Disconet vs Hot Tracks

[Discomanic]

This may have been asked before, but which remix service do you prefer Disconet or Hot Tracks? I like the Disconet Medley's better than the Hot Tracks Medley's. I also like the Hot Tracks remixed versions better than Disconet's.

[DanceMan]

I had most all of the Disconet Services, from its inception in the Fall of 1977, and the sound quality was never really that good, but I liked the early days choices better than in the 80's....I thought Hot Tracks was better overall and they always had great remixes on songs that I liked better.....Disconet was hit and miss, in that area....except when Tom Savarese was doing his thing....Nobody, was better than him at the helm...and I also liked their year end medleys...but, all in all, I think Hot Tracks got my pulse racing a bit more....

[NickNack]

Well, I'm probably a little biased as Capt. Mike (Wilkinson) of Disconet and I were friends. In the beginning, he was really about getting 'little known' songs out to the dj's. Plus, the dj's he chose to mix the sides were actually blending the work as if in a club. No studio console **** early on.

When it became more about the remix than the music, I agree it took them time to get up to snuff. On the other hand, the remix work presented on Disconet wasn't as 'formulaic' as Hot Tracks. But, to give Hot Tracks it's due, they 'grew' into that formula in later years. Their early work, like Disconet, could be pretty haphazard. Hot Tracks' remix of the Emotions' "Don't Want to Lose Your Love" is flawless, UNTIL they try to work the breakdown. All beat structure is lost and so is your dancefloor.

I have a place in my heart for those end-of-year Disconet medleys because Mike would bring the demos to the Anvil for a test. I remember him coming in with one and asking for my and Larry Rossiello's opinion. It was sounding fine until about 3 minutes from the end where in between one of the mixes a bass beat was left out, disrupting the flow. It was funny to see Larry and I, in unison, turn to the booth with a, "What the **** was that?", look on our faces. Mike immediately said, "What's wrong?" We backed the record up and made him listen. He heard what we heard, 1-2-3-4 / 1-2-3 / 1. Needless to say, it was corrected before being released.

I like both the services (and still subscribe to Hot Tracks) and I'm sure as a 'punter' , unless I played every Hot Tracks remix one behind the other you wouldn't pick up on the formula. I just dig Disconet because they were first, and I was there to see it, hear it, and watch it grow.

[nrgbeat]

When you say formulaic, do you mean all the Hot Tracks mixes start with a 32 beat non- vocal intro, then a 32 beat break in the middle of the song and then another 32 beats to end the song?

[NickNack]

On 2002-09-23 21:47, nrgbeat wrote:
When you say formulaic, do you mean all the Hot Tracks mixes start with a 32 beat non- vocal intro, then a 32 beat break in the middle of the song and then another 32 beats to end the song?

Exactly. I know the purpose of the formula is to help the dj mix in and out and to strengthen the break. It just gets monotonous to my ears after a while. Although it does work well for some songs, I don't think it's the best for ALL songs. At one time, Hot Tracks used one of Jomanda's rhythm tracks so often I couldn't tell what the hell I was playing.

Usually, IMHO, when Hot Tracks says they've 'taken out' the fluff, it means they've edited the song down to somewhere between six and seven minutes and stuck in the 32-beat break.