There’s an interesting Wall Street Journal article about how ipods are taking the place of traditional DJ’s at weddings because they cost less, enable couples to have more control over the music, and new ipod compatible equipment is making it easier than ever.
The rising popularity of ipods as djs has its detractors, namely, djs of course.
DJs say that despite the convenience and cost efficiency of iPods, the tiny music player is no match for a DJ’s musical timing and experience with song selection. “DJs can think on the fly and make adjustments,” says Mr. Ragusa. “The whole idea of a party is that it’s fluid. It’s dynamic. It’s an art.”
Some maintain that an ipod lends an unsophisticated ambience to a wedding.
Some wedding professionals think iPods are in poor taste. Claudia Hanlin, a partner at the Wedding Library, a wedding planning firm in New York, says couples should restrict iPods to rehearsal dinners or after-parties. iPod music at receptions may be off-putting. “The whole feeling is much less professional,” she says.
However real life brides that used ipods beg to differ.
Allison Emmerson, a 24-year-old graduate student at the University of Cincinnati, got married in July 2005 to Nate Emmerson, a 23-year-old paralegal. The couple’s friends tried to talk them out of going the iPod route because they felt it would ruin the reception.
It didn’t. Ms. Emmerson says guests hit the dance floor to the tunes that emanated from the iPod — which included David Bowie and the White Stripes. “Playing music is not brain surgery,” she says. “If you have good music and you have a fun atmosphere, you’re going to have people dancing.”
Related Posts
13 Responses to “Ipod DJ”
i agree with the DJ guy and with Claudia (and not just because she’s at the Wedding Library, which i adore). having someone to act as an “emcee” and keep the party on pace, keep momentum up, and also allow for lulls (like time to eat, first dance, father daughter dance, etc.) seems pretty important to me.
but from an savings point of view, it could make sense. but, i say, if you have the budget for a DJ, go with that.
I hope this doesn’t offend anyone–and I did hire a DJ, but that’s because I am not so good at making mixes.
I think that the argument for DJs over ipods sounds a lot like the argument of bands over DJs…and I think the rationale behind both has a lot to do with the fact that the Wedding Industry is so huge. Everyone wants to protect their income–thus expensive bands are better than less expensive DJs are better than even less expensive ipods. No one wants to feel that they wasted their money–so the most expensive option is typically touted in the Wedding Industry as “best.”
Whatever. I don’t think there is an all-encompassing “best” option. Put your money where you want. If you hired a band–great! If you hired a DJ–great! If you put together mixes and use an ipod–great! I don’t think anyone needs to defend their decisions–whether band, DJ, ipod or combination. Whatever works for you is going to be wonderful. And as long as your guests love and support you, it will be a fun party.
anyone who says it isn’t “appropriate” is a vendor that will lose money.
we are doing an ipod not to save money but to have the songs that WE want in the order that WE want. and we don’t need some cheesy d.j. chiding people into getting on the dance floor.
long live the ipod - and freedom of choice!!
I agree with Joy’s sentiments. I think it is a great addition to the realm of possibilites for a wedding. If you are having a casual wedding, I think the iPod is a great option. Just like DIY flowers can be a great option if flowers are not high on your priority list. Every bride, well, almost every bride, has to work within a budget and make decisions as to her financial priorities. In some cases, “live” music may not be a necessity.
Funny… We’re going to be incorporating all 3 during our wedding- Ipod during the ceremony, live reggae band during cocktail hour and dinner, and a DJ for the rest of the party. …It just happened to pan out that way.
This is like the tiff I got into with my fiance, he wants a band, but I want to hear the actual rendition of “our song” done by the person who initally sang it. He thinks it doesn’t matter. We are considering an iPoding DJ. A friend of his who does DJ, but working the ipod and mic. Right in the middle, and I get “our song”. 
interesting article… i haven’t heard of this yet…
sometimes the dj, poses as the wedding coordinator to make sure that your events are on schedule…
after reading all the comments… i can see all sides… i say do what YOU want to do & what makes you happy
I think both are great.. But I do have to admit, I am a part owner and a manager of a DJing company… I love the freedom of choice when you have your IPOD and you can relax and just listen to the songs that you want to listen to, when you want to, but then again you have to have someone be the official IPOD operator. However, with a DJ more than likely your event will run on time, he will act as a coordinator, and he can process a request quick. So I really don’t think “better” is really the factor, as long as your party runs smoothly and everyone has fun!
I think the same argument could be applied to having a professional photographer vs. a friend with a nice digital camera. It just depends if you want to hire someone to know that it’s going right.
We’re paying for the wedding ourselves, and I’m still in grad school, so I think we’re going to go the Ipod and no photographer route. Unless a family member wants to object and pay for it themselves
Try to get a photographer,even if you have to cut back somewhere else. But at every wedding I have been to the DJs are cheesy. And my Ipod is filled with obscure music that a DJ isn’t going to have. Yesterday Field Mob was followed by Marlene Dietrich followed by Matisyahu. A DJ isn’t going to do that.
I’m all for Ipods in leau of DJs, and I’m leaning towards that route myself.
I could see an iPod working in the right situation. It’s kind of like doing surgery on yourself. You MIGHT do a great job but if things turn out to be more demanding than you had anticipated or unexpected complications happen, you may have wished you had hired a pro.
Mrs. Bee, New York
Age and Occupation: 29, Weddingbee Publisher
Fiance's Age and Occupation: 33, Internet
Engagement Date: May 7, 2004
Wedding Date: March 5, 2005
Venue: Westside Loft, New York
About Me: Yes, my name really is Bee! I love my blogging, wikis, and tabasco sauce!
i think if you’re pumping it through speakers…media is media. that being said, there is a skillset that dj’s (should) have where they can deliver seamless and approporiate music to enhance the event for everyone to enjoy. ipods, you might be putting the music you love but not what’s most enjoyable for everyone else =P