Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

found following text on a cd-cover:

 

cd1 & cd 2 soft mixed /

faded by DJ .......

 

what do you think about adding this attribut to the 2 existing ones:

 

mixed by

compiled by

faded by ???

Posted
Compiled by is already an available option.

 

 

i know,

what do you think about adding this attribut to the 2 existing ones:

 

mixed by

compiled by

faded by ???

but the reason why i started this topic is that people (especially DJs who has extended their turntable-setup with a cd-deck) can see if a tune is mixable or not.

 

so mixed by would mean: the tunes on this cd are not mixable

compiled by + faded by would mean: the tunes on this cd are mixable

Posted
I think 'faded by' (which I just think equals bad mixing) should be listed as 'mixed by', which would solve Hans' problem.
Posted
I think 'faded by' (which I just think equals bad mixing) should be listed as 'mixed by', which would solve Hans' problem.

 

sorry guys! i know my english is bad! so please try to read my post more carefully.

 

this 'faded by' thing would mean that there are no mixes between the tracks, just fades

refering this to an artist does not really make sense, i agree

 

for example

 

http://www.rolldabeats.com/release/ruff_teck/ruff057

http://www.rolldabeats.com/release/segundo_mundo/285003_2

and some good looking cds i think

 

are not mix-cd's but there are sometimes fades between the tracks (without an absolute silence)

 

so some of the tunes are not 100% unmixed (not exactly the same acoustic content like on the vinyl version)

and the whole release is BETWEEN a mix-cd and a unmixed cd

 

listing it as a mix cd would be wrong but maybe there should be note in the comment field like 'some tunes are slightly faded' !?

Posted
there are sometimes fades between the tracks (without an absolute silence)

This would fall under "mixed by" then

Posted

I would put it under "compiled by".

If you take Jonny L's Magnetic CD, the songs also cross over into each other. But that's not "mixed". I think a CD is either mixed or unmixed. If somebody doesn't know how to mix, or doesn't want to mix it, it's just compiled.

I mean, come on, "faded by"... even a monkey can do that! I would feel VERY ashamed if I would be credited as having "faded" the CD!

 

Otherwise you need to put remarks on CD's on a track-by-track basis. There are enough CD's where a few tracks are overlapping! Which for example means you can't use it to start or finish a set with! Like a lot of the formation CD's have shortened versions (which I noticed isn't listed... I think New Breed Of Ravers and Highly Recommended have a lot of edits on them).

Posted

overlapping tracks but not mixed --> that is the phrase i was not able to write in english :D

thanks to The_Manipulator!

 

thats exactly the information i am missing in the rdb-database!

 

 

from my point of view this should not be listed as mixed by.

if you add a 'compiled by' it says nothing about unmixed or overlapping.

maybe you guys are able to find a solution that users can see this information on a release-screen.

 

ok! enough from me. sorry for beeing tedious ;)

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...