• How many hours a day do you listen to music?

    25 jan 2008, 02:38

    I'm really bored, and procrastination is big, so... Take the number of songs you have "scrobbled" and multiply it by the average time on your songs (mine is 5 mins 47 seconds... x5.77 aprox). I guess that, as I do, you listen to music in your ipod very often, especially when you're at class and you don't find it interesting ;), but let's ignore that number for now :)

    Now, make the sum of the days you have been "scrobbling", ignore if you used a program like... I dunno, Media Jukebox, that isn't able of scrobbling, and then, the number of days x 24 x 60.

    So, divide the number of songs/minutes since sign up, that will get you a percent which should be nice :). Now, since we wanted to get the hours a day, just multiply by 24. I know, we could have avoided that, so what, I find percent to be interesting :)

    According to this, I listen to about 6 hours a day of music. If I only took in count many other things probably would raise up to 8-9 hours... who cares. Since I'm not putting any artists and stuff, nobody will read this :) Better to hide procrastination.
  • Eclectic test my nuts.

    9 maj 2007, 06:47

    Every artist I check, there's an eclectic test. As if that said if you have an open mind with music or you're just a fanatic of your genres.

    First of all, I believe there's nothing wrong with liking only a single genre. I mean, if you only like hip-hop (which I dislike), that's fine, it's what you like. I believe it's better to know more music and thus, listen to many artists (even if all are from hip-hop). So, by now, one doesn't see what's wrong with the eclectic taste.

    But what about the people that listen to really crappy music, like Britney Spears' and have eclectic scores of 90 or more? So, I'm a dick because I'm intolerant to Britney Spears? Maybe, but liking 50 Cent and Britney Spears will make your "eclectic" score higher since they have no relationship, but to think about it... both are famous thanks to MTV, so it's the same people that watch that channel that will have this artists playing.

    In addition, I think that there's nothing special on listening to many different genres if all what you listen is what you watch on TV. What's special about it? I had never checked those "Eclectic *something*" journal that I saw everywhere, and I just checked a few today (and mine is in the 60's I think) and saw some that were higher than 90, but the artist were Green Day, 50 Cent, Britney Spears, Red Hot Chili Peppers (which I like) and basically, anything you see on television.

    If there was something like an negative effect on the score if what you listen comes from the same source... maybe that would make the eclectic score more exact: eclectic means a variation on forms, so why not think that TV actually creates a kind of music form and take that in count?.

    A lot of people listen to music that you have actually to search for and have lower eclectic score... that's just stupid. Why want a score that tries to tell you if you are open mind, if some people just play what they see on TV and still get high scores? Isn't that still a closed mind?

    I dunno, I might be wrong.

    Yet, what I think is all what matter is that one should search for new music all the time until you find genres that you like. So what if you don't like all genres? As long as you searched and tried as much as possible, I think you have an excellent reason to like what you like and that's all you need. If you haven't tried rock and you just heard some things that a friend showed you, you don't have good reasons to dislike it, same goes to any genre. You have to listen to it for a while to be able to understand it and identify yourself in it. I didn't identify myself in any hip-hop song I ever heard and same goes to many other genres I don't like. I identified myself on rock, metal, classical and now I'm really into jazz... I might not have a really eclectic taste, but I'm gonna say, with no modesty, that my taste has more shape than most people I know, because I have tried things... Eclectic should mean nothing.

    Britney Spears50 CentGreen DayRed Hot Chili PeppersAyreonLiquid Tension ExperimentChristina AguileraThe KillersThe BeatlesIron MaidenRadioheadWolfgang Amadeus MozartMiles DavisJohn Coltrane
  • Rythmbox on Gnome has everything you need.

    3 maj 2007, 00:15

    Honestly, when I moved to linux, the first thing I missed was iTunes. I used Amarok for a long time, I tried Exaile!, among many others (all the classically recommended) except for Rythmbox. Maybe it was because I was used to Windows, in which the software which was already there sucked most of times (IE, WMP, etc.).

    After the update to Ubuntu Feisty (I just updated today) I honestly think Rythmbox finally has reached a very good status to the point that I prefer it to any other media player. It's written in C, so it's faster and has as many features as I need...

    That's pretty much all. :)
  • Hooked up with a song.

    16 apr 2007, 08:10

    Acid Rain. I'm just addicted to it. Ever since I got addicted to Ayreon's Day Five: Voices, I hadn't listened so much to a single song.

