FJAAK — Blunts & Champagne #5
Hard Techno · 1h 01m · analysed 23 Aug 2026 · source: soundcloud.com
Public mix analysis — no affiliation or endorsement. This report measures a publicly available recording hosted on soundcloud.com. The scores are produced by SOONOS and do not imply any partnership with, or approval by, FJAAK.
In short
Blunts & Champagne #5 by FJAAK scores 64/100 in the SOONOS analysis (developing). The strongest dimension is IDENTITY (77/100) and the weakest is SURPRISE (66/100).
The engine files this performance as “Promising”.
Key takeaways
What weakened the set
- Long static loops (6×) — Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (4:00, 31:00, 35:30, 41:00, 48:30, 51:00). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.
What to try next
- Use the mid-EQ more aggressively to carve out space for incoming percussive elements.
- Incorporate tracks with more distinct 'hooks' to create memorable moments.
- Experiment with 64-bar blends to further lean into the hypnotic nature of the genre.
- Use subtle automation on delay/reverb sends to add depth to static percussive loops.
Timestamped insights
Each moment below is tagged with how it was produced: “measured” comes from the DSP pass on the audio, “listening” comes from the multi-agent listening pass.
Perfectly executed handover. The DJ waits for the phrase to complete before fully committing the new bassline.
Smooth transition that focuses on rhythmic continuity. The energy stays flat but the groove evolves.
Smooth transition with a well-timed bass swap. The incoming track's hats are introduced gradually.
A safe, functional blend. The tracks share a similar percussive palette, making the change almost imperceptible.
Slight level jump upon the bass swap. The incoming track is noticeably louder in the mid-range.
About this hard techno set
Blunts & Champagne #5 is a hard techno DJ set by FJAAK, running 1h 01m. It was measured by the SOONOS multi-agent engine and scores 64/100 overall — developing.
The engine files this performance as “Promising”.
How the score breaks down
SOONOS scores this set across 5 weighted categories. The strongest is IDENTITY at 77/100; the weakest is SURPRISE at 66/100.
Analysis coverage for this file is 100% — the share of the set the engine could measure with full confidence.
Energy and structure
The energy curve was sampled at 28 points, moving between 10 and 85 on the SOONOS energy scale — a wide dynamic range across the set.
8 transitions were detected and scored individually.
Beat-grid measurement (DSP) reports 601.5 grid breaks per hour, with a median beat offset of 27 ms.
How this score is built
Measured layer (DSP): the audio file is analysed directly — beat grid, tempo stability, loudness and energy. These values are measurements, not opinions.
Listening layer: a multi-agent pass reads musical intent — programming, storytelling, coherence and crowd effect. This layer interprets, it does not measure.
Fusion and ceilings: the two layers are merged, and the measured layer always wins on execution. When the DSP hears an execution problem, it caps the final score even if the listening layer is positive.
Measured coverage for this file is 100% of the set.
Full SOONOS analysis
The 8 dimensions
Not available — the 8-dimension profile was not measured for this set.
Score breakdown
TECHNIQUE
How well did you execute?
25%76
TECHNIQUE
How well did you execute?
STORYTELLING
Did the mix go somewhere?
25%74
STORYTELLING
Did the mix go somewhere?
ENERGY
Did you control the room?
20%71
ENERGY
Did you control the room?
SURPRISE
Did you remain unpredictable?
15%66
SURPRISE
Did you remain unpredictable?
IDENTITY
Did the mix sound like you?
15%77
IDENTITY
Did the mix sound like you?
Energy arc
Transitions analysed (8)
Long EQ blend with low-end swap
Perfectly executed handover. The DJ waits for the phrase to complete before fully committing the new bassline.
Percussive layering
Smooth transition that focuses on rhythmic continuity. The energy stays flat but the groove evolves.
Perfect Blend
Minor EQ Overlap
Smooth Phasing
EQ-based blend
Smooth transition with a well-timed bass swap. The incoming track's hats are introduced gradually.
Long blend
A safe, functional blend. The tracks share a similar percussive palette, making the change almost imperceptible.
Quick EQ swap
Slight level jump upon the bass swap. The incoming track is noticeably louder in the mid-range.
Technical subscores
78
EQ balance
87
Beat alignment
75
Energy control
90
Tempo stability
77
Loudness control
80
Musical coherence
79
Harmonic compatibility
82
Transition cleanliness
Measured (DSP)
27 ms
Beat-grid drift (median)
Typical gap between the two tracks' beats while they play together. Lower is tighter.
188 ms
Drift p95
Worst-case drift: 95% of the set stays tighter than this value.
3,652
Boundaries detected
Points where the audio changes track or section.
152
Hard cuts / h
Abrupt track changes per hour, with no blend between the two records.
28
Clipping events
Moments where the recording hits the ceiling and distorts.
291
Level jumps
Sudden volume steps between tracks.
Measurement confidence 100% · analysed on the full audio.
Recurring patterns
Long static loops (6×)
Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (4:00, 31:00, 35:30, 41:00, 48:30, 51:00). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.
Timeline
- 1:15Groove Lock
- 8:45Filter Tension
- 23:45Groove Lock
- 29:45Level Jump
Coaching notes
- Use the mid-EQ more aggressively to carve out space for incoming percussive elements.
- Incorporate tracks with more distinct 'hooks' to create memorable moments.
- Experiment with 64-bar blends to further lean into the hypnotic nature of the genre.
- Use subtle automation on delay/reverb sends to add depth to static percussive loops.
- Experiment with layering field recordings or organic textures during the final atmospheric phase.
- Consider a slightly more dramatic EQ sweep to signal the final transition more clearly.
Curious how your own set scores?
Methodology and limitations
This report is produced automatically from the published recording. It measures what is present in the audio file: a bad source encoding, a partial upload or a heavily processed broadcast version can change the measured values. Nothing here reflects the room, the crowd or the night itself.
Read the full SOONOS methodology →Questions about this analysis
- What score does FJAAK's Blunts & Champagne #5 get?
- Blunts & Champagne #5 scores 64/100 in the SOONOS Mix Database (developing), based on audio measurement plus multi-agent listening.
- How long is Blunts & Champagne #5?
- The analysed recording runs 1h 01m.
- Which part of the mix scores best?
- IDENTITY is the strongest category at 77/100, while SURPRISE is the lowest at 66/100.
- How is this score calculated?
- SOONOS measures the audio with a DSP pass (beat grid, loudness, tempo, energy) and runs a multi-agent listening pass on top. Measured axes always override the listening layer, so an execution issue heard in the file caps the final score.
More FJAAK sets analysed
Similar hard techno sets
- Kobosil — KOBOSIL - HARD SUNSET RAVE (LIVE @ HIVE FESTIVAL)64
- SPFDJ — SPFDJ on NTS Radio 12th June 202067
- Paula Temple — Paula Temple at Berghain Berlin 13 July 201360
- Perc — Perc - Doom, Bogota60
- Kasia — Kasia DVD – Closing Set After Stephan Bodzin | Melodic Techno & Progressive House | Warsaw 202671
- Rebekah — 1 Hour Loon Calls With Campfire 🔥71
- Dyen — DYEN @Rotterdam Rave Festival, 07-09-2024, Ahoy, Rotterdam72
- Klangkuenstler — Klangkuenstler - Vinyl only session from home73
Test how a set like this one would land in a club, a beach club or a festival.
Get the same breakdown on your own set: transitions, energy arc and measured execution.
Guides: How SOONOS works · DJ guides and research