposure/repetition campaigning than a result of something being simply the best liked.
On one end of the spectrum an elite few find support by way of investment and promotion that gets them heard by the masses. On the other end, a flooding of entry level DJs who want a shot at the new celebrity status that has been bestowed upon the namesake flood the market and are willing to work for very little pay, or for that all time favorite perk offered by seasoned promoters and club owners, good exposure. Naturally this is a better financial move on the promoter’s end, but this reduces the opportunity for all DJs as there is now a flood of local or regional talent that is satisfactory enough, at least until the headliner comes on, and ultimately removes any need or desire to pay for the expenses and fees that come from more seasoned talent that may or may not be from the region. It also puts the promoter into a position to move on to the next freeDJ as soon as the first one starts asking for more than just good exposure, which is bound to happen.
This is just one area where a union could come in handy, to not only protect the DJ but the longevity and quality of the dance music scene as well. Further, if the union was able to develop into something that even remotely resembled the Screen Actors Guild, (the longest running and most successful entertainment union) DJs that didn’t make millions of dollars throughout their career could feasibly have access to emergency funds, medical insurance, retirement options, and a wealth of other benefits and protections.
How it could work
There is no question it would take a tremendous amount of work, organization, and coordination. There is no question that there would be a tremendous amount of push back from venues and promoters. But, with some support from a few of the major players it could actually be quite achievable. We would first need the support of promoters like Pasquale Rotella (Insomniac) and headlining performers like Joel Zimmerman (Deadmau5) to support the union. I call them out specifically because on more than one occasion they have either expressed their love of the scene or their hatred of the garbage it has produced, I’ll let you figure out who said what.
Once a few of the larger venues and artists joined it would naturally start to trickle down to the smaller ones. Venues would still have the option to use non-union talent, but would’t have access to the headliners and DJs that were in the union unless they could show that they met a booking quota of union talent. Benefits wouldn’t be one-sided, the union could help mediate contract disputes by either party, impose sanctions or fines to violations, and in general, help raise the bar in terms of performance quality.
Aside from membership dues, a certain amount of live show experience could be required to join the union. This wouldn’t prevent anyone starting out from getting gigs, but rather help screen and filter out those that aren’t serious about taking the DJ path as a career, this would ultimately help alleviate the over-saturation in the market. By following much of the system set up by SAG, we could help protect the talent and help relieve some of the saturation that has caused way too many cases of seasoned and talented DJs being asked to play for exposure.
Why it will probably never happen
As realistic as unionizing may be in theory, in practice it will likely never happen. The two biggest proponents being greed and ego. Venues and promoters are often short-sighted when money is involved. In part because what is popular can change nearly instantly or they work from event to event and they want to keep the revenue flowing, and in part because they want the maximum profit immediately and don’t want to give up those free, exchange for cover and drink tickets, or $50 DJ slots.
Despite much of the unity and togetherness that is promoted within the consumer-side of the scene, the industry-side is rife with competition. DJs are generally not in the habit of helping one another out, unless they clearly see a greater benefit. Despite all the benefits that they would receive from being unionized, it is not unreasonable to think that when something like a call to strike occurred that there would be too many DJs that saw it as their chance to stand out or make a quick buck, rendering any strike meaningless.
Just keep this in mind: unionization has a proven track record for entertainers like TV and film actors, shouldn’t we have the same protections and benefits?
I recently had a discussion with someone who was in the process of scanning books so that people could have “free access to any and all books”. He viewed himself as a champion of the people; offering up his valuable time and effort in an act of a selflessness in order to be a provider of free knowledge. I was a bit surprised when he got offended and denied my assertion that he was ultimately stealing and that he was more thief than champion, especially in the eyes of the authors. The outright denial of his thievery, though took me aback, made me realize that his viewpoint is not uncommon.
Rather than beat a dead horse and speculate on the effects piracy has on various industries, let’s instead focus on the rarely discussed truth of what is really going on when you illegally download media. Let us get honest, shall we?
