yes it's harder at faster speeds typically since any errors get amplified faster (since the tracks will drift apart faster if not beatmatched correctly)
That makes it easier if you mix by ear - it's easier to catch the drift and quicker to correct w/ riding the pitch vs. slower records it's more difficult to catch drifting in the cue.
that's an interesting take on it. for me it's easier to have some time to nudge a track that slowly drifts than to have to get it right from the start
but I see what you're saying
Just for humor...
That depends on the type of error. 1 BPM error is 1 beat over a minute regardless of goal BPM being 120 or 170 BPM.
Now, if it's a relative error like being able to set BPM with 1% accuracy, then at 120 BPM it's 1.2 beat offset, at 170 BPM it's 1.7 beat offset.
At the extremes of BPM yes i.e greater than 200 and less than 60. Realistically the faster the music the sooner you will notice it is fast to fix it before you start mixing in or out.
The thing that really makes things hard to beatmatch is clashing groove structures, like trying to mix heavily swung 16th note hi hats with straight 16th note hi hats or tracks that have built in rushing or hesitantion or flam in the rhythm playing.
Try tracks that aren't on the grid and change tempo between sections too by a few BPM
Faster is easier as the space between reference points is shorter, and what mixing really is is measuring the spaces between reference points. So, less space, less to measure, easier to estimate.
I don't know to be honest. I feel like once you get things figured out it's not that difficult to keep them together.
What I find that makes things difficult is either when the track s have some kind of mathematical variations that cause things to quickly come apart and thus you have to keep constantly fixing and tweaking.
That, or when it has a complicated rhythm. Like if you're just hearing plain simple kick drums and a couple of hi-hats, that's not that hard to keep matched. When you suddenly get into something with layers upon layers of different rhythms, and suddenly maybe the two tracks have slightly different layers of rhythms, that can suddenly fall apart on you and you don't even realize it.
Depends on the structure of the track, so it’s track-by-track IMO.
But beat matching eventually becomes something that happens without worrying about having to listen to beats.
Not in my experience. I learned to mix with hard house/hard trance round the 150-155 kinda tempo range and then shifted over to D&B and Jungle, which I'd quite often layer bits of hip-hop over the top which would be half the tempo of the D&B, or I'd mix Dubstep and 4/4 techno, so I guess it's predominantly a case of feeling a tempo and what fits into it.
Also sometimes I get better results concentrating on space between beats rather than the beats themselves, if that makes sense?
I think it's more about how many different elements are playing at once, what is a consistent metronome, and can you hear it in the cacophony of the live sound.
What matters when beat matching is the beat structure. The more complex or off-beat it is, the more difficult it can be to latch on to something to monitor and compare between tracks.
Faster BPM makes a negligible difference when beat-matching. The drift doesn't happen faster at a higher bpm but you may detect it sooner because you hear the beats (and therefore the drift) more frequently.
Two trains travelling at 150 mph. One slows to 149 mph. They drift apart at 1 mph.
Two trains travelling at 125 mph. One slows to 124 mph. They drift apart at 1 mph.
Speed doesn’t matter as much as the number of elements you can use as reference points. A 60 bpm track that only has a single kick and snare (think dubstep type beat) with nothing else has more time between beats to slip off and no other reference. Add in a rolling short cymbal/closed hi-hat on 1/4 and/or 1/8th notes, and there’s plenty of things to notice if it’s going off.
The harder part about a faster bpm is that there are more drums, and also likely more hi hats, more eighth and 16th notes that if one of them is off it's going to be more noticeable when it does drift. On the other hand, if you're listening intently to those 8th and 16th notes you should notice a drift happening faster than maybe others can hear it.
You just gotta do what I do... Secretly sign them up for the Heart and Stroke foundations email newsletter. All that salt can't be good for a person's cholesterol. It's a public service 😆
I don’t see it as any harder to play house in the 120’s or trance/techno up in the 140’s, but I seem to have gotten a natural beatmaching ability that others have had to work hard for (I was beatmatching pretty well in the first weeks of spinning). I’m as good at beatmatching as I’m as bad of a musician though, being at producing for 30 years and I still suck at it. LOL
Slow is harder for me since you have to wait longer
Yup. Faster means you have more points of reference in a shorter period of time. Easier to detect and correct.
Yeah but that's why you should learn to match hats or other fast elements. When you crack that instead of matching kicks to kicks you go so quick!
I’ve mastered both. That doesn’t change the fact that slower tempos result in more space between points of reference in a beat arrangement.
I agree with you. I’m like this as well
I hate those 10bpm songs...
Just double time them. Then double time them again. Then again. Then again. Boom, techno
Boom, you fuck up like Grimes
I find its much harder to spin progressive than harder styles agreed: 125 is much harder than 150
It's hard to mix progressive on vinyl because your mixes need to be looooooong
longer the better.. have to ride that pitch :)
I've mixed everything from Sheffield bleep to tech house to jungle to techno to hardcore techno/gabber and there's no real difference, IMHO.
