Are DFA over-rated?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Were they one of the first few to get out the door first on this rock dance revival (or what ever you want to call it) post-post-punk, electro-clash--that got them where they are?

I like what they do but, they haven't done anything that beats the original material that they jock of the late 70's early 80's.

taste eye, Tuesday, 22 July 2003 19:54 (twenty-one years ago)

ahh, yes.

ddb, Tuesday, 22 July 2003 19:55 (twenty-one years ago)

didn't you get the memo? old is the new new...

bill stevens (bscrubbins), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:01 (twenty-one years ago)

i think the DFA were pretty hyped in the beginning of this year with the release of 2 of their mixes, but they have very little product available to sell so i'm not sure what being over-rated at this point in their career may matter.

also: i'm not sure if this is part of their shtick, but some of the segues on the Colette No5 mix are among the clumsiest i've heard (outside of my own)... the Muzik one seems a little bit less slapped together.

gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

ddb's got it all right. of course, my ass (an ed lover and doctor dre fan) disagrees.

gygax!
m.

msp, Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:07 (twenty-one years ago)

I always thought industrial dance was the first wave of post-punk rock dance music.

donut bitch (donut), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:17 (twenty-one years ago)

rephrase.. post-punk influenced.

donut bitch (donut), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Like early Fini Tribe, Blackouts, early Ministry (like pre-"With Sympathy") and a few of those early 80s Wax Trax! singles were totally 'proto-DFA'.

donut bitch (donut), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:19 (twenty-one years ago)

And most of those records make me hurl..that's why I don't care for the 'new wave'.

brg30 (brg30), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 20:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Isn't it weird how industrial is starting to creep its way back into popular music? You've got the DFA, and then the last song from the new Trail of Dead ep.

xnelio, Tuesday, 22 July 2003 22:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Ha ha there is no industrial revival you wishful thinker.

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 22:59 (twenty-one years ago)

"Losing My Edge" is even funnier than Buffalo 66!

brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 23:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Although Yancey posted the tracklist a while ago, I finally saw the confirmed DFA CD compilation and it's kinda lacking. So I made my own 80 min comp of my favorite DFA stuff:

LCD Soundsystem - Beat Connection (edit)
The Juan Maclean - You Can't Have It Both Ways ("live")
Metro Area - Orange Alert (DFA mix)
LCD Soundsystem - Losing My Edge
Radio4 - Dance to the Underground (DFA mix)
The Rapture - House of Jealous Lovers
The Juan Maclean - By the Time I Get to Venus
LCD Soundsystem - Give It Up
Le Tigre - Deceptacon (DFA mix)
Fischerspooner - Emerge (DFA mix)
The Rapture - Olio
The Juan Maclan - Give Me Every Little Thing
Black Dice - Endless Happiness (EYE mix)

For me the main difference with original post-punk stuff is that the DFA are heavily influenced by acid house as well.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 23:29 (twenty-one years ago)

i think the compilation is good - in terms of not covering things that already appear elsewhere on CD (like the Rapture stuff).

electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 22 July 2003 23:59 (twenty-one years ago)

my left toenail is funnier than Buffalo 66. but "Losing My Edge" is fucking great.

M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 00:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Ha ha there is no industrial revival you wishful thinker.

Snarf. You'd be saying otherwise if you ever visited Seattle, at the least.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 01:02 (twenty-one years ago)

lots of cynics on this thread. geez. i agree, losing my edge is fecking great as is the flip. i don't hear the industrial connection at all...i love how the colette comp is mixed.

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 01:07 (twenty-one years ago)

I think that the whole point of the dfa is that they are slotting themselves firmly between the next wave of techno antiquarianism and the rockist hipster cannon. They have their feet in both camps and they are using it to their advantage.

I felt that the DFA mix for muzik was a bit of a history lesson in dance music. You start off with the Metro area remix which is an opening statement of where they start in the whole disco-punk thing (we still sequence, but we do sample our own basslines and use "real" drum samples) then you segue way into Out Hud doing sorta Italio'ish disco followed by DK7 doing acid house then you get Beat Connection which is tracky conceptual disco followed by Radio 4 doing a pre-acid classic DJ International-esque Chicago trig-in house track followed by Black Dice which is fucking whale vomit and ruins the continuity of the mix, then you get House Of Jealous Lovers which is what ACR would have sounded like if they were American and The Deceptacon remix which is just strait disco with punky vocals then you get Make It Happen by Playgroup which sounds like early Cabaret Voltaire having hot deviant sex with a loft disco record then you get Casey Spooner's fat ass doing some Lame-O remix of emerge which sounds like a twee version of the Clipse featuring faux 808 tom percussion finished by Juan MacLean doing a quite straight take on Italio-disco without any of the grimy cheek that makes all the Rotterdam/Hague records so mind-blowing.

