Digital listening

michael

Bring out the vacuum
Hey all,

I've been reading for a couple of weeks and thinking this could be a good place to kick off a discussion on how digital media has affected our listening habits. I download a lot, I listen to a lot of ripped music from CDs and vinyl on my PC, and I also have a portable HDD player which I obviously use plenty when I wander about.

So here's a couple of points that come to mind, as some sort of start.

1. Being able to shuffle through a huge collection of music is like having the radio on a station where the world's most ambivalent DJ is playing only songs I've heard before.

I use shuffle plenty. Hearing individual tracks way out of context is something truly fresh ("like slang from 83"). At the same time I find it's a real relief when I hit a track from an album I like and decide to play the whole thing. It reminds me that despite loving various kinds of music that are driven by singles, what one of the benefits of the album format is for a listener.

2. Wanting to hear new music can override my ability to listen to new music.

This is one habit, not being able to listen to even a single track without wanting to skip, but surfaces in two different contexts: download addiction and simply having a big chunk of my music collection in a format that I can access really readily.

The first is pretty straightforward - it's just that obsessive collector thing.. seeing it was easy to grab some new sounds so naturally looking for more. So I'll set up downloads, come back to my PC and have about 5 albums worth of material to check out... do you think I finish even one track? Nah. 10 seconds, skip in a minute, 10 seconds, skip to next track, repeat... I was specific in saying this habit impacts on my ability to listen to new music, because naturally the more foreign the music I've downloaded is to what I'm used to, the less likely I am to get a positive impression when flicking through it like life will end if I don't hurry up and queue some more downloads. Perish the thought that a track might rely on building momentum or, really, any kind of dynamic shifts at all...

I've been trying to counter this recently. The obvious one is not downloading stuff when I know I've got things that even may be worth giving a better go. I've also tried dumping one new album on to my player at a time, and listen to the thing without skipping any track unless it's truly horrific.

On to the second point. This is pretty straightforward too. Now that I have x number of gigabytes of music I'm forever thinking about what else I could be listening to.


...I'm sure I could intellectualise this stuff a lot more. I've read an article on shuffle culture, relating it to post-modernism and the rise of collage in art and all the rest. But for now I'll just leave you with these simple experiences of mine and see what else comes up! ;)
 

Woebot

Well-known member
seems like it become easier and easier not to listen at all. maybe this is shown up in something like the grime dvds wherein the currency of the scene's product is strongly visual.

i have been thinking about this sort of thing quite alot. if one looks at musical scenes as being essentially means of marking out tribal affiliation then their visual/social element isnt insignificant (as the music industry would lead one to suspect, it being in the business of selling sounds). ok we have mtv, but thats essential function is as the motor of record sales.

is it then too difficult to conceive that the same tribal cultures who have up untill this point used music as a rallying point might now be switching (certainly at their vanguard) to different sensoral focal points? perhaps this might explain one aspect of the delibidinisation of music qua music? perhaps that you are/one is an "iPod" user is what is significant, rather than what you're listening to?
 

egg

Dumpy's Rusty Nut
Do you think in the rush of listening/ ease of skipping that shorter albums/ tracks have a higher chance of being listened to ('oh well i'll leave this on cause it's only 1minute 47' e.g.)?

Hmm, I'm hoping that non-physical media may actually inspire the return of the album format - LPs were around 40 minutes because that's what the carrier could take, CDs came along and lots of artists started making 72 minute albums, but non-physical media takes the time constraint out of it and so if people are going to make a collection of songs they will feel less distracted by that and end up focusing more readily on getting the best 'set' they can.

Which I think is a good thing. Bring back 36 minute albums!
 

stevienixed

i suffer rock
I never ever use shuffle. I still like to think the artist (or someone else) made the order of the tracks for a reason. Even if the record is more than an hour long, I'll listen to it until the end.

I very rarely if ever skip songs. My husband thinks it's a waste of time. I prefer to think that maybe I'll suddenly connect to the song. He makes me mixes. I don't as I'm crap at it. I can't be bothered. Maybe it's laziness, maybe sth else. Probably laziness.