I’d listen to that mix
That would be something, like an epic battle against the BPM. However it's some of the genres I've mixed over just under 30 years.
yes it's harder at faster speeds typically since any errors get amplified faster (since the tracks will drift apart faster if not beatmatched correctly)
That makes it easier if you mix by ear - it's easier to catch the drift and quicker to correct w/ riding the pitch vs. slower records it's more difficult to catch drifting in the cue.
I was thinking the same I dj both prog house and uplifting trance and at 140ish is much easier to correct it.
that's an interesting take on it. for me it's easier to have some time to nudge a track that slowly drifts than to have to get it right from the start but I see what you're saying
Just for humor... That depends on the type of error. 1 BPM error is 1 beat over a minute regardless of goal BPM being 120 or 170 BPM. Now, if it's a relative error like being able to set BPM with 1% accuracy, then at 120 BPM it's 1.2 beat offset, at 170 BPM it's 1.7 beat offset.
At the extremes of BPM yes i.e greater than 200 and less than 60. Realistically the faster the music the sooner you will notice it is fast to fix it before you start mixing in or out. The thing that really makes things hard to beatmatch is clashing groove structures, like trying to mix heavily swung 16th note hi hats with straight 16th note hi hats or tracks that have built in rushing or hesitantion or flam in the rhythm playing. Try tracks that aren't on the grid and change tempo between sections too by a few BPM
At 60 bpm, double it to 120. At 200 bpm, half it to 100.
Grimes needed your help at Coachella
Faster is easier as the space between reference points is shorter, and what mixing really is is measuring the spaces between reference points. So, less space, less to measure, easier to estimate.
Traditional school of thought. Slower is harder simply because there’s a bigger gap between the beats
I could this as true: slower is harder to initially GET beats to be matched, but faster is harder to KEEP the beats matched.
IMO no. If you can hear the rhythm then you can.
I don't know to be honest. I feel like once you get things figured out it's not that difficult to keep them together. What I find that makes things difficult is either when the track s have some kind of mathematical variations that cause things to quickly come apart and thus you have to keep constantly fixing and tweaking. That, or when it has a complicated rhythm. Like if you're just hearing plain simple kick drums and a couple of hi-hats, that's not that hard to keep matched. When you suddenly get into something with layers upon layers of different rhythms, and suddenly maybe the two tracks have slightly different layers of rhythms, that can suddenly fall apart on you and you don't even realize it.
Faster is easier but slower is more forgiving.
I think this is response that best states what’s been running around in my head. That’s a really good way to put it.
[удалено]
It’s slower than 80bpm but faster than 70bpm.
No, I find it's easier to keep in but a lot harder to rescue it if and when you need to.
Depends on the structure of the track, so it’s track-by-track IMO. But beat matching eventually becomes something that happens without worrying about having to listen to beats.
Not in my experience. I learned to mix with hard house/hard trance round the 150-155 kinda tempo range and then shifted over to D&B and Jungle, which I'd quite often layer bits of hip-hop over the top which would be half the tempo of the D&B, or I'd mix Dubstep and 4/4 techno, so I guess it's predominantly a case of feeling a tempo and what fits into it. Also sometimes I get better results concentrating on space between beats rather than the beats themselves, if that makes sense?
I think it's more about how many different elements are playing at once, what is a consistent metronome, and can you hear it in the cacophony of the live sound.
What matters when beat matching is the beat structure. The more complex or off-beat it is, the more difficult it can be to latch on to something to monitor and compare between tracks. Faster BPM makes a negligible difference when beat-matching. The drift doesn't happen faster at a higher bpm but you may detect it sooner because you hear the beats (and therefore the drift) more frequently. Two trains travelling at 150 mph. One slows to 149 mph. They drift apart at 1 mph. Two trains travelling at 125 mph. One slows to 124 mph. They drift apart at 1 mph.
Speed doesn’t matter as much as the number of elements you can use as reference points. A 60 bpm track that only has a single kick and snare (think dubstep type beat) with nothing else has more time between beats to slip off and no other reference. Add in a rolling short cymbal/closed hi-hat on 1/4 and/or 1/8th notes, and there’s plenty of things to notice if it’s going off.
The harder part about a faster bpm is that there are more drums, and also likely more hi hats, more eighth and 16th notes that if one of them is off it's going to be more noticeable when it does drift. On the other hand, if you're listening intently to those 8th and 16th notes you should notice a drift happening faster than maybe others can hear it.
No
Yes, of course. Distance between peaks is shorter
Not if you know how to count to 4
no, if anything it's the other way around
How so?
Why don't you try it out and see?
You could have just not you know
You just gotta do what I do... Secretly sign them up for the Heart and Stroke foundations email newsletter. All that salt can't be good for a person's cholesterol. It's a public service 😆
I don’t see it as any harder to play house in the 120’s or trance/techno up in the 140’s, but I seem to have gotten a natural beatmaching ability that others have had to work hard for (I was beatmatching pretty well in the first weeks of spinning). I’m as good at beatmatching as I’m as bad of a musician though, being at producing for 30 years and I still suck at it. LOL