You are a jerk and thief
When it comes to illegal downloads, it is easy to forget that you are stealing. Especially since there is no physical object that is taken from the possession of another physical or perceived individual. People come up with lots of arguments to justify their actions: it’s just a copy, it’s not hurting anyone, it’s not like I’m taking a purse from an old lady, I’m helping expose the artist to people, I shouldn’t have to pay for music because I’m a DJ, I’m sticking it to the corporations and big businesses that are ruining the <insert industry here>, blah blah blah. Bottom line, you are taking something that is meant to be for sale and not paying for it. No matter what argument or justification you come up with, you my friend, are a thief.
You are a jerk because you are robbing the creator of the media and essentially saying, “your stuff is worth having but I’m not going to pay you for it because my desire to have it for free is more important than your desire to make money from your labor”. Despite how you feel about whatever corporations or middlemen that have their hands in the process from creation to distribution or in the overall economic pie, you are in fact taking money away from the creator of the media. Even if it is a paltry sum from that $0.99 song you just stole. As for all you DJs that are getting paid gigs and playing illegally downloaded music, you are thieves, jerks, and a-holes.
You are a jerk and communist
If you take the work/labor of another person and distribute it to the masses (effectively creating common ownership) you are taking part in communism. This is exactly what is happening when you download and distribute digital material. Not only are you a commie but likely a hypocritical one at that, as I highly doubt that you are sharing with the masses the compensation of your labor, your birthday money from grand-ma-ma, or for that matter, the computer you downloaded the media onto in the first place.
Doesn’t it seem like a bit of a jerk move to be like, “I know you wanted to make money from this but I’m overriding your desire to feed your kids with the compensation of your work and deciding that my desire to make it available for free to other people is more important”? I’d like to see how people would react if someone took their paycheck and distributed the money to the masses because they thought they should be working for free. But I guess that is harder than clicking a button, so it must be more wrong.
The truth of the matter
Even if everyone suddenly decided to be honest with themselves about what they are doing, I’m not confident that much would change. We live in a world where the new generations are increasingly demanding that things be given to them for free, yet that they be compensated for their own efforts. Companies and artists are continuously struggling to find new avenues of compensation for their labor (resurgence of physical media a la vinyl production, advertising revenues, ridiculous pricing for live performance, etc) but so far most efforts only seem to further screw the artists, and the fans for that matter. You may be getting that song for free but you are ultimately paying for it somewhere.
Over the last 20+ years I’ve watched Pioneer work tirelessly to make CDs (and eventually MP3) the standard for DJ medium. Their own CDJs have become the main setup at every major venue and have essentially pushed vinyl out of the booth. And why not? CDs/MP3s are more convenient, less expensive, and provide longevity and the ability to replace lost music that scratched and skipping records cannot. So why now are Pioneer vinyl turntables about to hit the shelves?
Has Pioneer suddenly been stricken with remorse for its part in all but eradicating vinyl in the dance scene and now seeks penance? Has their corporate headquarters suddenly been taken over by old-school DJs who have had enough of controllers and the over-saturation of DJs? Are they tired of making fistful of dollars by selling the premier rigs? Not likely.
Why turntables, why now?
Pioneer is in business to make money. Businesses do not invest resources into projects unless they perceive there is profit to be made, even when producing a niche item. Simply put, they believe there is profit to be made. This is an interesting move considering more and more DJs turn to controllers and software. Even more interesting, the new decks do not contain any midi or digital interfaces, they are purely analog. Let’s consider this for a second; the most prolific DJ gear manufacturer, the one that spent over two decades pushing its digital gear so it would become the industry standard, believes there is profit to be made from analog turntables.
We’ve all seen the reports that vinyl sales are up and that there has been a renewed interest in the medium, some artists even going so far as to release only vinyl, but have we really seen the difference in the booths? Not really, CDJs still reign supreme. Despite recent vinyl growth, the focus in the booth is still on the all too easily accessible MP3. So why is Pioneer even bothering? Are they just seeking market dominance and hoping to capitalize on a possible final surge of record sales before it completely disappears? Possibly. But with vinyl sales currently breaking records (pun unavoidable) it is not likely the medium will be disappearing anytime soon.
Could it possibly be that they are preparing their rekordbox software to be a stand alone competitor for DJ software like Traktor and Serato and want to provide their own analog controller option? Maybe. While I wouldn’t put it past them, it seems to me that there would be some kind of digital interface built-in to further integrate the tables with their other products, not to mention it would make the price point much more attractive for most.