As I live in a shit town when it comes to recordshops - there's only one decent shop - I download more (and then order it if I like it).
 

xero

was minusone
WOEBOT said:
is it then too difficult to conceive that the same tribal cultures who have up untill this point used music as a rallying point might now be switching (certainly at their vanguard) to different sensoral focal points? perhaps this might explain one aspect of the delibidinisation of music qua music? perhaps that you are/one is an "iPod" user is what is significant, rather than what you're listening to?

Interesting to speculate on what these different sensorial focal points might be. The visual has always been important, fashions have generally grown in tandem with musical subcultures although it seems nowadays street styles are evolving with little or no music component. But what different sense could usurp the aural altogether? Youth culture rallying to new trends in gastronomy? can't quite see it myself :)
 

michael

Bring out the vacuum
stevienixed said:
I never ever use shuffle. I still like to think the artist (or someone else) made the order of the tracks for a reason. Even if the record is more than an hour long, I'll listen to it until the end.

I very rarely if ever skip songs. My husband thinks it's a waste of time. I prefer to think that maybe I'll suddenly connect to the song.
Yeah, I can totally relate to these ideas and that was certainly where I was at, up until maybe a year or two back. I had this self-imposed rule that upon first buying a CD I would always listen to the whole thing, right the way through, in the listed order. When I was a teenager this would extend to making sure I was doing nothing but listening on the first run through.

So the shift in mind set for me has been huge, and it's something I attribute to how I'm obtaining and storing my music... hence this topic!

FWIW, the notion of listening to a release right the way through in a set order is pretty much anathema to how dance releases work, particularly EPs and singles. Dubs, instrumentals, acapellas.. recording this kind of thing to my HDD has reminded me how unsuited these releases are to be listened to in their entirety.

Also on vinyl factors to do with mastering and the character of the medium come into play might impact on how you order your release, which is certainly not the case with a CD or web release.
 

scissors

Member
infinite piles of ipod data and infinitely more stuff which hasn't been grabbed and put on listening queue seems like it's a new kind of enthusiasm but sometimes the overflow entails this impatient attitude towards records "now its your chance to meet my pleasure/connection-feelers, dont fail" and that scares me a little. then there's the anxiety of having not 'properly' given records chances and the bizarre guilt over re-listening since all the yet-to-be-unwrapped stockpiles are frowning at you.

i guess digital access to everything matching the appetite for everything becomes a wide pathological thing w/ a tension where how much you want to love and hear pits itself against - or even totally negates - the capacity for that love. id much rather trade 50 minute mixes w/ friends than 700 MB CD-Rs of mp3s, it still seems more enjoyable despite technically being 'less'.

i never memorize entire rap albums anymore as a result of all this.
 
O

Omaar

Guest
michael said:
I had this self-imposed rule that upon first buying a CD I would always listen to the whole thing, right the way through, in the listed order. When I was a teenager this would extend to making sure I was doing nothing but listening on the first run through.
As a minor aside, I feel I must point out that when you played new music to your friends for the first time you never played the whole album through. I remember you would have a whole pile of new cds and be like 'check this out' and then ten seconds into the track you'd be like "but now listen to this" and so on ... not a criticism at all - thanks for introducing me to so much music!

Anyway I don't think this phenomenon is peculiar to listeniing to digital media but perhaps relates more to living in a digital culture.

I remember I used to listen to records by skipping through them, looking for breaks or samples, and although this is analogue listening as a process it belongs to a a digital system, as the end goal is sampling- so maybe the concept needs to be broader than just digital listening. So I would listen to analogue, but I would listen digitally.

I guess it's the same phenomenon as channel surfing or web surfing.

Strangely i find this over exposure increases my sense of bordeom; I had always assumed that boredom was due to lack of information/stimulation not over exposure. .