All in all, they know their history and they are not afraid to sell it right back to you with a smirk and a mesh-back hat. You have to give them credit, they hooked up with Universal and this shit is about to go mainstream. They were the first ones to make it out the gate, and they are about to brand Disco-Punk. I think a lot of their material is hit and miss, but when they hit it is out of the ballpark. I just hope the whole thing doesn't implode on them, the genre is already tired and acid house is going to become the next dance music revivalist trend. It is 1985 right now, and 1988 is just around the corner.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 01:17 (twenty-one years ago)

my left toenail is funnier than Buffalo 66. but "Losing My Edge" is fucking great.

Funny like ha-ha or funny like a one-toed foot?

PS Hard to disagree with Mike Taylor, esp. about the dread spectre of Acid House Has Risen From the Grave.

brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 01:59 (twenty-one years ago)

are you kidding? I am so bloody sick of laptop geeks making crappy microhouse tracks, I want to jack my body to the sound of a primal 808 and a sleazy 303. Adonis and Sleazy D are the only logical antedote to brittle shuffle tracks.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:12 (twenty-one years ago)

ho ho ho. i'd say jack tracks are the next "revivalist trend". i suppose this is the original acid house...

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:22 (twenty-one years ago)

...but any time acid house is mentioned i invariably think of british acid house.

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:24 (twenty-one years ago)

are you kidding?

I guess I just remember 1988 in Chicago really well ...

brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:27 (twenty-one years ago)

ditto that

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:28 (twenty-one years ago)

must be nice.

I am just finding that No Way Back is way better than all the dry computer records that are coming out these days. I would rather listen to old Steve Poindexter records than what is coming out on Force Tracks. Ever since computers replaced hardware as the tool of choice for dance producers things have gone down hill.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:34 (twenty-one years ago)

no way back still sounds great today, too, but ricardo villalobos can rock it just as hard. :)

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:37 (twenty-one years ago)

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

mike if you can explain to me WHY that is without resorting to some nebulous argument about "soul", i'll buy you a case of whatever your preffered beverage is.

strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:38 (twenty-one years ago)

some of the recent-ish stuff on force tracks has that real visceral element to it as well.

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 02:39 (twenty-one years ago)

You're too far gone, Mr. Taylor.

http://www.detroithistorical.org/promo-techno/images/tnobjuan.jpg


Juan of Van Buren Twp. (Andy K), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:03 (twenty-one years ago)

DFA ROX U R ALL GAY

Dan I., Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Honestly, it comes down to feel(some say there is a glitch in the sequencers that make them start a few milliseconds apart from each other that gives them their feel beyond their shuffle or accent functions). Those old Roland machines command the prices they do because their sequencers have a certain feel that you cannot get from other machines. Their user interfaces are quick and allow you to bang out ideas quickly. All the 909/808 sounds were tuned with pots on the inside of the machines that make every xox box sound just a little bit different. That is before you get into trig-in synths like the jx-3p, the sci pro-one, or the sh-101. There is just something really fun and energetic about that whole era of music technology that in a lot of ways has not been rivaled since. I am not going to rant about soul, I just really like the way those boxes sound and feel compared to laptop audio.

There is just something about hardware synthesis that computers cannot touch. It is not a soul thing, I am not going to call you an asshole if you disagree with me, it is just a personal preference. I don’t think computer synthesis sounds as good in a lot of cases. You can try and cover it up with mastering through tube amps, high-end graphic eq's and tube compressors, but that underlying characteristic is still there.

Computers are great; they give you a lot of options cheaply, they allow you to work quickly, and they make it easier to make music, but I don’t think that the results are always as good. At the same time, the interface sort of pushes you into certain directions and towards certain creative outcomes. Also, a lot of the software is based around the concept of centralized time keeping, rather than through distributed sequencing through multiple synchronized clocks. I like the idea of a whole bunch of little boxes working together to make music rather than one single interface. Also, I think that computers give people way too much time to edit and re-edit and edit the re-edit... visually and it can make things a bit sterile and overly considered sounding.

