SPFDJ — SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm
Hard Techno · 54 min · analysed 25 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, SPFDJ.
In short
SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm by SPFDJ scores 84/100 in the SOONOS analysis (club ready). The strongest dimension is IDENTITY (93/100) and the weakest is SURPRISE (81/100).
The engine files this performance as “Promising”.
Key takeaways
What weakened the set
- Recurring mid-frequency clash (2×) — Mid-range buildup muddies the soundstage and washes out vocals/synths during transitions. Detected 2× (5:42, 28:35).
- Long static loops (4×) — Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (33:00, 39:00, 43:00, 49:00). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.
What to try next
- Introduce more dynamic filter work to create breathing room in the dense mix.
- Experiment with brief, high-contrast atmospheric breaks to reset the energy.
- Monitor mid-range frequencies during three-track layering to maintain clarity.
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.
Smooth transition maintaining the percussive drive.
Slight mid-frequency clutter during the blend, but energy remains high.
Aggressive cut that perfectly matches the industrial aesthetic.
Intentional reset
Strategic disruption
Smooth integration of a new rhythmic layer, maintaining the driving momentum.
A bold move that slightly jars the mid-range but fits the high-energy style.
About this hard techno set
SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm is a hard techno DJ set by SPFDJ, running 54 min. It was measured by the SOONOS multi-agent engine and scores 84/100 overall — club ready.
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 93/100; the weakest is SURPRISE at 81/100.
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 19 points, moving between 85 and 95 on the SOONOS energy scale — a narrow dynamic range across the set.
8 transitions were detected and scored individually.
Beat-grid measurement (DSP) reports 551.3 grid breaks per hour, with a median beat offset of 16 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%82
TECHNIQUE
How well did you execute?
STORYTELLING
Did the mix go somewhere?
25%89
STORYTELLING
Did the mix go somewhere?
ENERGY
Did you control the room?
20%84
ENERGY
Did you control the room?
SURPRISE
Did you remain unpredictable?
15%81
SURPRISE
Did you remain unpredictable?
IDENTITY
Did the mix sound like you?
15%93
IDENTITY
Did the mix sound like you?
Energy arc
Transitions analysed (8)
EQ swap on phrase
Smooth transition maintaining the percussive drive.
Fast layering
Slight mid-frequency clutter during the blend, but energy remains high.
Hard cut on phrase
Aggressive cut that perfectly matches the industrial aesthetic.
Perfect Energy Handoff
intentional_reset
Minor EQ Overlap
Seamless Phrase Match
strategic_disruption
Fast percussive blend with mid-range EQ swap
Smooth integration of a new rhythmic layer, maintaining the driving momentum.
Aggressive cut-in on the downbeat
A bold move that slightly jars the mid-range but fits the high-energy style.
Technical subscores
85
EQ balance
90
Beat alignment
91
Energy control
93
Tempo stability
84
Loudness control
89
Musical coherence
76
Harmonic compatibility
85
Transition cleanliness
Measured (DSP)
16 ms
Beat-grid drift (median)
Typical gap between the two tracks' beats while they play together. Lower is tighter.
181 ms
Drift p95
Worst-case drift: 95% of the set stays tighter than this value.
3,240
Boundaries detected
Points where the audio changes track or section.
207
Hard cuts / h
Abrupt track changes per hour, with no blend between the two records.
82
Clipping events
Moments where the recording hits the ceiling and distorts.
206
Level jumps
Sudden volume steps between tracks.
Measurement confidence 100% · analysed on the full audio.
Recurring patterns
Recurring mid-frequency clash
Mid-range buildup muddies the soundstage and washes out vocals/synths during transitions. Detected 2× (5:42, 28:35).
Long static loops (4×)
Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (33:00, 39:00, 43:00, 49:00). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.
Timeline
- 0:45Energy Lock
- 5:45Texture Overlap
- 8:40Narrative Shift
- 5:42Risky pressure or vibe dip
- 8:38Risky pressure or vibe dip
- 28:35Risky pressure or vibe dip
Coaching notes
- Introduce more dynamic filter work to create breathing room in the dense mix.
- Experiment with brief, high-contrast atmospheric breaks to reset the energy.
- Monitor mid-range frequencies during three-track layering to maintain clarity.
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 SPFDJ's SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm get?
- SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm scores 84/100 in the SOONOS Mix Database (club ready), based on audio measurement plus multi-agent listening.
- How long is SPFDJ at HÖR /// April 2 /// 6pm - 7pm?
- The analysed recording runs 54 min.
- Which part of the mix scores best?
- IDENTITY is the strongest category at 93/100, while SURPRISE is the lowest at 81/100.
- 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 SPFDJ sets analysed
Similar hard techno sets
- Klangkuenstler — Klangkuenstler - home session | Involve Records & Friends84
- VTSS — VTSS at Intercell Melbourne84
- Clara Cuvé — (Increased volume)Clara Cuvé | Boiler Room x Bónusz Festival84
- FJAAK — FJAAK - SECTION. - 20/05/2684
- Clara Cuvé — Podcast 135 // Clara Cuvé84
- Clara Cuvé — CLARA CUVÉ I UNREAL STAGE I Nibirii Festival84
- Sara Landry — Sara Landry - Awakenings Festival 202584
- Anetha — Anetha – Audio Obscura at the Van Nelle Fabriek | February 6, 202684
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