What are DJs doing wrong

[pianistamediano]

it's important to remember that the 40s vinyl sound has nothing to do with what the orchestras of the day would have sounded like playing live

I think of this whenever people argue that traditional tango music should always be played preferentially even over that of currently existing orquestas, based in Buenos Aires or elsewhere, thereby demonstrating a lack of desire to support these groups and disinterest in tango music as a living, breathing thing.

Chalk it up to preference if you will — I personally find the sound engineering of many modern records grating on the ears if played too much — but I believe many, many people simply just don't want to have to get used to new music that is arguably a (interrupted? spiritual successor?) continuation of the tradition of tango music.

 

[opendoor]

It's not possible to tell the difference in a double blind test between direct playback from the original vinyl and a FLAC (or even a 320k MP3)

Not at my age anyway!

..The vinyl/shellac noise on old tango recordings is just a distortion..

You can't lump vinyl and shellac together. Here is why:

• It's important to distinguish between vinyl compilations made from used older shellacs and freshly recorded studio albums with current up to date technology.
• Due to their higher rotation speed of 78 rpm, shellacs inherently have a higher resolution of the audio signal than vinyls at only 33 rpm. Mint shellacs sound better than vinilos.
• Often apple and oranges are compared, as shellacs were produced long before vinilos. From around 1958 onward, all recording studios in Buenos Aires used good dynamic german microphones. From that moment on the recording quality of vinilos and shellacs were comparably good. Victor was the last to switch, which is why Odeon shellacs from before 1958 generally sound way better than Victor's.
• With a groove width of 120 µm, shellacs simply attract dirt particles and dust like crazy, while the 40 µm of vinyls hardly picks up dirt. That's why they have very little crackle and hiss.
• Many shellac records were played with steel needles on a Gramophone or Victrola. Therefore, shellac records wore out much faster. The tracking force was up to 1000 mN. Additionally the DJanes back then, the so called Vitroleras unfortunately did not care much about the conditions of the shellacs back then. They did not change steel needles after every side as it is recommended. An early electric record player with a crystal cartridge only pressed into the groove with 50 mN. People in BsAso only started buying record players when more vinyl records became available. These players usually had reversible styli and could play either speed.

​

..and it's important to remember that the 40s vinyl sound has nothing to do with what the orchestras of the day would have sounded like playing live.

• There were no commercial vinilos in the 40s. d'Arienzo published his first studio-LP in 1954, di Sarli in 1959. Before that he published vinyl EPs in 33 rpm at the Music Hall label from 1951 on. But MH quickly returned to shellac as nobody bought those vinilos.

 

[TTanguero]

It's not possible to tell the difference in a double blind test between direct playback from the original vinyl and a FLAC (or even a 320k MP3)

I used to do ABX tests every few years. Up to 128k mp3, I could reliably tell. With 256k mp3, and slightly older ears, my hit-rate was still valid but lower. Once it was FLAC versus 320k AAC, I absolutely cannot tell the difference even with headphones. On a dance floor? I doubt 0.1% of people could.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

I've experienced vinyl DJs a couple of times, and while I confess I can't see the point, I was impressed by how well it worked.

Same. Also impressed by the amount of labor that went into it.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

It's not possible to tell the difference in a double blind test between direct playback from the original vinyl and a FLAC (or even a 320k MP3)

Wouldn't the digital versions be an improvement (assuming they have been carefully cleaned or filtered)? The LPs I heard (on two or three occasions) sounded nice but not always as rich as the digital recordings DJs generally use.

 

[Rabbit]

Wouldn't the digital versions be an improvement (assuming they have been carefully cleaned or filtered)? The LPs I heard (on two or three occasions) sounded nice but not always as rich as the digital recordings DJs generally use.

they can be, but the way you'd run double-blind tests would be with the same track played directly from a vinyl and an unprocessed digitized version captured from the same disc. this would show that there's no perceptible change in the sound quality from the digitization

 

[ArbeeNYC]

they can be, but the way you'd run double-blind tests would be with the same track played directly from a vinyl and an unprocessed digitized version captured from the same disc. this would show that there's no perceptible change in the sound quality from the digitization

I see. But that would not necessarily make the digital version an improvement. A processed version, however, could improve the sound quality. When I heard them, I was surprised that the vinyl records weren't richer sounding than they were.

 

[itwillhappen]

I think of this whenever people argue that traditional tango music should always be played preferentially even over that of currently existing orquestas, based in Buenos Aires or elsewhere, thereby demonstrating a lack of desire to support these groups and disinterest in tango music as a living, breathing thing.

An estimated half of the milongas here don't stick to a strictly traditional musical style; I even hear modern orchestras at conservative encuentros. I think the debates with the dogmatic "Golden Age Taliban" are over.
Just as it has become clear since the "Zoom-Milongas" during the pandemic that it is possible to dance even to terrible audio quality.

Chalk it up to preference if you will — I personally find the sound engineering of many modern records grating on the ears if played too much —

It varies from person to person, but the DJ's own subjective listening experience should definitely be a factor when selecting songs. It’s not difficult, after all - you just expose yourself to a particular sound like reverb or pseudo-stereo for an hour or so and pay attention to your emotional reaction.
But about half the participants here enjoy dancing to "alternative" music, so they’ll be completely immune to that.

but I believe many, many people simply just don't want to have to get used to new music that is arguably a (interrupted? spiritual successor?) continuation of the tradition of tango music.

That is certainly very comfortable. In my view, a DJ should try to create an environment where many of the dancers move beyond the rut of their familiar tracks - finding joy in actual dancing. But if that doesn't work out for some reason, you as a DJ simply have to scale back.

 

[Eleven!]

I think of this whenever people argue that traditional tango music should always be played preferentially even over that of currently existing orquestas, based in Buenos Aires or elsewhere, thereby demonstrating a lack of desire to support these groups and disinterest in tango music as a living, breathing thing.

Chalk it up to preference if you will — I personally find the sound engineering of many modern records grating on the ears if played too much — but I believe many, many people simply just don't want to have to get used to new music that is arguably a (interrupted? spiritual successor?) continuation of the tradition of tango music.

I think it's actually worse than that. Tango is an improvised dance but too many people do not have that skill. They are taught patterns and sequences and then stop learning. They dance to the one version of a track that they recognise and it becomes default choreography. There are people who do not like modern orchestras and especially do not like live music because the default learned choreography fails. The timings are slightly different and they do not have the skill to adapt in real time to the changes. Personally I love dancing to live music.

Maybe a bit blunt. But.....

In summary I don't believe there is a disinterest in modern orchestras per se, I think that a large proportion of people going to local milongas cannot really improvise in real time on the fly to differences in music. Which to be fair is incredibly difficult (but beautiful and profound when it happens).

 

[ArbeeNYC]

There are people who do not like modern orchestras and especially do not like live music because the default learned choreography fails.

Some of the modern orchestras, like Sexteto Cristal, are very good. Small live orchestras, however, often sound terrible. The problem is that there are very few full-scale tango orchestras around now (outside B.A., where there are some). But a small trio of electric piano, violin, and bandoneon does not make a tango orchestra. I'll take traditional recordings any day. (And it has little or nothing to do with improvisation or unexpected music--it's all tango.)

 

[Rabbit]

I think that a large proportion of people going to local milongas cannot really improvise in real time on the fly to differences in music. Which to be fair is incredibly difficult (but beautiful and profound when it happens).

I don't think it is really that difficult, but it is not taught well. Most leaders look the same no matter what music they're dancing to (so it doesn't matter whether they've memorised anything or not)