Dj for 50-60 guests?

The wedding day schedule starting at noon followed by reception 2pm is a good time in between to get pictures taken of the family and as a couple alone. Cocktail hour (if works) starts 2pm and have the celebration starting 2:30pm so your guests get to party into the evening.

As for DJ, its your call to get if the budget fits the timing frame your looking 6 hours (2-8pm). The basic package would be enough and if the DJ is including the MC as part of the deal, can't get any better. We had 72 guests and wedding schedule started 1pm and ended at 1am with a DJ from 4:30pm - 1am.

View quoted message Thank you for your reply,we have a cocktail reception before the dinner with a little bit of food,we think we're going to see if we can change the time to finish by atleast 11pm.We've been looking into bands hoping to find one for a descent price.As soon as you said wedding singer I pictured Adam Sandler,might just have to hire one!

View quoted message

I'm assuming your ceremony is at noon. If this timeline is suggested by your venue and you're not married to the idea (pun intended), I would revisit this. Of course, take this with your own grain of salt. If your ceremony is at noon, that means most people are out the door by 11am or so, plus however long it takes for them to dress up before hand. They are not likely to eat before leaving, maybe breakfast in the morning. By 2pm when the meal is supposed to start, everyone's going to be starving. I suggest bumping things earlier into the day for a brunch reception or push it later and make it a dinner (Sunday weddings ending at 10-11pm is fine).

In regards to your DJ question, I agree with Kelcie that it's probably not the best investment, especially if you're sticking to your original timeline. If you're looking for laid back but want some spectacle, maybe a jazz-pop musician or a wedding singer. Think of the wedding scene in "The Hangover" (minus the dirty ad-lib lyrics).

As for MCs, have you considered your BM and MOH? If they're the outgoing witty type (who can hold back on comments and jokes that aren't PG13), that's an option.

View quoted message Thank you for your input Kelcie! It seems like an Odd timeline,I might see if we can change it up a bit.But as for it being a club feel,we didn't really want that I thought maybe a Dj would be useful as an MC aswell, didnt want to hire a separate person for that role but if were planning on having a little bit of a laid back reception live music would be better.

Honestly, I’m not sure a DJ would be worth the investment. I think professional DJs are generally preferable to DIY music if the couple wants their reception to be a bumpin, club-like dance party. This is because DJs can read the room and adapt accordingly, handle transitions to avoid lulls/abrupt song changes, mitigate technical difficulties, etc. But really think about whether a big dance party is likely at your wedding. 50 guests is a fairly small crew. And, as is the case at almost every wedding, a portion of those guests probably won’t want to hit the dance floor or may have physical disabilities which impair their ability to do so. Plus you’d be starting and ending the dance VERY early (on a “typical” wedding timeline the dance doesn’t start until around 9–you’d be ending at 8!). If your reception venue has windows, the room will still be flooded with natural light, which isn’t super amenable to a club atmosphere and may actually make people who are hitting the dance floor a little self conscious.



I don’t mean to suggest that your wedding won’t be lovely and wonderful—it will! I just don’t think a packed dance floor is likely under the circumstances, meaning the cost of a DJ may not be worth it. I would consider other forms of entertainment. You could have a DIY playlist and then spend the extra money on something fun, like a photobooth? That way, you’re providing an activity and those who want to dance still can! Or, if live music is your style, maybe hire a musician or two to play a couple sets at some point in the evening? Full bands are obviously quite costly but single musicians / duos can be much more affordable. Live music is more of a “spectator sport”—as in dancing isn’t really mandatory. You could also use the money you save on a DJ on an extra round of food around 7 pm. If dinner wraps up at four, you’ll probably have some grumbling stomachs later in the evening. Guests might be more inclined to stick around if they have a snack station to look forward to.
I hope this helps! Good luck!

View quoted message It was the timeline that was made up by the venue.We figured since we have kids and its a Sunday that we would have an earlier wedding.It is a regular sit down reception with a 3 course meal and planning on having some sort of music.At first we weren't planning on having a dance floor we were just going to have all family,but we decided on friends aswell.I would feel bad for having a later wedding on a Sunday knowing guests would have to work the next day.

What's your reasoning for having the meal between 2-4pm? Is this a sit-down meal or is it cocktail reception style? Are you looking to create a dance party after the meal?