The shuffle function and depersonalisation

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Depersonalisation might be the wrong word.

I am listening to Spotify as usual and it's on shuffle. It gives me the feeling of listening to radio in the past, of being played things you'd not listen to by yourself necessarily.

But the difference is that at any moment I can intervene and skip a track or select something else.

I dunno if there's much to mine here but I thought oh that's interesting that what makes it better is it's taken the personal decision out of this.

Perhaps as a - false? - antidote to the feeling (cultivated by Spotify among others) of being perfectly marketed to, perfectly shepherded down a path of music, only clicking related items. Of course it IS false here because Spotify knows what I like (like a conscientious courtesan).
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Now listening to Zapp "Funky Bounce". Never would have heard it. Would have given it half a minute.
 

version

Well-known member
I find skipping through the shuffle function contributes to the "gamification" of music somewhat. You can find yourself skipping through simply to see what comes next.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Yeah true! It's like Tinder. Only with slightly higher a chance of getting sex off the shuffle function.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
I mean I don't want it to all be bad. I actually think the shuffle function is one of the best things to come out of MP3 world
 

thirdform

pass the sick bucket
Depersonalisation might be the wrong word.

I am listening to Spotify as usual and it's on shuffle. It gives me the feeling of listening to radio in the past, of being played things you'd not listen to by yourself necessarily.

But the difference is that at any moment I can intervene and skip a track or select something else.

I dunno if there's much to mine here but I thought oh that's interesting that what makes it better is it's taken the personal decision out of this.

Perhaps as a - false? - antidote to the feeling (cultivated by Spotify among others) of being perfectly marketed to, perfectly shepherded down a path of music, only clicking related items. Of course it IS false here because Spotify knows what I like (like a conscientious courtesan).


im always baffled by this thing. I've never had an algorithm know what I like. the only difference for me is no presenter voices and as you say, i can skip what i really hate. that doesn't train it to be any better though...
 

thirdform

pass the sick bucket
I still have to make playlists in foobar. they are just far far less laborious as I don't have to sit in front of a tapedeck taping london turkish radio like i used to do for 6 hours a day when i was 4.

Or you know on the c90, when you were 4 years old, you would not realise until you listened, that you were coming to the end of the tape, so you'd find another song to tape over it and then fade it out.
 

version

Well-known member
im always baffled by this thing. I've never had an algorithm know what I like. the only difference for me is no presenter voices and as you say, i can skip what i really hate. that doesn't train it to be any better though...

You never found anything through the related vids on YouTube?
 

Leo

Well-known member
related: this is what makes freeform DJing so difficult. a good freeform DJ plays a variety of styles that have some sort of thread from one track to the next, maybe a sonic element, lyrical themes, maybe something to do with personnel who played on the tunes, some form of continuity that weaves its way through and makes the set swerve and go off in a new direction over the course of 5-10 songs. makes connections you never realized existed. can't program an algorithm to do that, and shuffle's random for the sake of random can be interesting but no replacement for a good DJ.
 

sufi

lala
related: this is what makes freeform DJing so difficult. a good freeform DJ plays a variety of styles that have some sort of thread from one track to the next, maybe a sonic element, lyrical themes, maybe something to do with personnel who played on the tunes, some form of continuity that weaves its way through and makes the set swerve and go off in a new direction over the course of 5-10 songs. makes connections you never realized existed. can't program an algorithm to do that, and shuffle's random for the sake of random can be interesting but no replacement for a good DJ.
for the sake of argument though; perhaps a shuffle could come up with as good a mix, just by choosing from a selection that is based vaguely around your tastes. Interesting themes would occur organically, there might well be continuities between tracks that you only notice/appreciate now that they are juxtaposed? perhaps the same reasons you like these tracks, but you never spotted the threads before, swerving like a meat dj

i guess the randomness factor kind of limits the extent that you're taken on a planned journey, but you might still perceive that - i wonder if we could do some blind tests? turing for djs
 

sadmanbarty

Well-known member
i'm going to try it now.

i use incognito on google chrome (wanking), so youtube has none of my history. i'll just follow the autoplay and see if anything interesting happens.

i'm starting here:

 

sadmanbarty

Well-known member
don't like the first auto-select which doesn't help. bit of an abrupt energy and mood shift. poor selection.



the rnb original of this is one of my favourite pieces of music ever. this isn't as good, but still gorgeous. devastatingly poignant. i'm enjoying it to properly asses if it flows properly from the last. i suppose similar arrangements; guitars, vocals, etc.


advert, that's not good. don't like this, but a good pick up. bringing up the energy to just the right degree, in just the right away. the arrangement with the strings fits in with the past too picks.


very abrupt shift. though those synth pads are built for that. it's how 90% jungle mixes work. expansice mdma bliss descends upon you so you don't care what was happening for you. sure a remix of this is on a heartless set.


another advert. neat's the link between these two. the momentum between mixes keep stalling. shifting energies that never pay off.


those pads again. not falling for that trick this time. don't like the song.


wow, love this. Bermondsey classic this is. big bossomed girls with fake eyelashes and bright orange foundation spilling their wkd over you in excitement as it comes on. got bugger all to do with the last song.


guitars are back. this is wicked, love it.


more guitars. gorgeous vocal. embarrasing yet endearing pre-grime mc call outs.


guitars. this was epochal for me as a little boy. this is the first idea of cool society presented to me. an ideal i've been aiming for ever since. (wow, that rap is atrocious!).



meh. this is fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQHaCXX9WPM


overall, it's no good. not giving me much i like. the arbitrariness of the selections wasn't revealing anything; no great juxtapositions.

as much as i don't want to encourage dissensus' culturally reactionary inclinations, i do have to admit you lot are right on this count.
 

Leo

Well-known member
for the sake of argument though; perhaps a shuffle could come up with as good a mix, just by choosing from a selection that is based vaguely around your tastes. Interesting themes would occur organically, there might well be continuities between tracks that you only notice/appreciate now that they are juxtaposed? perhaps the same reasons you like these tracks, but you never spotted the threads before, swerving like a meat dj

i guess the randomness factor kind of limits the extent that you're taken on a planned journey, but you might still perceive that - i wonder if we could do some blind tests? turing for djs

could be an interesting experiment. except the shuffle would pick from, as you say, selections that are based vaguely around my tastes. I'm talking about a DJ who doesn't know my tastes, and pulls in tracks/artists I either never imagined I'd like or just never heard of at all.
 
Top