DJLearnDJLearn
Editorial

Where our knowledge comes from.
And where it doesn't.

DJ knowledge circulates online mostly as assertion: a forum post cites a video, the video cites a blog, the blog cites nobody. We work against that chain. This page sets out which sources we allow at all — and which we deliberately exclude.

Where we currently stand

These figures aren't written into the page as text — they're counted from the register and from the learning content itself at every build. So they can't go stale in our favour.

77
Sources in the register
71
of them primary sources
2582
Statements with a citation
115
Lessons carrying a marker

Some context, so the numbers don't look bigger than they are: we're at the beginning. By far the largest part of our learning content is craft and practice knowledge, which by the rules above needs no source at all. What does require a source is the hard core — figures, specs, menu paths, the legal position — and we're working through that piece by piece. What isn't yet sourced, we don't present as fact either.

Not every sentence needs a footnote

“Use effects sparingly” is craft teaching, not a factual claim. Inventing a scientific source for it would be false authority — and exactly the breach of trust we want to avoid. That's why we distinguish three kinds of statement with different sourcing obligations.

Fact

Verifiable statements about the world: figures, prices, technical details, menu paths, file formats, the legal situation.

Needs at least one primary source or specialist literature. For law and health, primary sources only.

Practice

Craft and experience: “Learn beatmatching before you use sync.” A teaching position, not a statement of fact.

One source is enough — or we mark it openly as our editorial assessment.

Teaching

Motivation, tone, practice instructions: “This phase will cost you two to three days.”

Needs no evidence — but may not smuggle in a factual claim. An automated test watches for that.

Which sources we allow

We keep a fixed register. What isn't in it doesn't get cited — and what we can't cite, we don't assert as fact.

Primary source

Primary source

The originator of the thing itself. If you write about a controller, you cite the manufacturer. If you write about GEMA, you cite GEMA.

Typical examples: Manufacturer manuals, legislation, GEMA tariffs, audio standards, platform terms

Specialist literature

Specialist literature & institutions

Established literature and public bodies. Always secondary literature — it reports on something, which is why it is never tier A.

Typical examples: Specialist books with an ISBN, academic papers with a DOI, chambers of commerce, consumer advice centres

  • Dance Music Manual
    Focal PressSpecialist book2024-09-12retrieved 03.08.2026

    5th edition (2024). ⚠️ The research report of 2026-08-10 consulted the 4th edition (2019) — the page numbers in the code comments refer to that one and do NOT apply to this edition. Evidence taken from it: the BPM definition (ch. 16), genre tempos for house/techno/drum & bass/trance (ch. 27-32), level summation in the bass (ch. 17) and explicitly that there are NO universal LOW/MID/HIGH boundaries (ch. 34). The link points at a book wholesaler and should move to the publisher's page.

  • The Mixing Engineer's Handbook
    Bobby Owsinski Media GroupSpecialist book2025-10-06retrieved 03.08.2026

    6th edition.

  • How To DJ (Properly)
    Bantam PressSpecialist book2006-11-20retrieved 03.08.2026
  • Unlocking the Groove: Rhythm, Meter, and Musical Design in Electronic Dance Music
    Indiana University PressSpecialist book2006-11-15retrieved 10.08.2026

    Evidence for the definition of four-on-the-floor (p. 78), NOT for its historical origin. Taken from the research report of 2026-08-10.

  • Preisvergleich DJ-Controller (Deutschland)
    GeizhalsTrade publicationretrieved 12.08.2026

    German retail prices, taken 2026-08-12: DDJ-FLX4 from about 295 €, DDJ-REV1 from about 256 €, DDJ-FLX2 from about 156 €. Street prices, not manufacturer figures — which is why the text says “about” throughout.

Trade publication

Trade media

Editorially run industry media with an imprint. Enough for market and practice statements — never for law, health or hard technical figures.

Typical examples: Trade magazines and portals of the DJ and audio industry

  • Loudness Targets For Streaming Platforms
    Mastering The MixTrade publicationretrieved 10.08.2026

    Trade publication with an imprint. Evidence for loudness targets on platforms that publish NO figures of their own (YouTube, club play). Contradicts the primary source on SoundCloud — there SoundCloud itself applies.

What we do not accept as a source

  • Forums and Reddit
  • YouTube tutorials with no evidence of their own
  • Wikipedia (only as a springboard to the sources it names)
  • other DJ courses
  • product descriptions from shops
  • blogs with no imprint
  • output from AI systems

For us, AI systems are research assistants, not a source — not even when the answer sounds convincing. And we don't take second-hand citations: if you find “X writes that Y says”, you open Y.

How often we re-check

A price from two years ago isn't a source, it's a memory. That's why every source gets an expiry date. When it runs out, our automatic check fires before anyone reads the outdated figure.

Prices and platform termsevery 6 months
Software behaviour and menu pathsevery 12 months
The legal situation and GEMA tariffsevery 12 months
Hardware specificationsevery 36 months
Music theory, acoustics, physicstimeless

Next review due in the register: 02/2027. After that our automatic check speaks up, for as long as the source hasn't been looked at again.

The “sources checked” mark

A lesson carries this mark only when two things are true at once: it has been editorially checked against its sources, and every single factual statement in it is sourced. Everything else stays unmarked — a half-covered trust signal would be worse than none, because people stop checking the moment they see a seal.

Found a mistake? Write to us using the contact details in the imprint. We prefer corrections to facts over a good feeling.