Speculation aside, I see a profitable option that I’m hoping Pioneer will take. I’m hoping that Pioneer sees a potential to create a symbiosis within the market place that will ultimately create more revenue for themselves while keeping a smile on the vinyl addict’s face. If they push their turntables even a fraction as hard as they did with the CDJs they will indirectly help drive vinyl sales up, which will naturally in turn drive turntable sales even higher, which will push vinyl sales even more, and so on. Preference and nostalgic desires aside, as someone who sees the financial benefits of a vinyl resurgence, I’m more than happy to see Pioneer put forth these little beauties.
What’s this vinyl business?
In the early 90s my DJ rig included pair of Pioneer CDJ-500IIs for no real reason other than most of the music I played was on CD. At the time I never thought that CDJs would become the industry standard, especially when taking into account all the grief given by my fellow DJs for using CDs (many of which now give me grief for preferring vinyl).
By the mid-90s I moved away from CDs to vinyl for three main reasons: I liked the feel, I preferred the sound, and vinyl was where it was at for underground music. Eventually, I also came to realize that vinyl ultimately made financial sense. It was better for creating a unique sound for myself, which from a business standpoint was imperative.
More so than CD, vinyl was often released in limited runs, making it easier to stand out by playing music that other DJs did not have. Nothing like the Beatport/Shazam everyone has everything instantly of today’s DJ world. Vinyl was also more expensive, harder to mix, and more of a hassle to maintain, which inadvertently provided the added benefit of keeping the total number of DJs entering the scene much lower. This increased the value of the DJs that were already in the market as a result of basic supply and demand.
Clearly, Pioneer does not profit from there being less DJs in the world, but the question remains: Will Pioneer push their gear and invite a further resurgence of vinyl bringing it back into the booths, are they just setting up a future release of an advanced version of rekordbox, or are they just OCD and trying to round out their DJ gear offerings? Let me know what you think. Are you happy to see Pioneer make some analog tables? Or is it a case of too little too late?
Step 1: Don’t take yourself too seriously.
Not long ago, the interweb was abuzz with some potentially interesting discussion regarding dance music ghostwriting. Unfortunately it was short-lived and the parts of the discussion that had any real value never fully materialized. While a few articles claimed to oust some ghostwriters, they did little more than praise artists like Benny Benassi (known ghostwriter) for their hustle. Really, there should have been at least a hint of discussion about how ludicrous the whole enterprise actually is.
No harm no foul
The discussion has since been abandoned with a hastily adopted conclusion that the whole thing falls into the ‘no harm no foul’ category. Something to the effect that if the ghostwriter is ok with the terms of the contract they signed and if the person who attached their name to the work has no moral dilemma with purchasing the illusion that they possess some skill, then there is no problem. Before you subscribe to such monetarily-centric industry behaviors, let’s put a few of the important aspects of this trade into focus.
It should first be made clear that really, the ghostwriter is not to blame. It takes tremendous hustle to make ends meet in today’s economy, especially by way of the music industry. Having talent alone isn’t nearly enough to survive, even for those few of a kind that can produce more than a single potential hit. Ghostwriters alone may not have the infrastructure, contacts, or financial backings available that are needed to make music a successful hit. This is of course assuming that they even wanted to be in the limelight in the first place.
The ghostwriter is also clearly more interested in choosing money over artistic integrity by the very fact they are parting ways with their creation in order to let someone else take the credit for a few (or many) bucks. There is no mistake or confusion as to what their goals or intentions are in regards to their work. They are in it to make money, clear and simple. The person attaching their name on the bought work, however, is a liar. They are living a lie and they are selling a lie.
The Elton John defense
People often cite artists like Elton John, Elvis, or any of the countless artists who are not only well known for not writing their own music, but also for becoming quite famous as a result of the songs that the ghostwriters provided them. There is an obvious, but unfortunately, overlooked difference in having a ghostwriter provide you with a song that you in turn PERFORM LIVE for an audience compared to a song you simply PRESS PLAY for an audience. Artists like Elton John still perform the song. They bring their own talent to the equation, a piece of themselves, as well as some actual effort to the piece.
