How To Mix Better?
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 2:28am |
 Coolness: 51330 | it keeps your reflexes sharp...
I love 80's because a lot of the stuff is made with beatboxes, so it's a lot more steady than a human drummer. New Order/ Blue Monday, Eurythmics/Sweet Dreams, and some other one I'd rather keep secret... mouihihi |
| I'm feeling overworked right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 2:43am |
 Coolness: 685615 | There's also SSQ - Tonight (from Return of the Living Dead) that works great..
A lot of industrial stuff also, and some metal, works well.. |
| I'm feeling bleh right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 3:03am |
| Coolness: 51330 | Gotta keep trying new shit, a lot of stuff you would never try unsuspectedly fits together...
Who found out about Wizard of Oz and (is it Dark Side of The Moon? Am I an idiot if I'm wrong?)??? Part of being a good DJ is being able to spend a lot of time experimenting shit. It's the most enjoyable part of the hobby, aside from all the money we all make off it. |
| I'm feeling overworked right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 3:46am |
| Coolness: 685615 | yeah Wizard of Oz and Dark Side of the Moon work amazing together, it's really incredible how everything lines up..
The experimenting is fun for sure. That's what I love so much about doing mixes with Ableton.. If you've got a mashup that ends up working out well, or a tune that's done with a live drummer that you synch up to a set tempo, you can export it to spin out in your sets.. re-edits of tunes you like also, like if you find that the 2nd breakdown of the track would work better as an intro, you can re-arange them all pretty easily.. |
| I'm feeling bleh right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 4:06am |
| Coolness: 51330 | Cool I'll give it a try... thx for the tip |
| I'm feeling overworked right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 4:25am |
| Coolness: 685615 | You can find it online usually titles The Dark Side of Oz..
It also synchs up with the reggae version, Dub Side of the Moon.. It's totally amazing. |
| I'm feeling bleh right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 5:13am |
| Coolness: 51330 | I've seen "The Dark Side of OZ", I meant Ableton. heheh.
Good nite |
| I'm feeling overworked right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» fishead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 8:12am |
 Coolness: 75695 | a lot of things done after '83 or so are done to a click track... there may be slight fluctuations, but that's what skills are for...
btw: ZZ Top were huge Depeche Mode fans - look it up... there's electronics all over their records... and the 12" mix of Legs is pretty hot. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MURDOCK_ROCK replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 1:34pm |
 Coolness: 83900 | i've still got some questions regarding noise cancelation/ phasing....
i've been using the allen & heath xone 62 alot and i can't help but to notice... and i've yet to experience any noise cancelation with it... but on lower end mixers like the numarks i find alot more eq'ing is involved... like especially if yer rockin' 2 big reeses or something. are higher end mixers made to minimize cancellation to a certain degree or what? |
| I'm feeling warm unicorn jizz right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 5:27pm |
| Coolness: 685615 | I think you've got your terms mixed up with something else.. If you're talking about phasing, it's got nothing to do with your mixer and everything to do with your records.
noise cancelation: Modern active noise control is achieved through the use of a computer, which analyzes the waveform of the background aural or nonaural noise, then generates a polarisation reversed waveform to cancel it out by interference. This waveform has identical or directly proportional amplitude to the waveform of the original noise, but its polarity is reversed. This creates the destructive interference that reduces the amplitude of the perceived noise.
For sound to actually cancel out, you'd need to be playing a record with the exact same samples/bassline patch as the previous one, but with an inverted phase. That would actually cancel out each other's frequencies. |
| I'm feeling bleh right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MURDOCK_ROCK replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 6:48pm |
| Coolness: 83900 | thats what i said....
but my question is in regards to how much it depends on your system... cuz "in theory" what your saying is true... but if actually put it into effect through a "dj mixer" as opposed to "wav editor" your not necicarily gunna get those results... |
| I'm feeling warm unicorn jizz right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 6:58pm |
| Coolness: 685615 | There is no "in theory", for any kind of sound cancelation to occur, you need a sound wave that is 180 degrees the oposite of the other, and the frequencies will cancel each other out. The only way to get any really noticable kind of effect that people mistakenly refer to as "phasing" is with 2 copies of a record, and the effect that they call "phasing" is actually "flanging". |
| I'm feeling bleh right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MURDOCK_ROCK replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 9:46pm |
| Coolness: 83900 | regardless... your totally not catching my question... |
| I'm feeling warm unicorn jizz right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» fishead replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 10:17pm |
| Coolness: 75695 | screwhead: it's called phase because when the records are in synch they are "in phase" and if you knock them out of synch, they are "out of phase"... hence you get a flange effect, but you do it by playing around with the phase of the two records. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 10:44pm |
| Coolness: 51330 | Originally Posted By FISHEAD
btw: ZZ Top were huge Depeche Mode fans - look it up... there's electronics all over their records... and the 12" mix of Legs is pretty hot. WOOOOT? That's surprising and cool. Update » NormanWells wrote on Wed Mar 21, 2007 @ 10:56pm Screwhead said: The only way to get any really noticable kind of effect that people mistakenly refer to as "phasing" is with 2 copies of a record, and the effect that they call "phasing" is actually "flanging".
And fishead answered: screwhead: it's called phase because when the records are in synch they are "in phase" and if you knock them out of synch, they are "out of phase"... hence you get a flange effect, but you do it by playing around with the phase of the two records. Taken from Wikipedia: The phasing effect was originally produced by simply copying the sound onto two analogue tape decks and mixing them together. One tape was run slightly faster than the other, so that one copy of the sound would overtake the other, resulting in a rising then falling effect caused by wave interference. DJs can achieve the same effect by playing two copies of the same record from the same point at the same time. However, as more practical solid-state electronics and latterly software were used to re-create an approximation of the unwieldy tape-flanging set-up, the term Phasing more specifically refers to a swept comb-filtering effect where there is no linear harmonic relationship between the teeth of the comb (compare this with flanging, where the teeth of the comb-filter are spaced along the frequency spectrum in a linear harmonic series). A flanger is a subtype of phaser in which the notches are uniformly spaced. In this case, the notches are created by mixing the signal with a delayed version of a signal. Flangers tend to sound more natural, like the "jet plane whoosh" effect, whereas phasers tend to sound more unnatural. |
| I'm feeling overworked right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Deadfunk replied on Thu Mar 22, 2007 @ 3:39pm |
 Coolness: 153030 | thats what i explained, but in my words...! |
| I'm feeling angelkoreish x 10000 right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Fri Mar 23, 2007 @ 5:06am |
| Coolness: 51330 | Just confirming... |
| I'm feeling happily drunken right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Deadfunk replied on Fri Mar 23, 2007 @ 11:20am |
| Coolness: 153030 | yeah, i was saying it because im happy that some one proved me right, it was a STFU YOU CUTTERHEAD IDIOT WHO THINKS HES BETTER THAN ANYONE BUT DONT KNOW SHIT ....
thnx, that had to get out! |
| I'm feeling angelkoreish x 10000 right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» NormanWells replied on Fri Mar 23, 2007 @ 12:21pm |
| Coolness: 51330 | Eh c'mon show some respect to my man Fred, he was partially right! |
| I'm feeling happily drunken right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Deadfunk replied on Fri Mar 23, 2007 @ 9:12pm |
| Coolness: 153030 | do you think he respect me, read his post, i say something, wasnt even talking to him, and hes all like,
you suck you are a idiot stfu bla bla bla ??? |
| I'm feeling angelkoreish x 10000 right now.. | |
How To Mix Better?
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