    Oh well, this better stops soon, because after the addiction usually comes a short hate of the song and then I like it again, which makes it all strange :S.

    It's just how weird I am... or maybe I'm not that weird? I dunno.
  • Why do I hate sold-out artists so much?

    16 apr 2007, 04:47

    Everytime I see artists like the mexican RBD or the senseless reggaeton with it's increasing popularity, I complain as hard as I can. Damn, I can really rant on it.

    Everyone in my family start telling me that it shouldn't affect me, that if I don't like that I can just ignore it and be tolerant.

    Tolerant my nuts. If I can't stand it, it's for a good reason.

    They are sold out. They don't care for music, They don't make music and they have no idea about what it is to be a real artist. I'm not an artist because I don't have the talent to compose or to do something special with the sounds and rythms, even tough I would really love to do it. So, I will stay as I am, enjoy the good compositions out there and do other things I like and I'm good at.

    But this people just don't. They are not good. Somebody else composes for them or when there are strange cases in which they actually do the stuff themselves, the songs suck. Why? Because it's all "I want to be famous". If someone is going to be in the music business just because it's business, they better shut the fuck up and die.

    Artists, real artists, like Arjen Lucassen from Ayreon or important bands like Kamelot who do their own stuff are not receiving the fame they deserve because some stupid people is falling for MTV and publicity in general.


    That's what really affects me. If they weren't an influence to young people (and old people too, for shame) it wouldn't matter. But they are some of the worst influence out there. A pedophile might be a fucking bitch who is completely fucked up and ruins children's lives, sure. But how many lives can he/she ruin? Britney Spears is a dickhead-bulimic-drogadict asshole whose fame is influencing millions of girls and getting them into losing their own personality and, what's the real bad thing, turning it into a fucked up image like Britney's. Is she worth of being famous? is she something special? does she have a special talent? She was hot for sure, but that doesn't mean she's made for being into the music business.

    That's why I care: fucked up idols can really mess up society.

    And I'm not saying Burzum's founder and others are a better example to follow for society... but I'm sure pop stars are far away from helping this world.

    Reggaeton artists are such low shit. The rythm is good to dance in bars and all... pretty good I accept. But other than that? where's the value in music? why do they do it? what are they provoking in society? Because I don't mean to be too conservative, but I'm sure that the image of an asshole with more jewels and golden chains than brains and common sense is surely not the best. "Hey look, I'm cool and famous, imitate me" What the fuck? There are lyrics where the artists in reggaeton music actually say this kind of sentences and it's pretty common. "They all want me, be like me" I would prefer to be a vegetarian, and that's saying much. And if you ask them why are they into music, they will answer some bullshit referring to women or fame. They don't care for music, they don't care for giving good lyrics or quality music. Why don't they better become drug dealers? More money and more women. And there would be a good chance this trashy morons would get in jail, which is a good plus.

    One of reggaeton artists' favorite words are "reggaeton is not about it's lyrics, it's for dancing". If lyrics in a song don't matter, then why put lyrics into it? Ignorant. The idea is to feel as someone important. Just read reggaeton's lyrics and you will understand what I'm saying. In all of them, the composers call themselves the center of the universe or similar. Selfish egocentric vaginas.

    I could rant so much on this.
  • How I got into the music I listen to.

    13 apr 2007, 05:43

    First of all, I'm the only metal head in my house. Nobody else can stand Lamb of God, Dream Theater, Ayreon, Devin Townsend or Symphony X, as well as almost everything else related.

    About 6-8 years ago, I listened to Eminem (who I still respect for his motivations on music), Backstreet Boys and all the crappy-pop folks. By that time, my oldest brother started to listen to more rock-like music. The closest thing to rock I had heard before that, were Maná, a mexican "rock" band, which used to be good.

    The thing is, my brother started to listen to Guns N' Roses and I liked them. Then Queen, Pink Floyd's a brick in the wall. I was fascinated by the music. It had nothing to do with BSB or BS (not bullshit, Britney Spears, but they are close :D).

    As I guess most of you did (unless your parents introduced you), I started to dig on the subject, and discovered many artists none of my friends knew about. After a lot of rock, Rata Blanca was the first metal band I found. It's from Argentina and they are pretty good. The curious thing is, that I loved the band and my brothers could stand it, but none of my friends could. I just couldn't understand why, since I just thought "hey, this is good".

    By that time, I didn't know what heavy metal was; even more, I had no idea about genres. Hip-hop, rap, rock, metal... I knew the music were different, it's just plain obvious, but the feeling was something I hadn't touched.

