IPOD KILLED THE DJ? CNet news runs an interesting piece about the ever-widening influence of the iPod:
As a bride-to-be, Jessica Spence was taking extra care to note the details at a friend's wedding recently.Read the whole thing.
One thing that stood out to her was an idle-looking DJ who hit a few buttons on his laptop and appeared to take the rest of the night easy.
"I swear to god, the DJ was playing Solitaire throughout the dinner and cocktail hour," Spence noted in an online forum at wedding-planning site TheKnot.com. "It seems sort of silly to pay someone a lot of money to sit at a laptop and put on songs when we can do the exact same thing."
With their confidence in wedding DJs dented, Spence and her fiance are counting on their iPod to provide the musical entertainment at their wedding reception in Minneapolis later this month. They're among a growing number of couples making personal music players a central part of their big day.
Keeping wedding budgets in check is one reason couples are going the digital-DJ route. According to wedding-planning guide Bridal Bargains, professional DJs charge an average of $600 per wedding. A live band can run upwards of $1,000. If a couple has already plunked down $300 or so for an iPod or an iRiver, and spent hours refining their digital-music collection, it's easy to see why a DJ might seem superfluous.
posted by Annie at 7:16 AM
1 Comments:
I almost think it's a good idea to use an iPod to play your own wedding music, because I'm going to give the DJ a list of songs that I want to hear anyway. But, the DJ does provide a service of being the emcee, and he keeps the wedding events organized, which someone would still need to do, even with digital music. You would still need to introduce the couple, do the first dance, cut the cake, etc.
I'd still go with the DJ, just to make sure the bride and groom are not bothered while they're mingling with their guests.
Post a Comment
<< Home