Do The Order Of Songs On An Album Really Matter To You?

**Goofle** · 06-07-2013, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

Depends on the album.

If it's a well crafted piece of work that's meant to be enjoyed as a whole then yes it does matter because usually these things have been put in that order for a reason over hours of deliberation & thought.

I imagine that I could happily listen to New Wave on shuffle and that is a well crafted album. Suppose that's because every track is brilliant.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-07-2013, 03:40 PM

Maybe, but it would have to finish with 'Home Again'

Lisnaholic · 06-07-2013, 04:11 PM

I´m surprised to see so many people staying loyal to the original track order.

For me the shuffle function is one of those inventions like the remote control; "How did we get by without it?" Sure, there are concept albums, albums that flow from track to track or have obvious openers and closers, but I find that most albums sound just as good played out of order.
For me, "shuffle" enhances the listening life of an album by making the experience a little different each time. In fact, "shuffle" is so much my go-to option that with plenty of albums I don´t know what the actual track order is. The other day I found myself playing In A Silent Way on shuffle, and that´s a two-track album.

Spoiler for brian eno on an album´s running order::

We spent a lot of time listening to the tracks on this album in different sequences...trying to find a good sequence in which to present it. This is a traditional issue in record-making - because a song can flatter or kill the one following it. It was easier in the days of vinyl, because you were dealing with two distinct suites of music - Side 1 and Side 2 - and it was relatively easy to divide the material into two groups of say 5 or 7 songs. But when CDs came along, you suddenly had a continuous stream of up to 80 minutes of music to deal with.

To give you an idea of the dimensions of this problem: I was working with a band once on an album of 15 tracks, and we were starting to wonder about how to sequence them. Someone in the band said "Couldn't we just listen to all the alternatives?". I decided to work out how long this would take. The number of sequences is 15x14x13x12x11x10x9x8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1.... which comes to a magnificent 1,307,674,368,000 - or approximately 1.3 trillion possible sequences. If each of these sequences takes an hour to hear, that amounts to about 150 million years of continuous listening. If you'd like to sleep and have a social life, you should multiply that by 3, which would take it up to 450 million years - so you'd need to have started listening around the middle of the Paleozoic Era, surrounded by puzzled very early life forms, to have met the deadline of early July, 2011 in the Holocene Era.

Clearly, for us mortals, going through all the alternatives isn't an option. So Rick and I, both unfortunately mortal, listened on 'random shuffle' - just let the CD player throw the tracks out in any order, and paid attention to combinations which made sense (or sounded dreadful). That's how we built up the running order, but there was one fly in the ointment: BREATH OF CROWS. Whatever we seemed to do, that one didn't seem to sit comfortably. It really wanted to be all alone, separated from everything else. That's why we put the one minute silence in...so that, for those listening to the album as a continuous experience, there'd be a hiatus before it started. ( It isn't a silence actually - I put some white noise, fake tape hiss, in there...to make a psychological cue that something was still happening.)

My suggestion is to occasionally listen to the album on random shuffle. It produces some nice surprises, like suddenly noticing a track you hadn't really noticed before.

**Goofle** · 06-07-2013, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

Maybe, but it would have to finish with 'Home Again'

I think the first and last tracks are the ones I wouldn't change on any album. Apart from shitty drone albums that have little five minute ambient pieces to break up the monotony.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-07-2013, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

The other day I found myself playing In A Silent Way on shuffle, and that´s a two-track album.

Maybe we should send you to shuffleholics anonymous.

'Hello my name is Lisnaholic and I'm a shuffleholic, On my worse days I shuffle 2 track albums, I know I have a problem'.

Lisnaholic · 06-07-2013, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

Maybe we should send you to shuffleholics anonymous.

'Hello my name is Lisnaholic and I'm a shuffleholic, On my worse days I shuffle 2 track albums, I know I have a problem'.

Yeah! I´m hopelessly addicted to the adrenaline of random chance, but that´s the story of my life, Urban; living on a knife edge ....

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-07-2013, 04:35 PM

I have to admit I do like putting every single album on my computer on shuffle & seeing what happens.
You'll be surprised just how well Glenn Miller & Slayer fit together.

Zer0 · 06-07-2013, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

I have to admit I do like putting every single album on my computer on shuffle & seeing what happens.
You'll be surprised just how well Glenn Miller & Slayer fit together.

I sometimes put my entire music library on shuffle when I can't decide what album to listen to, and also put my iPod on shuffle when I'm driving. Napalm Death one moment Tegan and Sara the next.

I do like the point Lisnaholic (and Brian Eno) made about making the listening experience of an album different each time my shuffling. The novelty of it might make it interesting to me for a while but it would more than likely just sound wrong to me. However as a little experiment I'm going to listen to a couple of my favourite albums on shuffle tomorrow and see what the results are.

Lisnaholic · 06-07-2013, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zer0

However as a little experiment I'm going to listen to a couple of my favourite albums on shuffle tomorrow and see what the results are.

Go for it, Zero ! Live outside the box a little; you may be pleasantly surprised.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

I have to admit I do like putting every single album on my computer on shuffle & seeing what happens.
You'll be surprised just how well Glenn Miller & Slayer fit together.

^ Ok, that´s a little too much of a wild ride for me ! Luckily I don´t really have the technology for that; I have to choose a specific file or cd first, so I know what I´m getting into.

sidewinder · 06-07-2013, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

For me, "shuffle" enhances the listening life of an album by making the experience a little different each time.

I can certainly see the appeal to this. I might be more likely to try it out if shuffling an album on iTunes didn't just go on indefinitely. I've accidentally shuffled albums on my iPhone, only realizing it an hour or so later when I start wondering why I'm hearing the same song or why the album hasn't ended yet. Obviously this is during somewhat passive listening while at work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?

I have to admit I do like putting every single album on my computer on shuffle & seeing what happens.
You'll be surprised just how well Glenn Miller & Slayer fit together.

I do this at home on the evenings and weekends, since I never know a) how long I'll be around or b) what I feel like listening to. I like the variety and it keeps my g/f from getting bored with whatever I choose. I did however create a "Home" playlist that includes basically my entire collection with some obvious things taken out that I know she doesn't like. Gotta please the household, not just myself.

06-07-2013, 03:40 PM	#12 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	Maybe, but it would have to finish with 'Home Again' __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

06-07-2013, 04:11 PM	#13 (permalink)
Lisnaholic ...here to hear... Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: He lives on Love Street Posts: 4,444	Confessions of a shuffle addict I´m surprised to see so many people staying loyal to the original track order. For me the shuffle function is one of those inventions like the remote control; "How did we get by without it?" Sure, there are concept albums, albums that flow from track to track or have obvious openers and closers, but I find that most albums sound just as good played out of order. For me, "shuffle" enhances the listening life of an album by making the experience a little different each time. In fact, "shuffle" is so much my go-to option that with plenty of albums I don´t know what the actual track order is. The other day I found myself playing In A Silent Way on shuffle, and that´s a two-track album. Spoiler for brian eno on an album´s running order:: We spent a lot of time listening to the tracks on this album in different sequences...trying to find a good sequence in which to present it. This is a traditional issue in record-making - because a song can flatter or kill the one following it. It was easier in the days of vinyl, because you were dealing with two distinct suites of music - Side 1 and Side 2 - and it was relatively easy to divide the material into two groups of say 5 or 7 songs. But when CDs came along, you suddenly had a continuous stream of up to 80 minutes of music to deal with. To give you an idea of the dimensions of this problem: I was working with a band once on an album of 15 tracks, and we were starting to wonder about how to sequence them. Someone in the band said "Couldn't we just listen to all the alternatives?". I decided to work out how long this would take. The number of sequences is 15x14x13x12x11x10x9x8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1.... which comes to a magnificent 1,307,674,368,000 - or approximately 1.3 trillion possible sequences. If each of these sequences takes an hour to hear, that amounts to about 150 million years of continuous listening. If you'd like to sleep and have a social life, you should multiply that by 3, which would take it up to 450 million years - so you'd need to have started listening around the middle of the Paleozoic Era, surrounded by puzzled very early life forms, to have met the deadline of early July, 2011 in the Holocene Era. Clearly, for us mortals, going through all the alternatives isn't an option. So Rick and I, both unfortunately mortal, listened on 'random shuffle' - just let the CD player throw the tracks out in any order, and paid attention to combinations which made sense (or sounded dreadful). That's how we built up the running order, but there was one fly in the ointment: BREATH OF CROWS. Whatever we seemed to do, that one didn't seem to sit comfortably. It really wanted to be all alone, separated from everything else. That's why we put the one minute silence in...so that, for those listening to the album as a continuous experience, there'd be a hiatus before it started. ( It isn't a silence actually - I put some white noise, fake tape hiss, in there...to make a psychological cue that something was still happening.) My suggestion is to occasionally listen to the album on random shuffle. It produces some nice surprises, like suddenly noticing a track you hadn't really noticed before. __________________ "Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

06-07-2013, 04:35 PM	#17 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	I have to admit I do like putting every single album on my computer on shuffle & seeing what happens. You'll be surprised just how well Glenn Miller & Slayer fit together. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.