    Then Mägo de Oz came. Folk Metal, one of the best bands I've heard (I don't like their last album, Gaia II). With this, I really introduced myself into the music world and started to read on the Internet about it and not only download stuff via P2P.

    One day, my old bro got Rhapsody as a recommendation. He didn't like it, but as soon as I listened to it, I couldn't believe how much I preferred that music over the popular music. I could feel the music.

    I had a site back then in which I put a song now and then. I had put a few songs from MdO and others, but when I listened to Rhapsody, I added one of their songs (I believe it was Last Winged Unicorn) because I thought "hey, visitors will like this". Nobody liked it.

    I researched a little and found out they were Power Metal. I got Blind Guardian, one band I really love. Then comes Symphony X by accident and the rest slowly came into my collection.

    I believe it's great that it was not someone that put this music in my head, but myself. I didn't listen to it on the TV, I didn't find out because people next to me loved it. It's just the music I like. No brainwash.

    How about you? How did you get into the music you listen to?
  • I guess I just get too distracted.

    7 apr 2007, 07:39

    So, today I decided I should look up at the bands I listen too. I started to look... Iron Maiden, Ayreon, etc.

    "Where's Neal Morse? I've been listening to it a lot lately"

    After I did a better search and find I only have 29 plays, I realize that songs from Neal Morse last about 20 minutes each. And my favorite (The Door) lasts over 29 minutes.

    I don't really care about having more or less tracks played... after all, I hadn't seen until today the fact I beat 20k tracks some time ago. What I care about is that a great artist as Neal Morse will not get the recognition he deserves.

    I think that's actually a big problem. Some artists, like Neal Morse and Opeth, might have been heard way more than they are recognized. Much more time, but that won't notice as much as it should.

    I can't complain. is already giving a pretty good service for free (although they do have some ways of making money, but one has to eat), but I still wish there was a system to prevent this lack of recognition.

    Neal Morse has 210,433 tracks played. Average song is about 20 minutes (I don't have all albums so I can't really check... I can't find them all). That would mean 4,208,660 minutes played.

    The Who have 5,857,388 tracks played, with an average of more or less, 4 minutes per song (I have plenty of their songs and that's the result). That would stand for a little over 23.5 million minutes played. I know that this band is way more popular than Neal Morse. I know they have been heard a lot more. But the difference that was 5,857,388 over 210,433, compared to the now 23.5 million to 4.2 million looks much smaller.
  • Yes, finally more songs from Thaumasia.

    12 feb 2007, 04:07

    After a long time, Thaumasia releases new songs.

    It's not for advertising, but Thaumasia is formed by one person who performs all instruments and does... everything. Is an imaginary band from a friend, but I must say his music (progressive rock, puts lof of techno on it) is very original and I like it, but it had been lots of months since he didn't make any music.

    I will guess you don't really care about my friend's music, but it's kinda fascinating to see how one almost forgets about a band when it doesn't release anything new for a long time, but when the new stuff comes out, you remember how good all the music is and start to re-listen to all of it once again.

    Now, that doesn't happen with "classic" bands like Guns'n Roses, Metallica (I don't care for their new stuff), Queen or lots of others, yet, I bet I would listen to Queen and Guns a lot more if they were releasing new stuff with the same quality.
  • Come on, keep ranting against iPods

    23 aug 2006, 05:59

    I can't believe how many people react in such a rude way against the popular iPods. I know, lot of people that don't even care about music buy them just because it's fashionable, but there a millions of others (like me, I said it, happy?) that use it and need it.

    Personally, my computer is good, it's fast, but with no RAM, running iTunes or almost any media player makes it unstable while being on it. Thus, I connect my iPod to my stereo system (two buffers and a few other things... works fine!) and I save RAM from my PC.

    Also, when I bring my iPod out of my house with me (duh, with who else?) I never know what I will be willing to listen to. I just need the variety of songs I have, and my 20gigs iPod allow me to do that.


    Oh, I have listened to more than 40 gigs of music in the last year. That's excluding how many times I've listened to my favorite songs (IOW, excluding repetitions).

    Those who really do listen to a lot of music know how important is to listen what represents your mood. When I'm angry I just won't want to listen to Radiohead, when I'm sad, save me from emo or I will go lemming (suicidal).

    I just can't stand the idea of hating something only for the reason of it being popular. YES, new Metallica sucks, I agree. But that's not always the case... I don't like rants damnit.