Author Topic: Groom vs. DJ  (Read 3657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12806
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #45 on: August 19, 2014, 04:35:35 PM »
Unless the vast majority of guests share the same taste in music, I think that it's very inconsiderate of the groom. I'll even use the word "selfish." The reception is a celebration of the wedding and a thank-you to the guests for coming to the wedding. It's not a fawning tribute to the HC's tastes.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

turnip

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 519
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #46 on: August 19, 2014, 06:07:44 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12806
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #47 on: August 19, 2014, 10:55:37 PM »
Deleted because I lost my cool. Sorry.
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 08:16:10 AM by artk2002 »
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

Hmmmmm

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6336
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #48 on: August 19, 2014, 11:25:47 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Mental Magpie

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5112
  • ...for the dark side looks back.
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #49 on: August 19, 2014, 11:36:22 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

As always, there needs to be struck a good balance.  The hosts must be good hosts and offer a variety while the guests need to be good guests by accepting that variety has a good compromise.
The problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is that you're still choosing evil.

Lynn2000

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4960
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #50 on: Yesterday at 10:33:51 AM »
I agree with having a balance, and flexibility and graciousness on both sides (host and guest). Think how generic many weddings would be if the HC pitched things solely towards what they supposed the majority of their guests would like. On the other hand, we have many threads here about HCs who went overboard personalizing their wedding to the point of alienating guests--insisting that guests wear specific colors or costumes, for example.

I think the groom's music playing during the early portion of the reception, when people are eating and chatting, would be a great compromise. Then the specifically dance-oriented portion could have more traditionally danceable songs, perhaps interspersed with some of the groom's more danceable favorite songs. A good DJ would presumably familiarize themselves with the requested music (even if they didn't know it before) so they could create a harmonious mix.

As I said before, I don't dance, so I don't see dancing as a requirement for a reception or for having a good time in general. (Unlike, say, having food people can eat or places to sit.) But if the HC really want people to dance, they need to make reasonable compromises to facilitate that--for example, maybe they would have preferred a smaller, cheaper venue, but it didn't have room for a dance floor, so they went with a larger, more expensive venue that did have room. Likewise, they need to make an effort to include songs that people in general will dance to, into which they could incorporate more obscure stuff once people are in the groove.
~Lynn2000

turnip

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 519
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #51 on: Yesterday at 12:21:20 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Hmmmmm

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6336
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #52 on: Yesterday at 12:47:17 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Even the groom's friends believe his choices are lacking and are urging him to include a wider selection. So don't equate to having a Mexican buffet which is pretty mainstream. A mexican buffet with beef fajitas with no vegetarian, chicken, or seafood options would seem to be more inline with this music scenario.

Even with the cake, I'd never serve only chocolate cake to a large group as I know many people do not like chocolate. While the chocolate may be the largest I will have something else available. My goal is to assure my guests enjoy their time, not highlight my personal preferences.

Mental Magpie

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5112
  • ...for the dark side looks back.
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #53 on: Yesterday at 12:59:00 PM »
Hmmmmm said what I was thinking. Again, this is about compromise.
The problem with choosing the lesser of two evils is that you're still choosing evil.

turnip

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 519
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #54 on: Yesterday at 01:04:15 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Even the groom's friends believe his choices are lacking and are urging him to include a wider selection. So don't equate to having a Mexican buffet which is pretty mainstream. A mexican buffet with beef fajitas with no vegetarian, chicken, or seafood options would seem to be more inline with this music scenario.

Even with the cake, I'd never serve only chocolate cake to a large group as I know many people do not like chocolate. While the chocolate may be the largest I will have something else available. My goal is to assure my guests enjoy their time, not highlight my personal preferences.


We keep talking about different scenarios.  I'm not going to defend this specific groom - but more the general statement that if guests don't include 'rock' then they are being inconsiderate to their guests.  That's along the line of insisting guests include chicken fingers because not everyone eats chicken breast.

Some couples like hip-hop.  Some couples like classic rock.  Some couples like modern pop.  Some couples like country-and-western.  If you have a western themed wedding and wear cowboy boots - I'm not going to demand you play 'wrecking ball' just to satisfy my taste for pop.

wolfie

  • I don't know what this is so I am putting random words here
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #55 on: Yesterday at 01:22:34 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Even the groom's friends believe his choices are lacking and are urging him to include a wider selection. So don't equate to having a Mexican buffet which is pretty mainstream. A mexican buffet with beef fajitas with no vegetarian, chicken, or seafood options would seem to be more inline with this music scenario.