I am not going to say that all microhouse is soulless and blah blah blah, I simply have an aesthetic preference for the older analogue stuff. I like the way a handful of synths, a couple drum machines, two outboard processors and a cheap mixer sound. I like synth/drum machine tracks a lot more than audio manipulation tracks. A lot of computer audio just doesn't sound good to me. I would rather listen to I-F than Sutekh right now.

At this point I think you owe me a case of beer, Jess. I will be mailing my address to you shortly.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Magic Juan knows he would not have a career if the 808 was never invented.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:12 (twenty-one years ago)

I am in the middle of composing a track called "Isolée Is the Teacher," so watch what you say.

Model Re-Press (Andy K), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:16 (twenty-one years ago)

if that were the case his set at the tastefest would have been far more enjoyable.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:17 (twenty-one years ago)

At the same time, the interface sort of pushes you into certain directions and towards certain creative outcomes

Although I'm tempted by this argument having worked on computer software, surely the challenge is to overcome whatever creative constraints you're imagining here Mike.

It's not as if ForceTracks, or Playhouse or Perlon have produced a 'microhouse' sound simply from composing on a laptop. I wouldn't pay up a case of beer with this linear line of reasoning...

Michael Dieter, Wednesday, 23 July 2003 03:56 (twenty-one years ago)

besides "it all comes down to feel" = "soul" = ennnhhh, try again

as always i am far more interested in what the music sounds like (and by that i don't just mean the individual sounds) than the machinery it's made on

strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 04:02 (twenty-one years ago)

you should maybe drink the beer, then have the argument

gaz (gaz), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 04:05 (twenty-one years ago)

a much better idea

strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 04:09 (twenty-one years ago)

two things re: Acid House and DFA. Their remix of "Emerge" sounds exactly like Reese & Santonio's "The Sound" and the end of "Beat Connection" sounds like any Acid House beat, especially Fast Eddie's "Acid Thunder".

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 05:23 (twenty-one years ago)

ok jess, but obv what the music is made on will affect what it sounds like (guitars != turntables != synths), so why is it wrong for Mike to say he dislikes music being made with computers?

Dave M. (rotten03), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 06:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I like Mike's explanation, but I think that many of the records that sound like they were made with Roland boxes duct-taped together were probably done with Pro-Tools or Cubase etc.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 06:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Let's do a computer music Pepsi Challenge - simulation versus 'the real deal', can you spot the difference?

Michael Dieter, Wednesday, 23 July 2003 06:50 (twenty-one years ago)

How about the irony of Mike rehersing the human/machine divide. Reiterating the Soul/Disco(House) complaint in terms of Chicago House and Microhouse. Dubious.

So the age old complaint of 'real' instruments versus synths/samplers is now mapped over 808s vs. laptops - eh...

Michael Dieter, Wednesday, 23 July 2003 06:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Dave M, because it's wrong to make prescriptions for music thus ruling out stuff you've never heard because it doesn't conform to an ideal of production. how would anything new or interesting ever happen if we all had so many rules about what was essential for good music? Didn't people in the 70s and 80s say "hardware" wasn't hardware at all?

Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 07:06 (twenty-one years ago)

DFA unplugged, anyone?

Also, Armand Van Helden plugged "No Way Back" into pro-tools and worked out a pretty cool track on 'Killing Puritans'.

Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 07:11 (twenty-one years ago)

I think "Beat Connection" and "House Of Jealous Lovers" are as good as or better than almost everything they rip off. On the other hand I never need hear "Losing My Edge" again and "Give It Up" was rubbish and a lot of the other DFA productions I've heard are eh. But! I think they're much broader in style than they get credit for, so in that sense they're underrated. I don't think they're the saviours of pop music or anything tho.

Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 07:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Mike is absolutely right, I think. But it's not about technology, it's about context. Microhouse is cold compared to those old acid records. Acid sounds like sweaty basement dance clubs, microhouse sounds like pristine loft apartments.

I think it's because back in the acid days (not that I'd know) the idea of anyone sitting around and listening to those records would've been unthinkable, but that's exactly the context microhouse is made for. Acid was only ever designed to be heard in sweaty basements, and it retains a real freshness because it was made in a context that is difficult for us in our technology-sated musical world to even imagine.

Microhouse is fantastic, but it is jaded, sophisticated music whereas acid is brutal dancefloor simplicity.

That's not to say one has more soul than the other, but microhouse only ever surprises me on the intellectual level, whereas acid has an insistent rawness that has a completely different, and equally unexpected, effect.

I have to say that I hate DFA's vision of what 80s dance was about, with the exception of Metro Area. It all stinks of dance music that's scared of being club music, which is just wishy-washy. It's all far too arch to cut through on a body level.