Even when assuming the extremely unlikely scenario that a DJ/Producer who is willing to slap his name on someone else’s work in turn actually mixes it in to his own set (and yes some DJs buy premixed sets to play out for ‘live’ shows), are they really bringing any talent to the performance? Wouldn’t this then give him the right to lay claim to every song he plays in his set as his own by proxy? The short of it is that they aren’t selling a track as a result of their performance of it or really anything they are adding to it, as is the case for artists like Elton John.
For a producer to even qualify as having talent they need to actually produce, for a DJ, they need to actually mix (and mix live at that). When you buy either of these tasks and slap your name on it, it just makes you a lying fraud. These credit usurping talentless frontmen that do so are no Elton Johns, rather, they are more akin to Milli-Vanilli than anything else. If we didn’t stand for Milli-Vanilli’s pedantic synchronized dancing and lip-syncing nonsense when they were called out, why should we stand for any of these Jesus posing sky-pointing fakers?
At this point some people might be tempted to spout off some rhetoric nonsense like ‘if the people like the music, have a good time and are none the wiser, what difference does it make? Who gets really gets hurt?’ The industry gets hurt and the consumer pays the price, quite literally. Not only are consumers buying and perpetuating a lie, they are elevating these glorified lip-syncers to millionaire status. Consumers are unknowingly perpetuating a system where imitators keep raising their performance prices, which in turn further gouges the consumers when it comes to performance costs, all in the name of paying for the artist’s increasing cost of their lies and fame greed. Dance music has become increasingly caught in a vicious cycle of paying for lies.
As always, Not Your Jukebox seeks to remain a champion for art, truth, consumer awareness, and to encourage others to do the same. Don’t pay for lies and fame greed, demand better.
Now that the great Format Wars of the last decade have been reduced to a few occasional skirmishes, fought with talking points tossed around by both sides, it would seem that, for better or worse, non-physical media is music’s destiny. Even with vinyl making a remarkable spike in sales over the last few years, it is unlikely that we will ever see a physical medium as the norm for housing music again.
MP3s have forever changed the audio landscape; I mean what’s not to love about them? You can have thousands of songs and the only space they take up is virtual. You can email a song to a friend and they can instantly listen to it just about anywhere on a plethora of devices, and with a little know how and a short internet search you can gain access to just about any song ever made, for free. Considering how much joy the little buggers have brought to the world how could anyone possibly speak ill of them? Aside from, of course, the fact that you can’t ask an artist to sign an MP3.
Whether your music collection consists entirely of free downloads or you took the “moral high ground to support the efforts of the artist” and paid your dollar per song, the fact remains that there have been unforeseen costs with this format change that the $0.99 price tag doesn’t cover.
Music is now disposable
Music has been a consumable product ever since the very first mogul realized that he could record some music and sell it for a profit. MP3s have now taken things a step further and turned music into a disposable product. You can download a song you like (foregoing the entire album if you so desire), listen to it a few times and delete or forget about it as soon as the next hit song comes around. This mentality has caused much of the industry to become even more formulaic than ever in order to turn a profit. There is also less of a risk for labels now as productions costs allow them to throw whatever they can to see what sticks, effectively removing any filters of quality. No longer exists the mentality that you buy an album and treat it with more permanence. Picking out music carefully, intentionally, and spending money only on that which connects most to you. Most of the filtering on the consumer end is gone as well, now it is more a matter of ‘this sounds good right this second, buy it, bored with it, next’. This leads to people being less likely to become genuine fans of artists as they are building a short-term relationship with a song instead of a long-term relationship with an artist’s body of work.
This has become especially true for DJs. Once upon a time, good DJs tended to be a lot more selective about what they played, if not simply as a result of the cost alone. They would immerse themselves in the music, learning every high and low in order to work a carefully selected song into a set as a piece of the story they were telling and get the most out of that song as they possibly could. Records would continuously make their way in and out of the crate depending on the gig, some never leaving at all. Now DJs often buy a new set for every gig, exchanging most of the tracks in their set for whatever the most currently released version of their cookie cutter music happens to be that week. It is no wonder that so many DJs/Producers resort to putting so much attention on a stage and light show, it has become the only way to tell them apart and keep people interested since the
garbage music isn’t doing it anymore. In short, there is very little connection to the music anymore, which seems to ultimately miss the point of music in the first place.
