Deathy, you are WAY out there dude LOL
For most of us humble DJs, knowing your tracks intimately kinda eliminates the need for DJ notation. Having some strategically placed cue points helps you jump right to the parts in a track you want to get to. And since you already know the track, the relative location of the marker in combination with the waveform will tell you that is’t the beginning of the verse, bridge, break, whatever.
Personally I think this is overdoing and overthinking stuff by a factor 5. While knowing what comes next is important, maybe THE most important thing a DJ can master, this is not based on the way a track is built up. It’s about knowing what material you have to work and what fits. I doubt many DJ’s will go “oh, the next track would be nice if it had such and such an intro followed by a chorus and then a verse with a break at time xx:xx” and then start searching on that particular string (or even smart playlist). The whole idea is, imho, that when you hear a track, based on what came before, the time of night, the mood in the room, how people have reacted to your previous tracks, you just know 1, 2 or 3 tracks that would just fit. It’s not a database algorythm in my eyes, it’s your brain that needs to be doing it.
In the article it claims that DJ notation is a great tool “to seem like you have intimate knowledge about tracks you might have heard only a few times”. Frankly, if you have only heard it a few times, it should not be in your DJ collection in the first place. Listening to it more than a few times is needed before you even buy it. Then you listen to it some more while you enter it into iTunes and when you prep it in your DJ software (setting cues and such).
Just my two cents as always.
.