Yes, Losing my Edge is very funny, in the sense that the vocal is very funny. The track is workmanlike and a little mehh.

Maybe I spent too long listening to mediocre 80s dance, but I don't think styles like Italo, 80s disco and proto-house work with out that over-dramatic almost operatic 'cheesiness' that the originals have and that DFA have surgically removed. It's like, if you want to have Peech Boys, you have to have MFSB too.

I'd love to hear Jan's view...

Jacob (Jacob), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 08:43 (twenty-one years ago)

immensely, immensely overrated, but okayish at what they do. i listen to the odd dfa thing at home and quite enjoy it, but i feel guilty abt it like i feel guilty abt liking undie hip-hop

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 08:49 (twenty-one years ago)

My top liking DFA tip for Jacob - compare it to other indie music not other club music!

Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 08:50 (twenty-one years ago)

< insert cuss of indie music here >

Jacob (Jacob), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 09:03 (twenty-one years ago)

microhouse sounds like pristine loft apartments

until you've danced to it in a sweaty basement club!

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:09 (twenty-one years ago)

(I think I may be the only person who absolutely cannot fucking stand "Losing My Edge")

donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:25 (twenty-one years ago)

(donut, don't you like fun?)

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:38 (twenty-one years ago)

shouldn't music transcend the tools used to make it? (re 808 vs software)

disco stu (disco stu), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:42 (twenty-one years ago)

DB, just treat it as a Fall B-side from 1992 and it all makes sense.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 14:01 (twenty-one years ago)

It'd be funnier that way, I can take MES caricaturing hipsters a lot easier than a guy from DFA

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 14:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I like that track fine, though. I kinda wish the track itself was a bit louder in the mix.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 14:05 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't think at all that microhouse is sophisticated & jaded... the stuff luciano, villalobos et al are doing right now is super-joyful (well, some of it sorrowful) and visceral.

jack tracks are definitely already back. there's force tracks' "jack to the future," a recent mark farina 12" on classic or MFF that's actually storming, that "track of the night" tune on playhouse, osborne's work on ghostly/spectral...

philip sherburne (philip sherburne), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 15:22 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't have a problem with the vocals as much as how incredibly boring the song is. "Clint Eastwood" is 10x more exciting, and that's saying something.

donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 16:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Does anyone else doubt the continuing sweaty basement club value of making 1992 style acid house in 2003? Not that I don't like acid house but it is hardly sweaty basement stuff anymore, given most of it is so slow.

Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 18:14 (twenty-one years ago)

The vocal is way too low; I thought the song itself was supposed to kind of retarded, as far as the whole joke went (not that I don't think it rocks in its retarded way, but ...)

brian nemtusak (sanlazaro), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 21:26 (twenty-one years ago)

this thread made me laugh so much that it resulted in me spilling my red cola all over myself.

acid house / micro house - whatever, it is all sweaty basement dancin' music. that's what it is designed for - DANCING. i've been playing acid house out since 1987 ('i was there") and still play it out from time to time, esp the just pre acid jack trax - denise motto, adonis, the children, gherkin jerks... - and i run a sweaty basement microhouse night BUT, i don't listen to it. none of it makes any sense tome unless heard in the context of a club enviroment at which point it becomes the best sonic experience of my life.

funnily enough, the one thing that has brought many of my friends who were acid house veterans out clubbing again after years of staying in are the sounds of perlon, playhouse, kompakt etc.

given most of it is so slow

ronan - that's what the pitch control is for.

stirmonster, Wednesday, 23 July 2003 21:33 (twenty-one years ago)

gherkin jerks!

I love that stuff...

Where's your night?

Jacob (Jacob), Wednesday, 23 July 2003 21:52 (twenty-one years ago)

besides "it all comes down to feel" = "soul" = ennnhhh, try again

Honestly, I can't convince you because you don't know. I'll put it to you like this, work with an 808 and a 909 and then work with an mpc2000xl with 808 and 909 samples. You can get damn close with the mpc if you try really hard to emulate the programming style of those machines but there is still something missing. It comes down to a feel, it is like the difference between the way two jazz drummers swing. You can give two guys the same sheets and they are going to swing the same beat just slightly differently. If you have an ear for this sort of thing, it makes a huge difference. The old Jack and Detroit records sound the way they do because the sequencers in those boxes had a certain feel. A 909 swings like a 909 for a reason, the 808 sounds the way it does for a reason.