There is no culture
While pop music has always been a part of the corporate machine and void of any substantial culture, dance music was on the fringe, in the underground and rich in culture. The culture is already suffering at the hands of the current transition to the mainstream and subsequent corporate takeover, but at an accelerated rate thanks to MP3s. Interpersonal exposure to music has become much more removed and impersonal. People may in fact be sharing new music more than ever, but really, the quality of sharing is greatly diminished. Sending a file to someone for them to listen to doesn’t have the same impact as people being in the same room and listening to it together, something much more common when music was shared via a physical medium. There is no way to truly gain insight and understanding of how a person sharing the music interprets and connects to the piece without being present. You aren’t just sharing music at that point, you are sharing an experience, which ultimately deepens the connection to a piece or artist.
Similarly, something important is also lost by way of no longer going to a music store to discover new music, specifically, interacting with people behind the counter or the other people that are browsing in the store. While ultimately music is deeply personal, we only expose ourselves to new music through a very narrow lens. Interpersonal connections play a very important role when it comes to music exploration and understanding, all the blogs, Kazaas, Napsters, and Pirate Bays in the world can’t replace that. It saddens me to think that there is an entire generation out there that has never experienced a boutique music store, being opened up to new sounds by someone who has an unmatched passion for all things underground and rare.
Most importantly, for DJs, with record stores came the ability to create a unique sound for a region and an individual DJ. A store would have a limited amount of space and copies of a track so both shop owner and DJ would have to be discerning about what to buy. While a few cities still have a reputation for focusing on a particular sound, the internet distribution of music has destroyed the possibility of a regional feel as more and more people have access to all the same music and end up playing the same Top 10 tracks. Unless you work for a record label or are good friends with a ton a producers and getting tracks before they are released, finding that secret weapon that is unique to your set/region is an impossibility. In fact, all anyone has to do now is hold up their phone during your set and they can instantly download any song you play.
Quantity over quality
Over all, the music industry has long been lost to the philosophy of quantity over quality. While labels have always been concerned with doing whatever it takes to achieve the highest sales numbers, that system is more prevalent than ever. And don’t be naive and think that music is popular or sells on its own merits alone, good music doesn’t magically fall into the awareness or the hands of the masses, that is just not the reality of the music industry. Record sales have migrated to individual song sales and the labels push individual songs more than albums or even the artists making them. Even worse, labels work harder to monetize songs via ad revenue from sites like YouTube than they do investing in the artist with any real A&R of legitimate value. An album now needs to be a compilation of hit singles rather than a complete piece of art with a one or two breakout singles. There is a reason you can go to a massive/festival and every song sounds the same, the industry is about selling a formula, one that can be duplicated and pushed on to the consumers for the maximum possible sales results. For independent music, digital retail sites like iTunes and Beatport are the only ones making any real money (a third or more of the sales) and they thrive through saturation even more so than the labels. There are no industry filters anymore, anything goes and the mentality is now ‘the more the merrier’ to increase the chances that they get something that actually sells well. In more ways than one, this makes the business side of Top 10 playlists even worse in that it perpetuates the must play mentality, if for no other reason than very few are willing put in the effort to dig through all the crap when ten popular songs are a few clicks of the mouse away. This ultimately prevents a lot of legitimate art from being heard and supported, further ensuring the monotony that is the dance music/Top 40 scene of today.
I’m not going to drudge up the thoroughly debated quality of digital vs analogue sound issue, as it ultimately doesn’t matter when people are primarily listening to music through earbuds, computer, and portable Bluetooth speakers. People, for the most part, don’t seem to care about the quality of sound anymore, otherwise they wouldn’t settle for MP3s (which by their very function down sample music and remove elements of the original sound) through their cheap headphones. This is already assuming it was originally produced at a higher quality to begin with, which for a lot of electronic music is becoming less and less the case. Again, it is no wonder that we are saturated with a bunch of formulaic sounds, produced by people with no understanding of proper production methods, and are bounced to an MP3 in order to be posted on a digital distribution site by way of their or a friends ‘label’. MP3s have helped considerably to make mediocre music acceptable and standard.
