Well... if you're accepting designer input
, I'll throw my hat in the ring.
I think- and I accept the risk of vanity with this statement- that both designs are undoubtedly very well thought-out and "professionally" put together. Each has its strengths and weaknesses.
Besides the question of aesthetics, which we can only leave up to you, one must consider the idea of function. While simplicity is desired in certain realms- websites for professions, services, and products- it tends to stagnate in others- music being the key here. If you consider other music artists, you see that flair and counter-simplicity design is prevalent. Here are a few examples (and please forgive me if you think I am pigeonholing you into any genre or artist-type; music aside, let's consider the design):
Basshunter:
http://www.basshunter.se/basshunter.htm
Consider the background and gradation (on the banner once you enter). I would actually argue that isn't the best banner since it tends to be hard to read, but just considering it as a sum of its parts minus function you get a prevalent intricacy in the design.
Alex Gaudino:
http://www.alexgaudino.com/
This makes me think intricacy through typography. He escapes the clean-cut lettering on '2.0 startups" by using the stylized A.G. but preserves clarity with the under-write.
http://www.colonia.com.hr/
Simple Lettering, intricate design.
NSFW
http://www.sexualmadness.de/
Consider the intricacy of octopus.
In conclusion, the intricacy avoided in many mainstream designs for '2.0' is not always preferred in certain avenues. You also have to consider your own website, which doesn't tend towards the design pattern of beauty through simplicity, but rather, through complexity (consider your stars and layout).
Ultimately, it is a question of your aesthetics and both of your choices are good
EDIT: Your turn to answer a question
... who did that cool DJ on the side of the website?