To be frank, to say a sequencers feel in a recording makes no difference is like saying a drummers feel makes no difference in a live band. You are welcome to your opinions, but in this case they are objectively wrong. You can dodge the issue all you like, but in electronic music the technology is the outcome. I've put the hours in behind the old x0x boxes and I have done it behind an MPC. There is a difference, and those who know from first hand experience will tell you so.

To wrap it up for you in plain English; just because you can't hear/comprehend the differences between Elvin Jones and Alex Van Halen doesn't make me an idiot for preferring to listen to the former when it comes to jazz. As for not caring about how the technology changes music; when the machines are your band, the technology is the music.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Thursday, 24 July 2003 00:48 (twenty-one years ago)


Or to put it another way in more easily understood rock-centric terms:

You can say that you don't care about the technological basis behind music, but you would have to admit that Girl You Really Got Me by The Kinks would be a completely different song emotionally if it were done on a banjo and an acoustic guitar.

I mean come on, banjo's and acoustic guitars are totally in the same family of instruments as electric guitars; there shouldn't be a real difference in the sound right? And besides, it is all the same, what difference would it make if it was an electric guitar or a ukulele they both have strings and make sounds right? It shouldn't make a difference if this one guy plays on this track or if we just get another guy, they all do basically the same thing right? There is no difference between players, and we don't care or understand how the records are made anyway.

Mike Taylor (mjt), Thursday, 24 July 2003 01:04 (twenty-one years ago)

i think you're belaboring the point, mike.

i can hear the alesis mmt-8 sequencer in a lot of early detroit stuff (because yes, i've worked with it), but when i listen to r-theme that's not what i'm really listening for.

disco stu (disco stu), Thursday, 24 July 2003 01:22 (twenty-one years ago)

And that is a fair point, Stu.

Obviously you are going to listen to music because of what is being expressed rather than just because it features a certain piece of gear. There are pleanty of good computer tracks and lots of bad 808 tracks, that is a given. The point I am trying to make is that the technology does change the outcome.

If you were a real dork you would know that R-Theme was made on one of these: http://www.keyboardmuseum.org/ar/k/korg/s/sqd1.html

Mike Taylor (mjt), Thursday, 24 July 2003 01:40 (twenty-one years ago)

i agree with you that technology changes the outcome and that the roland machines swing in their idiosyncratic way. i think what bothers me about gear discussions is that they end up being more about the conceit of technology than the artform. obviously the two are inseparable, but i like to look at it as a snapshot in time, that this is what the artist had to work with and the end product was a particular piece of music. the influence is there, but should we ignore new technology because it influences us to take a detour down an unknown path? i think that's where a lot of the most interesting (lamest adjective ever) music comes from. what makes jack tracks/acid house special includes the gear as much as the circumstances surrounding the musical artifact. this is a relevant argument for any piece of music. and once again it's all a matter of taste...and how the audience shapes the music as much as the artist.

(thanks for the link)

disco stu (disco stu), Thursday, 24 July 2003 02:01 (twenty-one years ago)

this is actually turning into an interesting thread, we should probably take this conversation into a thread of it's own.

Technology and electronic music

Mike Taylor (mjt), Thursday, 24 July 2003 02:20 (twenty-one years ago)

but stirmonster I can't understand why you wouldn't listen to acid house outside of a club? especially given you obviously love electronic music, it sounds great just remembering whenever the last time I heard something in a club was.

Ronan (Ronan), Friday, 25 July 2003 17:02 (twenty-one years ago)

ten months pass...
This was a good thread even though I didn't know what it was about halfway through.

christhamrin (christhamrin), Sunday, 13 June 2004 01:06 (twenty years ago)

also: i'm not sure if this is part of their shtick, but some of the segues on the Colette No5 mix are among the clumsiest i've heard (outside of my own)... the Muzik one seems a little bit less slapped together.

I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, but The Colette mix was mixed by James Murphy, an avowed rocker turned dancer circa 2000 while the Muzik mix was mixed by Tim Sweeney, who, while a young one, has probably clocked more hours DJing, with regular weeklies and a radio show then James and is an excellent DJ, mixing, scratching, tricks and all that. He was also under the tutelage of Steinski at some point. Not that Steinski's known as a DJ primarily, but I just thought that's a cool fact.

Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Sunday, 13 June 2004 08:08 (twenty years ago)

not to make any value judgement as to their relative skills at DJ, just their relative skills at beatmatching or whatever. I've seen James rock some awesome sets.

Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Sunday, 13 June 2004 08:09 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.