In this circa 2000 article from the New Scientist, under AI hot topics, there is an interesting discussion of an application called the HPDJ, which is very similar to the kind of work going on at Umixx. I love the way the article pits “man against machine”, and actually conducts “blind” listening tests to see if the “machine” can fool listeners with its seamless mixes. This is intended to be some kind of predictor of whether DJs will soon be out of their jobs. I dunno, something about this musical version of “The Rise of the DJ-ing machines” grates me the wrong way. Is there really a need to create a perceived threat here?

Even if the software turned out really smooth and musical blends, wouldn't it just fall in line with the 1000s of other human DJs out there, each with their specific style or flavour? To think for a moment that this could be all things to all musical people is just naive and for an article reporting on science (albeit popular), I find the slant alarmist and irresponsible.

I see this kind of application complementing DJs rather than replacing them. For one, automating some of the more mechanical aspects of mixing can free up “human resources” to focus on other non-mechanical sides of blending. In a similar vein, imagine how this application would work well in an iPod, especially if seamless mixes are right up your aesthetic alley.