Full Band or DJ? | Diamond Bridal Gallery

You can afford to buck tradition on a lot of things to make your wedding your own. There’s no need to go by certain expectations when it comes to attire, food, and venue, so long as it reflects both the couple and is respectful of their guests.

But music? That’s non negotiable.

Music is an essential element of any wedding, from the prelude before the ceremony to the final song at the end of a reception. The problem? Selecting who will provide the music can cause a lot of headaches, from budget concerns to how well each option will fit.

While there is no absolutely correct choice, it’s important to consider a number of factors when deciding your music provider.

Here, Diamond Bridal Gallery provides a list of pro’s and con’s for each type of music provider for your reception:

  1. DJ: A DJ is likely the most popular choice for modern weddings, and for good reason. DJ’s tend to run cheaper than a full band, averaging only a few hundred for beginners, and up to a few thousand for professionals. A good DJ will also help overall flow of the reception by providing announcements, and adjusting music to accompany dinner and dancing. DJ”s are great for both couples who have an idea of what kind of music they want, and for the indecisive couple that wants a mix of songs.

It might not be the best option if: the couple wants something they know they can count on. While most DJ’s are professionals, you just aren’t guaranteed exactly what songs you’ll get. Personality is also a large factor and some DJ’s may be louder or take over the wedding more than the couple wants. DJ’s also have a decidedly modern, bigger party vibe, so they may be less suited for very traditional celebrations or very intimate weddings.

  1. Full Band: The second most popular option, because nothing quite has the same atmosphere as live music. A full band is more personal than a DJ, and also more predictable in what they will play, and the general demeanor they will exude. Live bands have the same ability and finesse to adapt music according to dinner, dancing, and first dances.

It might not be the best option if: the couple is on a tight budget. As lovely as live music is, it often doesn’t come cheap. While a more obscure band will be most cost effective, you can still expect to shell out more than you would for a DJ. It’s also not the best option if you want someone to double up as an announcer, or to get people out on the dance floor. While a full band can certainly encourage people to get to their feet, the band also does not have the same expertise in running a party, as does a DJ.

  1. Do it Yourself: The least traditional of the main options, and also the riskiest, do it yourself ideas are gaining popularity as the cost of weddings increase, couple with the advent of newer technologies. Ipods or streaming services are connected to speakers. Most couples opt for a playlist, or a few, that loop continuously. It’s certainly a way to save money: up the thousands of dollars. You’ll also get full control, of course, over exactly what music will be played at your reception.

It might not be the best option if: you aren’t good with music, don’t have time, and don’t have someone to help. Do it yourself is just that: the responsibility is all on your or a member of the bridal party, which takes a lot of time planning and may add a good deal of stress. Even if you have it on automatic play, someone will still have to control the music so it’s timed to play the correct songs during the first dances, dinner, and other special dances. You’ll also be responsible for volume control and need someone to make announcements. In short: a lot can go wrong, and it’s a lot of pressure to put on the bride, groom, and whoever is helping, If you go with this option, make sure the risks don’t outweigh the money you’re saving, and also make sure there’s some sort of a backup plan.

Start planning your wedding today by shopping attire at Diamond Bridal Gallery.

Photo Credit:  Milk Photography