What it all means
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not asking you to dump all your MP3s in the trash but to rather, at the very least, just recognize that there are valuable aspects of experiencing music that are lost as a result of the format shift. If there is even a solution out there to regain what has been lost, we won’t find it until we first realize that there even is a problem. In the meantime there are always the well known and basic ways to help maintain a higher quality of music experience; support physical releases on CD or vinyl, support full albums, buy music and then actually listen to the music consciously from time to time instead of in the background while doing something else, learn the history behind genres and artists, interact with people and listen to music together in person, dig for music instead of looking at fabricated charts, and support independent, lesser known, and local artists. Let’s work together and make quality matter again.
When I made the transition from the dance floor to the DJ booth in late 1993 I actually started out by playing CDs. The technology was in its infancy but I could get by. I even matched my first beats with my rudimentary front-loading players. I would like to say that I was predicting the future or that I was an early adopter, but the truth is simply that my all my music was on CD and I was just following the music. As my taste, the scene, and the music developed, I eventually turned to vinyl because that is where the music I wanted to play was.
I have always had a connection to the music; it was what was driving me to get out there as often as I could so I could dance to it and play it. Switching to vinyl brought that connection to a whole new level. I was literally touching the music, manipulating it directly. There was no middleman, no computer translating my manual labor from binary input into mechanical movement and sending it out as digital data. I was in direct contact with the music; everything was analog, organic, and real. I could hear it the instant it came in contact with the needle, whether it was connected to an amplifier or not. I could see the story the artist was telling, where the breaks and builds were. I could almost always tell if a track was worth my time just by the album art alone. It was special. Not only did it enhance my connection to the music, but it also enhanced my connection to life. Vinyl helped me gain a lot of insight into the world and into myself over the years and has taught me some very important lessons.
Anyone who has spent any time with a record player knows that as you move your finger closer to the center of a spinning record, the slower it travels. Though the physics makes sense, it is still something that can take the brain a moment or two to really wrap itself around. There is a lesson here: that your perspective can be limited to your position in life. The record is always moving as a whole (as is time, life, society, the universe, etc.) independently of you and your position, but how you experience it is always relative to where you are and what you are doing. It is easy to forget that there can be other perspectives that are accurately experiencing something that is completely different from our own, especially in light of the fact that we can only ever truly know our own. People will often make the mistake of going to an extreme and thinking everything is relative as a result, but this is not the case. Even if we have a truly accurate understanding of what we perceive (which is more uncommon than we like to admit), it is usually only a piece of the whole. Very rare is it that we can fully step back far enough from a perception to see the record moving as a whole, and never can we remove ourselves absolutely. We can, however, do our best to understand other perspectives, which is always a good way to get a clearer picture of the planet that we are all spinning on as a whole.
Many a philosopher has claimed that true happiness comes from the effort that one makes as opposed to the end result of that effort. I have to agree. When I have a good night behind the decks, when I am really working hard and the crowd gets it and is connected to everything I am doing, it is like a drug. The amounts of serotonin, dopamine, and adrenaline that are released in my body are so high that I have a mild depression from the come down after the experience a good night. It is in the doing that I find the happiness, not in the done. Even the prep work before the gig has a kind of happiness attached to it. From the process of digging through track after track just to find the right one to feeling the full weight of the crates as I lug them to the venue. Just to be clear, I am not saying there is no happiness in a job well done, just that there is no real or meaningful job well done without actually enjoying the effort it takes to get there. One must learn a lot of patience, stamina, and drive in order to even begin to know what hard work is, but it is worth it a hundred fold. Passion truly is when you enjoy the effort more than the result.
Nudge a spinning record too hard or too soft while you are riding a mix and you will quickly learn the value of moderation. My experiences in the DJ world have forced me to face the value of temperance as a virtue time and time again. Whether I am over-thinking or not paying attention, drinking too much or not enough, playing too hard or too soft, moderation is always key in just about every aspect of DJing, from the business to the art to the pleasure. Just as in any part of life, playing to an extreme may bring pleasure, but it is short-lived and the pain that follows usually out weighs that pleasure. I have really come to understand that longevity in anything requires moderation. For the most part people understand this concept but so few actually incorporate it into their daily lifestyle, despite professing otherwise. More often than not people push something to an extreme until they burn out or experience some major negative effect. They then pull back and say they are living a moderate life. This is not true temperance. Temperance requires active restraint to prevent an extreme in the first place. Over-working a mix into a train wreck and then correcting it is not temperance, restraining oneself and preventing the train wreck in the first place is.