Even with the cake, I'd never serve only chocolate cake to a large group as I know many people do not like chocolate. While the chocolate may be the largest I will have something else available. My goal is to assure my guests enjoy their time, not highlight my personal preferences.


We keep talking about different scenarios.  I'm not going to defend this specific groom - but more the general statement that if guests don't include 'rock' then they are being inconsiderate to their guests.  That's along the line of insisting guests include chicken fingers because not everyone eats chicken breast.

Some couples like hip-hop.  Some couples like classic rock.  Some couples like modern pop.  Some couples like country-and-western.  If you have a western themed wedding and wear cowboy boots - I'm not going to demand you play 'wrecking ball' just to satisfy my taste for pop.

I don't think anyone made the statement that if hosts don't include "rock" they are being inconsiderate of their guests. They did make the statement that not taking into account their guests preference for music is selfish. if you want to only play bagpipes at your reception that is fine, but you can't be upset if most of your guests don't dance and if some of them go home early.

Hmmmmm

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6336
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #56 on: Yesterday at 01:23:49 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Even the groom's friends believe his choices are lacking and are urging him to include a wider selection. So don't equate to having a Mexican buffet which is pretty mainstream. A mexican buffet with beef fajitas with no vegetarian, chicken, or seafood options would seem to be more inline with this music scenario.

Even with the cake, I'd never serve only chocolate cake to a large group as I know many people do not like chocolate. While the chocolate may be the largest I will have something else available. My goal is to assure my guests enjoy their time, not highlight my personal preferences.


We keep talking about different scenarios.  I'm not going to defend this specific groom - but more the general statement that if guests don't include 'rock' then they are being inconsiderate to their guests.  That's along the line of insisting guests include chicken fingers because not everyone eats chicken breast.

Some couples like hip-hop.  Some couples like classic rock.  Some couples like modern pop.  Some couples like country-and-western.  If you have a western themed wedding and wear cowboy boots - I'm not going to demand you play 'wrecking ball' just to satisfy my taste for pop.

I have not said "rock" must be included or any other genre of music. I'm sayng that playing only the genre the groom prefers seems restrictive and does not make any  consideration of what would be enjoyed by guests.

auntmeegs

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3192
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #57 on: Yesterday at 01:40:13 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

Ok, but then don't expect people to dance, or be disappointed when they don't. 

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12806
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Groom vs. DJ
« Reply #58 on: Yesterday at 05:19:56 PM »
Wow.

I'm truly stunned. 

So hosts who plan events according to their tastes and preferences are now 'selfish' because the reception is a 'thank-you' to the guests?

Someone will have to find me an Emily Post or Miss Manners reference for that one, because I'm not buying it.  If someone said to me "We went to a wedding last weekend, but it was totally spoiled because they played music we didn't like and we couldn't dance" - well the word "selfish" might cross my mind, but it wouldn't be in reference to the event hosts.

Hosts who plan any event solely based on their personal preference with no regard to how it will be enjoyed by their guests are rude. Imagine a host who only enjoys meat and potatoes so does not over a vegetable, salad or fruit. We'd all feel their hosting was lacking.

No one is saying that pop music must be included. But including a few selections of classic rock or something mainstream would potentially enhance the enjoyment of the guests. There is a reason all country bands has a selection of rock music in their playlist. Hosts know that some guest will not dance a two step or waltz so it assures everyone the opportunity of dancing.

Imagine a host who only offers Chinese food with no Spaghetti!   Oh wait  - that safely describes a lot of weddings I go to!   Or only Indian food or Italian food or Mexican food.   How inconsiderate!

It's music.  If the hosts don't care for rock, then I don't see why they have any obligation to play rock 'for the guests'.   Nor do they have to offer chocolate cake in case some guests don't care for buttercream.

If many or a majority of the guests don't like Chinese, then yes, it is rude. It's selfish because it's putting the host's preferences first with no consideration of the guests. That's the epitome of bad hosting.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain