Do you suffer from iTunes-ADD? (aka. my irrational music pet-peeve)

Albie said:
This topic makes me realise that some people - even those who actually do appreciate the music - just don't give albums a proper listen. If I listen to music, I rarely listen to randomly chosen tracks, I have to listen to the whole album.
Click to expand...

I talked about this with a friend, how the art of listening to a cd is being lost thanks to the iPod. However I disagree, because I like putting my iPod on shuffle because when I use my ipod I usually seek variety. I think of it as the best radio not on radio hehe. I can listen to Maiden at one second then to spanish folk the next and so on, I like that. When I want to listen to an album I usually do that in my car or at home, put in a cd and there you go. On my iPod I rarely listen to one album, I usually play an entire artist's discography or a playlist of favorite songs. Not to mention one can still listen to just one album on th iPod, it is about choice and preference which is why the iPod is a gift from God, I mean Steve Jobs :p
 
Albie said:
This topic makes me realise that some people - even those who actually do appreciate the music - just don't give albums a proper listen. If I listen to music, I rarely listen to randomly chosen tracks, I have to listen to the whole album.
Click to expand...

I normally listen to full albums. It's simpler and better that way, not least because many songs suffer from being taken out of context. I do listen to playlists with selected tracks - however, I very rarely shuffle, firstly because I want to decide for myself what I should listen to (I dislike having to repeatedly skip tracks I don't want to hear), secondly because I sometimes like to piece together playlists with songs I think would fit together for whatever reason. Shuffling only creates a mess.

Going back to the original question, the only times I don't play songs in their entirety is when I want to hear a specific part, like a solo, and nothing else. In those cases, I normally fast-forward to that point. I seldomly cut songs short if I've listened from the beginning.
 
I understand your comments all on why you "shuffle" (I like the radio analogy, Onhell), but the reason I don't do this (be it on my MD player - yes, I don't actually have an iPod ;) - in my car, or on my laptop) is the reason Shadow gave.

The way I see it is that nearly every artist I listen too puts most of the emphasise on the album and will spend a lot of time and thought into how it should piece together. For that reason alone, it warrants a proper listen. I don't really, as a rule, buy "Best Of"s (aside for Maiden) unless I don't care too much for buying two or three albums just to have three or four of their songs - Stone Roses is a good example of this.

However, I must stress - this is just my opinion.

SinisterMinisterX said:
My biggest annoyance with the ipod is that there's no way to make shuffle mode respect tracks which belong together. There's nothing worse than hearing "The Hellion", and then not hearing "Electric Eye" immediately following.
Click to expand...
Or like "Rapid Fire" and "Metal Gods"; these two cannot be separated.
 
Albie said:
Or like "Rapid Fire" and "Metal Gods"; these two cannot be separated.
Click to expand...

Ironically, with the 2001 remaster, Priest changed the track order of this legendary album. They said they always would have preferred to let the album start with RF.

It was:
"Breaking the Law"
"Rapid Fire"
"Metal Gods"
"Grinder"
"United"
"Living After Midnight"
"You Don't Have to Be Old to Be Wise" 
"The Rage"
"Steeler"

Now it's:
"Rapid Fire"
"Metal Gods"
"Breaking the Law"
"Grinder"
"United"
"Living After Midnight"
"You Don't Have to Be Old to Be Wise"
"The Rage"
"Steeler"
 
Forostar said:
Ironically, with the 2001 remaster, Priest changed the track order of this legendary album. They said they always would have preferred to let the album start with RF.
Click to expand...
My original copy of British Steel was on cassette and I'm pretty sure it opened with "Rapid Fire" then "Metal Gods" - although I could be wrong, I ditched the cassette years ago when I got the CD. My CD version is not the remaster but the old version and runs as you stated, and I seem to recall being surprised when I saw this running order.

But like I say, I could be wrong.
 
LooseCannon said:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=301172
Click to expand...

That page doesn't say if it satisfies my goal of not separating tracks that belong together.

My understand of the compilation feature was that you could use it to group songs by multiple artists. For example, I have a few songs from the "Less Than Zero" soundtrack - so artists like the Bangles, Slayer, Aerosmith and LL Cool J all have an album called "Less Than Zero [soundtrack]". I thought the compilation thing was about being able to play this soundtrack album without having to make a playlist for it.

But then again, that's only what I thought, not what I know, since I've never bothered with actually using that feature.


Edit: time for some user interface design. Here's what ought to happen:
1. In iTunes, select a group of songs from the same album with consecutive track numbers (no gaps).
2. When such a selection is made, iTunes should provide an option - maybe a checkbox in the "Get Info" screen - that says "Always play these songs together".
3. When that option is chosen, iTunes considers only the first song available for shuffle mode, but when that first song gets played the rest always follow.

Programmatically speaking: each song gets a property called "Successor", which is only editable by the user as described above. Sort of like the "Source" property, which you can't edit directly, but only change by:
1. Delete the song from iTunes
2. Move or rename the file on your computer
3. Re-import the song from the new file location
That's another pain in the ass, as I'm now re-organizing many of my music files and doing this over and over.
 
One day I thought I wanted an iPod, but now it sounds to me like they're a pain in the ass... :huh:

Especially if you have thousands of songs...
 
They're not a pain in the ass, generally speaking. It's only a pain for me because of my reorganization.

My normal directory structure on my music hard drive is:
Code: 
Artist folder
    Album folder
        Song files, named: Artist - Album - Track - Title.mp3

But I had a few thousand songs like this:
Code: 
Folder named "Various Artists"
    Letter-of-alphabet folder, e.g. "H"
        Song files, named Artist - Title.mp3

I cannot abide such inconsistency!
So I'm moving all my "Various Artists" files to their own Artist folders, even when the artist is a 1-hit wonder and I only have that one song.

I am progressing through the alphabet from A to Z, and I'm up to G.
So now it's time to get back to work on this project, and create a "Gloria Gaynor" folder to contain one song, "I Will Survive".
Yes, I listen to disco. Fuck you. :P
 
With over 15,000 songs, it will take a while...

I don't think I'll ever have that many songs! But I have opened up my musical tastes since joining this forum... ;)

But 15,000?  :blink:
 
Albie said:
My original copy of British Steel was on cassette and I'm pretty sure it opened with "Rapid Fire" then "Metal Gods" - although I could be wrong, I ditched the cassette years ago when I got the CD. My CD version is not the remaster but the old version and runs as you stated, and I seem to recall being surprised when I saw this running order.

But like I say, I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
'

The LP's are like the old CDs, at least my old LP (the first tracklist I posted), so I was surprised, when I saw the remaster! :)

On a sidenote: The British Steel remastered CD is very recommendable! More powerful guitar sound than the older version!
 
I have Hall and Oates' Greatest Hits from 1974-83 or something (forget the dates)...I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes those guys...the're about as far away from metal as you can get!

And Leftoverture is fabulous! My favorite on that is Cheyenne Anthem  :ok:
 
OHMIBOD.jpg
 
I usually listen to albums. As a matter of fact, I've only ever done that "put all your songs in a playlist and hit shuffle" thing a handful of times. It has its advantages, because it allows me to rediscover some gems I'd forgotten about. For example, my all-track-playlist had hundreds of songs by Jethro Tull and Joan Baez. I don't often listen to either artist (well, that's been true until fairly recently with Joan Baez), but with that type of playlist, they pop up all the time. The last time I did that, I ended up playing the album Aqualung in its completeness, asking myself how I could have forgotten such a brilliant album.
Similar things happen when I do what I do more often, which is creating a playlist as I go. That is, I put on a song, then choose one I feel like listening to afterwards, and so on. More often than not, I end up adding the rest of the songs from the album that particular track was from to the list, or start listening to the album from the start.
I know that hardly anyone does it like that because it is so inconvenient, but I like doing it because I pay attention to the music this way, and do some sort of "active listening". Sometimes I compile playlists with care, usually when I load my 1-GB MP3 player. I don't need any more space on my player than that, because I want to be limited in the amount of music I can choose. By my own experience, that makes me pay attention to the music I choose and listen to, and I got into several artists this way.
Nevertheless, most of the time I put on entire albums from the start, be it on my computer or my MP3 player, and even more often, I simply pop in a CD or put on an LP on my HiFi system (yeah, I'm soo retro).
 
About a third of my 4 GB* iPod is Maiden studio and live albums...  Okay, I don't listen to A Real Live Dead One that often, but I still think that I need the entire Maiden collection always with me  ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top