DJ or Ipod

[ckpoodge]

Hi everyone. I've gleened so much information from all of you. However, I have one question.

We've discussed having a DJ at our wedding, and love to dance. But, I've seen some budget posts that show the brides used Ipod hookups - at a MUCH cheaper cost.

Is there a benefit to a DJ - what comes in the $1,500 cost (approx.) vs the $350 (approx) cost for an Ipod hookup?

Any and all comments are appreciated. We're meeting with our coordinator on May 17th and would like to know all the ups/downs regarding this.

We are definitely party people, so a great mix of music would be great. But I don't know if there are any other perks of having a DJ.

 

[pezaddict231]

I think it depends on your group. An ipod would be great for a wedding that is mostly eating and mingling. You'd just want some background music so people can hear each other.

If you really want a party atmosphere, I would go with a DJ. A good DJ can really gauge the crowd and get people on the dance floor. They can also do any announcements / intros for you.

We did think of doing an ipod setup but we would have had to have someone in charge of it all night and we didn't want to impose that on any of our guests.

 

[girli565]

A DJ acts as a master of ceremonies, he will do any introductions, gauge the crowd, can bring a party back to life after it has gone down a bit. He really makes sure the party flows a certain way so any lulls are filled.

An iPod setup will have to be manned by a guest or you can add a technican to the price for an additional price. But they just set it up and run it. They won't do anything else.

We're partiers and we knew that we needed to have someone running the party. It's worth the $1400 to us.

 

[Pinkerbell1983]

We too really love dancing and we had the ipod! I made various playlists for each section of the reception (cocktail hour, background music, dancing music etc) and just switched them at the right time. The ipod was definitely loud enough as they hooked it up to the big speakers, plus I got to choose all the songs that were played at the wedding.

 

[superdiz]

I couldn't imagine a wedding reception without a DJ because I feel like a person can fix any digital snafu whereas if the IPOD doesn't want to cooperate and you don't know how to fix it, that could = disaster. I think the extra money is for peace of mind. And I have to admit, our DJ had a few really great/funny moments that I will never forget and really appreciate. So I would vote DJ! We had Chuck Johnson. Loved him

You can see him being creepy in the back of my siggy pic LOL

 

[ColeV]

If you want to dance I'd go with the DJ, especially if you have 50 people or more. My guests weren't big dancers, it was less than thirty people, an intimate space, and I wanted a vintage feel. I went with the Ipod for those reasons, not just the cost (and during the holiday season it doubled!). I figured our best man was a computer technician and certainly wasn't going to do a speech, so what better job for him to do than run the Ipod!

 

[lpizzuro123]

A DJ acts as a master of ceremonies, he will do any introductions, gauge the crowd, can bring a party back to life after it has gone down a bit. He really makes sure the party flows a certain way so any lulls are filled.

An iPod setup will have to be manned by a guest or you can add a technican to the price for an additional price. But they just set it up and run it. They won't do anything else.

We're partiers and we knew that we needed to have someone running the party. It's worth the $1400 to us.

Definately what girlie said.

We had 50 people at ADH and our DJ was wonderful. He introduced the bridal party and my DH and I as we came into the reception, he assisted with the toasts, told people when to go up for food, kept the party going with dancing and props (which alot of people don't like and think are cheesy but it really got everyone into the party) and also assisted with the cake cutting. We had a few birthdays the week of our wedding so he made those anouncements also.

Everyone up dancing.

Props - except my DH with the Mickey Groom Ears - those he owns and wears whenever possible (cheesy yes - but everyone loved them)

My DH and our ringbearer on the dance floor.

I also would not want to make any one of our guests responsible for playing the music at our wedding.

Linda

 

[aimeeblonde]

I would go with the DJ. It might be more expensive but at least you can set your mind at ease when it comes to your guest's entertainment. And like they said, a DJ can also emcee, so you already have that! Plus a DJ will give the party a more....lively but formal atmosphere. It shows that you took the time to hire one and do a programme.

 

[KrisJenn1210]

We're going with the iPod setup for ours. Our event is 12-5pm and mostly family, so not sure how much dancing there will be. I would have loved to have a DJ, but since it's holiday season and prices double, we decided to spend the money elsewhere. If we were having an evening event, this probably wouldn't be a question and we would go with the DJ. I know my family is not much for dancing, but DF's is up for anything, so hopefully the iPod will provide some opportunity for dancing if people want to. As far as someone running the sound, we'll have to see who we can beg to do it.

 

[DisneyDJChuck]

I couldn't imagine a wedding reception without a DJ because I feel like a person can fix any digital snafu whereas if the IPOD doesn't want to cooperate and you don't know how to fix it, that could = disaster. I think the extra money is for peace of mind. And I have to admit, our DJ had a few really great/funny moments that I will never forget and really appreciate. So I would vote DJ! We had Chuck Johnson. Loved him

You can see him being creepy in the back of my siggy pic LOL

Hope you two are doing well! I think I would look better in the background with red eyes, though.