btw, how are abacus’ sales doing these days ?”

lmao some good arguments for both sides, but at the end of the day, can anyone disagree that it’s what comes out of the speakers that matters?

i’m not really disagreeing with your point – of course there are extremes of bad writing that are impenetrable, but i wouldn’t know if there was a recent trend for more of this, having not been around long enough… just saying, as long as there’s good writing too (which needn’t be too cautious about its terminology, as long as it’s sincere), the next generation will look after themselves!)

i’m not sure you need worry too much about the next generation. i only fell for techno on 20th february last year(!), but for the most part haven’t found dance music writing impenetrable. anyone who’s intrigued enough by the music won’t mind trying to work it out for themselves.

although obscure sub-genre name-dropping is bound to fall on a lot of deaf ears, i think as long as the writer is sincere and means something by it, there’s no need to spell it out for the newcomers every time (wouldn’t that start get on the old-handers’ nerves?!)

in any case, if you got rid of all the catchy names, what language would be left to describe the music? the last time i heard a useful definition of a genre that didn’t rely on already-knowing-what-it-generally-sounds-like was, er…

that is, unless you could give an example of music journalism from a time before this became an irritating trend? i’d be very interested to see that!

“That next generation IS out there and we need to take them into account, as well as casual fans of the music who are looking for those “gateway” records and artists to take them deeper into the scene”

this is the best thing i’ve ever read regarding house music to me, thanks.

ouch, i don’t think that’s true at all. I’ve only had a few goes at beatmatching on decks but I still find it incredibly fun. seriously, mixing records is very very enjoyable and you really do get a feeling of achieving something when it goes well. i definitely wouldn’t call vinyl DJing a ‘burden’.

buying the equipment is a financial burden, but if you just wanted to try it then you must know someone who has decks that you could try?

What this is about for me is the quality of the DJ set. If it sucks, blame the DJ for not doing a good job of making it compelling, regardless of what they used. If it’s awesome and you enjoy dancing to it, salute the DJ no matter how they brought it to your ears/feet.

I think you can’t stop progress however not all the progresses are improvements.

Digital deejaying offers a lot of advantages (cheaper, softer on the back, more availability, quicker diffusion…etcetc…) BUT there are things that can’t be digitalized. You can’t digitize the feeling of putting your freshly bought vinyl on the slipmat when you’re back from the record shop. Neither you can digitize the pleasure of preparing your djbag (heavy or not, it’s part of the game). Scrolling down a list of song is nowhere near choosing a record from a bag, it’s not a matter of technology, quantity or price, it’s a matter of feeling, like music. Going to the record shop takes you longer and is more expensive but you can have a chat with the retailer, it’s more crowded than beatoport but at least you get to listen to the full song.
I’ve bought Traktor scratch a few months ago and I think it’s a wonderful tool, but I keep on playing also on vinyls because it’s just more rewarding. Further more i realized that i was downloading too many songs because it’s cheaper and in the end you just dilute the quality of your library without really knowing your tracks.

I don’t know how much will vinyl resist but when it’s gonna be gone there are a lot of related little pleasures that will be gone with him and they can’t be replaced by progress.