Quote:
Originally Posted by Zer0
So I guess you could say it did throw up a couple of surprises but I won't be in a rush to listen to it on shuffle any time soon.
|
^ Thanks for sharing the results of your experiment with us, Zer0. I´m glad it wasn´t a total disaster for you!
I´m still surprised at how unpopular "shuffle" is, so I´ve tried to think up a couple of things in its defence:-
Firstly, I often want to hear a bit of music but don´t have the time or inclination to hear a whole album side. So back in the days when vinyl or cassette were the only options, I always heard the opening tracks more often than the subsequent ones. Not only that, but it´s natural to be much more attentive to the first tracks that you hear. These two circumstances combine to give you, over time, a lopsided perception of the music, all weighted to the open bars of the opening track. Isn´t "shuffle" the perfect way to correct that imbalance and give all the songs an equal chance?
Secondly, artists themselves are quite happy to mix and match when they play live. Dylan is notorious for treating his repertoir like a pack of cards, even to the extent of dealing out the same card twice in one night. Pink Floyd, those intimidating AOR perfectionists, often play great slabs of sequenced songs, but a glimpse at the track list of
Pulse shows that they also resort to a little cutting and pasting when it suits.
Finally, as Eno indicates, no artist with ten or so tracks to juggle with can possibly check out every track-list combination, and, although I have no evidence to support this, I suspect that some artists either don´t worry, or get over-ruled when it comes to working out their song order.
So come on guys; engraved in vinyl doesn´t have to mean carved in stone!