I think marshall mcluhan and walter ong used to argue that we were moving away from an oral or aural culture, and towards a visual culture. Maybe you're right Woebot. Maybe that's why I'm more interested in photography than music at the moment.

I'm also becoming fussier about what I listen to, and listen generally only listen to music at my computer. The tempatation to change songs, and the ease with which it is done (the mouse click is pretty much just an unconscious extension of body reflex now) make it inevitable.

Maybe we need better music library systems to find the appropriate music to listen to at a particular time more easily.

Maybe it is the search for the best thing to listen to at a particular time, the search for the perfect beat or whatever, that has become the most exciting thing about music in a digital culture. Maybe we're getting hooked on searching, cataloguing, collecting and getting less interested in listening.
 
Last edited:

Woebot

Well-known member
minusone said:
Interesting to speculate on what these different sensorial focal points might be. The visual has always been important, fashions have generally grown in tandem with musical subcultures although it seems nowadays street styles are evolving with little or no music component. But what different sense could usurp the aural altogether? Youth culture rallying to new trends in gastronomy? can't quite see it myself :)

lol! cor gastronomy! that would be fantastic wouldnt it! what about playstation though! and didnt eno have a rap about "smell being the new frontier"? i loved that :)
 

Woebot

Well-known member
scissors said:
then there's the anxiety of having not 'properly' given records chances and the bizarre guilt over re-listening since all the yet-to-be-unwrapped stockpiles are frowning at you.

for real!
 

michael

Bring out the vacuum
michael said:
I use shuffle plenty.
Today on the way home from work I went from DJ Vadim ('Viagra', with the Company Flow MCs) to 'I Wanna Know What Love Is' by Foreigner to some semi-ambient net download with acoustic guitars and crackles... think it was Konrad Bayer from Autoplate.

Now that is an example of shuffle being awesome... and also a great example of disparate sources of music coming together in a digital age... vinyl, illegal file sharing download, net label, respectively.

Of course, recording vinyl to MP3 is completely illegal here in Australia too. As is taping TV shows to VHS, ripping a CD you bought to your hard drive, etc. Wicked. I'm a rebel and I'm never ever doing what I should.
 
Last edited:

Melchior

Taking History Too Far
michael said:
Now that is an example of shuffle being awesome...

Unless it's an example of shuffle making you listen to Foreigner?

Now, obviously you like Foreigner enough to dump it on your mp3 player right? But would you have ever put it on if you hadn't had your player on shuffle?
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Hold up Nick, Foreigner have done some really awesome tunes! 80s MOR rocks enough to have a whole playlist devoted to it, not just a cameo appearance on shuffle.
 

bun-u

Trumpet Police
I quite like using the shuffle function (on my minidisc). it throws up some unthinkable segues...today I was listening to to crazy times mixtape - titch introduces each track and for one he says 'here's one from one of our youngers' then the fall's 'slates, slag etc' comes on
 

michael

Bring out the vacuum
Funnily enough I started that thread on Sturgeon's Law because I was thinking about someone trying to convince me to find the good in 80s hair bands. This'll probably get plenty of responses about the joys of Motley Crue or whoever...

I do have a (completely nostalgic?) soft spot for MOR. John Waite's 'I Ain't Missing You' or whatever it's called keeps sneaking into the back of my brain. Not to mention Fleetwood Mac's 'Dreams'. Hahaha! :D
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Dude Dreams is 1977. Their 80s hits were stuff like sara, tell me lies, everywhere. I had too look that up to find out, so please don't think I'm some fleetwood mac freak. :)

I did see the vid for everywhere recently which was pretty funny.
 

michael

Bring out the vacuum
Omaar said:
Dude Dreams is 1977.
I was trying to figure out what Dude Dreams was for a mo!! Would certainly have a different vibe...

Omaar said:
Their 80s hits were stuff like sara, tell me lies, everywhere. I had too look that up to find out, so please don't think I'm some fleetwood mac freak. :)
Sure sure. ;) Man, those 80s numbers were pretty bad.
 
Top