Dardis wrote:I'm vinyl only as well, but honestly I don't think it makes much difference. The main difference is born out of people's perceptions.
As Kraviz alludes to in that interview, when you play digitally it is assumed that you will use several decks, effects, etc & almost have to re-engineer tracks on the fly. If not you're just using auto-synch & are apparently not doing anything at all. I don't think this is the case at all, a well prepared auto-synched set achieves the same ends as it's vinyl counterpart. Because you don't have to count to four along with the beats on two records however (which becomes second nature to most vinyl djs after a few weeks), it's frowned upon.
As a vinyl dj you also have the luxury of people automatically assigning all credit to you when a quality record is played, despite the fact you had nothing to do with making anything. Some spotter type came over to me once when I was playing & said "wow Las Ramblas, you're such a good dj". It was my opener & I hadn't even mixed one track yet!
tbh, I don't think you know what you;re talking about - 1) it doesn't take a few weeks for mixing with vinyl to become second nature, and it aint about counting to 4. 2) regardless of what you play, no set should be well prepared.. the DJ should be prepared, but the set shouldnt. and lets not mention auto sync. 3) why shouldn't a DJ be praised for playing a good track? there's a lot more to playing a good track than playing a good track 4) the guy was probably talking about the DJ before you, or was being sarcastic because you played an 'opener'
As for the main post:
A good DJ is a good DJ regardless of what they use to play, but I think that people have more time for a vinyl DJ than a laptop DJ - especially if you're not already a well known name. Personally I won't bother to download a mix unless it's on vinyl or by a DJ/artist who I am interested in.