Band vs. DJ

kateh Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:01 AM

Band vs. DJ

I'm having a really hard time deciding which is better for my FI and I... A band or a DJ.

We met with the first band last night, and I wasn't so impressed. For those of you who hired a band - did you feel like a lot of people were up on the dance floor?

All of my friends hired DJ's, and while some were just ok, a few were great and had people on the dance floor the entire night.

I know that I want the wedding to be fun, and at the same time elegant. I'm just so confused. Please help!!!

Mrs. dleeny Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:03 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I would have hired a band if we were having a bigger wedding.

m&m2005 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:04 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

We used Tommy Tunes for our wedding in June and my underlying 'theme' was elegant sophistication. They were perfectt for us and the floor was always packed. They were never in your face or loud which was important to us. We use Joe E and he was great.

PK2BE Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:21 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

If you have the budget, go for the band! Every wedding that I have been to that has had a band people were dancing all night. There is something special about having live singers and instruments.

If your guests are younger and like more hop-hop dance type music than you should probably go with a DJ. Good luck!

leighdvm Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:35 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I personally prefer DJ's over bands, JMHO

kateh Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:46 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

Thanks for everyone's input. I'm going to try and meet with a few more bands, and see if I feel any differently. I know my parents will be shocked if I go with a DJ, but so be it...

Those of you who got bands... were you able to see them live before you booked them? All I've seen so far is a video of the band, and it wasn't live. It was a video that they made for prospective clients. I would really love to see the band live, and see what they're like in person.

Thanks again.

Goldi1021 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 10:47 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

We chose a band versus a DJ because we are having a formal, black tie, wedding on a Saturday night. We felt a band was more appropriate to express the formality we desire for our function.

Edited to add:

Most of our guests are older (over 30) and are not interested in any form of pop or hip-hop music - come to think of it, I am not either. FH was also a member of a marching band in college as are most of his guests. There is a very strong appreciation for live music here which was yet another reason why a band is better for us.

psf80 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:12 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I prefer a band over a dj. But it comes down to cost for a lot of people. All of the weddings I've been to have had bands and people were up and dancing all night long. I think music selection has more to do with whether people are up and dancing than whether it's a dj or band.

palebride Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:14 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

it's all a personal choice - there are good and bad bands and dj's out there.
I always planned on having a dj at my wedding...but we fell in love with a band at my cousin's wedding, and booked them. they were perfect for us and kept everyone dancing at our wedding.
but i've also seen some great dj's at showcases.
i's suggest going to as many showcases as possible and check out differetn bands and dj's and get a feeling for which is better for the two of you!
good luck!

lullabella Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:19 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

If your budget allows for a really good band then go for it. Otherwise I would get a DJ. Some of the inexpensive bands are just not good... and IMO they can ruin a wedding.

wendyz06 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:22 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I prefer a DJ over a band. I really like to dance and enjoy hip hop and rap etc. I hate the way bands play these songs- not upbeat enough for dancing. I never dance at weddings with bands unless its like an 80's song.

janelovesharry Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:24 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

Posted by PK2BE

If you have the budget, go for the band! Every wedding that I have been to that has had a band people were dancing all night. There is something special about having live singers and instruments.

I agree!!! We didn't even consider a DJ, FH and I said from the beginning that this was one area to splurge in (cutting back on flowers). We saw Soul Revival at a friends wedding last summer and loved them immediatly!! (They are a vendor on here now too). I have been to weddings that had dj's and they were alot of fun too. However, IMHO, there is something about a live band, that just makes people want to dance!!

TreAnt425 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:30 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

Posted by leighdvm

I personally prefer DJ's over bands, JMHO

Me too!

LisaLeo Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:38 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

We are having a band...much more elegant. Everyone was up dancing at my brothers wedding 2 years ago (he had the same band). My band sings fluent Italian....so beautiful!! So elegant!

JanuaryBride06 Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:40 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

We went with a band but that's our personal preference. Go with whichever DJ or band you think it the most professional and give you the best service/performance for your wedding.

MrsFudge Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:42 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I had a friend that did both and it was awesome.

xjulietx Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:48 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

We had a band and it was great. I love live musicians. I know that there are some good DJ's but bands are able to adjust to the crowd better without interruption. If a song doesn't seem to be getting a crowd going, a DJ is prettymuch stuck with it while a band can segue into another song. I have also experienced good band moments when a crowd LOVED a long and they band just extended the length of it

I am not sure of the price difference between bands and DJ's but if you can afford a band, it will be money well spent.

MissingTheBGene Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:49 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I had a similar situation, FI wanted a band and I wanted a DJ, so we needed to weigh each option.

First thing was the cost factor, a decent band will run at least $5K, whereas a DJ is less than $3K (this quote is for the top of the line everything, with extras like those TV and stuff).

My argument was that I preferred the original song to be played, I didn't want a band singer putting their own twist on things, and I also wanted a huge variety in the music, I felt that bands you hear the same things. I know bands can play a variety of music, but I still felt that overall the 'sound' is the same.

FI's argument was that a band was more formal an appropriate for a wedding, and his concern was that he didn't want an emcee that was going to talking on the mic all night.

In the end, the cost issue won out, and we picked a DJ, but to make sure FI was comfortable, I told him he can pick the one we go with (we ended up both really liking the one we chose anyway) and he got to pick out which emcee he liked best.

ETA: now, most DJs offer live musicians in their packages, where you can have a percussionist or a saxophonist (or both) play with the music, so you get the feeling of live music for the fraction of the cost.

Good luck and HTHS!

kateh Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:52 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

Thanks for all the replies everyone! Would you mind sharing your bands names?

And how did you know which was the right band for you? were you able to see them live prior to booking?

Soccer_Girl Posted: Jul 22, 2005 11:53 AM

Re: Band vs. DJ

I agree that certain DJs have more class than others. We are going with Scott from DanceJock for the reception, but we are having live music for the ceremony and the cocktail hour. I think using both will give us the mix we need.

Anyone else doing this?