Mixing vinyl, especially songs that were recorded with a live drummer, require a tremendous amount of focus. Sometimes this is easier said than done when you have lights flashing in your eyes, people dancing all around you, yelling in your ears, sub par equipment that does not stay consistent, or any one of a number of territory common distractions. Focus is something a DJ needs to survive. Presence is something a DJ needs to stay happy. I have learned that my best nights are the ones when I take that focus and evolve it to a point where I have truly let myself go and I am completely present in the moment, in the mix. I am aware of the lights, the people, the yelling. Not just aware, but using those things, incorporating them into what I am doing, the music I am playing, and the way I am playing it. I never plan a set because how can I really plan for a moment I am not yet experiencing? Every moment is different so every set is different. We only ever really have whatever moment we are currently experiencing, yet, so rarely are we actually truly present within that moment. It can be difficult to avoid being stuck in thoughts of moments past or of those yet to come, but life opens up in wonderful new ways when you pay attention to the moment you are currently in, when you enjoy what you are doing at this exact moment. Of all the wonderful things that vinyl has taught me, knowing how to be present in this one and only life that I have and to truly be a part of the world around me is by far my most favorite, as well as the one I am most grateful for.
I know this is preaching to the choir for those of you that have a history with records, but I think it is important to remember whatever lessons vinyl may have taught you and, in general, the positive effect that vinyl can have on the music and the artist. Those of us that were there for the beginning and early years of the dance music scene know that the we as a whole have lost our way in many respects. The life and soul has been diminished in so many ways, much of the art has been replaced by automation. The passion for the music has been replaced by passion for wealth and fame. We of the old school have failed the new school by not impressing the connections that brought us into the fold to begin with. It is important for those of us that know the value of vinyl to share with those that only see it as an outdated and cumbersome medium. To share with those that have never been exposed to anything but the digital and that are far removed from the direct analog magic that is near and dear to us. I encourage you to take part in the re-revolution and help keep the education going.
On the surface it sounds great, an idyllic call to the masses: Peace, Love, Unity, Respect. It was, in part, a response to the hammering the underground/rave scene was receiving from the media and government in the late 90’s. Parties were being shut down with extreme force, DJ’s were being arrested, the RAVE ACT was threatening to destroy everything we had worked so hard to build, and the media was fanning those fires. PLUR was meant as a flower in the gun of all the misconception and hatred aimed towards the culture.
By the turn of the Millennium the small candy kid based movement started gaining traction and went from joke fodder to one of the most commonly used phrases within dance music culture. While it may have originally had the pure and innocent intentions of creating a utopian environment it has instead become a gateway for the apathy that plagues the culture. Further, it has opened the doors to those that demean and destroy the quality and meaning of the electronic music world. I am speaking specifically of the ‘unity’ portion of the concept.
As a generic concept unity is fantastic, the idea of the music bringing people of all backgrounds together by way of a common ground is admirable. But when we start to examine the kinds of people that have been ‘unified’ into the culture, we see that the music and culture did not change them for the better as was intended, but rather they changed the music and culture for the worse. This is not a unique phenomenon, history is littered with various cultures and peoples opening their arms to newcomers only to be slaughtered by those very people that they were welcoming. It really is ok to not want some kinds of people in our culture.
Had we been a little more xenophobic we wouldn’t have news alerts like Paris Hilton securing an Ibiza residency, or SFX buying up every promoter they can with the philosophy that (and I quote) “…it’s not really based on dance music, as much as the event.” Had we been a little more discerning we wouldn’t have a saturation of mediocre talent that cares more about money than art and craft, little kids running around in their underwear more concerned with how many people pay attention to them rather than actually dancing, or end up being asked to pay ridiculous sums of money to hear posers auto-play and/or sync the same five songs all night.
Sadly, because we trusted that the music could and would enlighten everyone the way that it did us, we have allowed our culture to be bombarded with douches and sluts who have created a world where the music is no longer the important part of dance music culture. Maybe the U should have stood for ‘Underground’ or ‘Understanding’ because ‘Unity’ didn’t do us any favors.