SOONOS

    Yellow ClawYellow Claw Mixtape #12

    Trap EDM · 45 min · analysed 26 Aug 2026 · source: soundcloud.com

    Overall score
    84/100
    Level
    club ready
    Duration
    45 min
    Genre
    Trap EDM

    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, Yellow Claw.

    In short

    Yellow Claw Mixtape #12 by Yellow Claw scores 84/100 in the SOONOS analysis (club ready). The strongest dimension is IDENTITY (90/100) and the weakest is SURPRISE (82/100).

    This mix doesn't just play tracks; it weaponizes them for the festival environment.

    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× (14:08, 17:32).
    • Repeated volume jumps (2×) — Gain-staging mismatches break perceived continuity and force the crowd to readjust. Detected 2× (14:08, 17:32).
    • Long static loops (1×) — Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (39:15). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.

    What to try next

    • Experiment with 'silence as a weapon'—brief pauses before massive drops to heighten anticipation.
    • Explore more complex harmonic layering during breakdowns to add emotional depth.
    • Vary the transition techniques slightly more to avoid predictability in the fast-cut style.
    • Refine mid-range EQ during peak drops for greater 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.

    • 3:12Measured (DSP)82/100Listen at 3:12

      Strategic disruption

    • 11:25Measured (DSP)85/100Listen at 11:25

      High-impact transition typical of the genre, perfectly timed with the vocal hook.

    • 14:08Measured (DSP)92/100Listen at 14:08

      Masterful layering of two high-energy tracks, creating a massive wall of sound.

    • 17:32Measured (DSP)78/100Listen at 17:32

      Slightly abrupt mid-frequency jump, but energy is maintained through the hype vocal.

    • 28:05Measured (DSP)82/100Listen at 28:05

      Strategic disruption

    About this trap edm set

    Yellow Claw Mixtape #12 is a trap edm DJ set by Yellow Claw, running 45 min. It was measured by the SOONOS multi-agent engine and scores 84/100 overall — club ready.

    The engine files this performance as “Promising”.

    This mix doesn't just play tracks; it weaponizes them for the festival environment.

    How the score breaks down

    SOONOS scores this set across 5 weighted categories. The strongest is IDENTITY at 90/100; the weakest is SURPRISE at 82/100.

    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 13 points, moving between 65 and 98 on the SOONOS energy scale — a moderate dynamic range across the set.

    10 transitions were detected and scored individually.

    Beat-grid measurement (DSP) reports 794.5 grid breaks per hour, with a median beat offset of 21 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.

    Listen to the original set

    Full SOONOS analysis

    0

    This mix doesn't just play tracks; it weaponizes them for the festival environment.

    The 8 dimensions

    Not available — the 8-dimension profile was not measured for this set.

    Score breakdown

    TECHNIQUE

    How well did you execute?

    25%86
    Beat Alignmentmeasured80
    Transition Qualitymeasured84
    Phrase Accuracymeasured91
    EQ & Frequency Control (estimated)measured84
    Tempo Stability (estimated)measured93
    Technical Cleanlinessmeasured80

    STORYTELLING

    Did the mix go somewhere?

    25%87
    Narrative ArcAI87
    ProgressionAI82
    Tension & ReleaseAI85
    Section AwarenessAI88
    Flow ContinuityAI85
    PayoffAI97

    ENERGY

    Did you control the room?

    20%83
    Energy Curvemeasured81
    PacingAI84
    MomentumAI93
    Peak ManagementAI91
    Energy HandoffAI93
    Fatigue ControlAI45

    SURPRISE

    Did you remain unpredictable?

    15%82
    Unexpected MomentsAI86
    ContrastAI77
    Transition Varietymeasured94
    Selection RiskAI88
    FreshnessAI43
    Surprise ControlAI86

    IDENTITY

    Did the mix sound like you?

    15%90
    Selection QualityAI91
    Identity ConsistencyAI98
    IntentionalityAI95
    ConfidenceAI96
    RestraintAI63
    SignatureAI95

    Energy arc

    11:0045:00

    Transitions analysed (10)

    1:45

    Perfect Intro Handoff

    100
    3:12

    Minor Level Jump

    strategic_disruption

    82
    5:15

    Flawless Drop Swap

    100
    7:15

    Precise Rhythmic Cut

    100
    9:40

    Slight EQ Overlap

    82
    11:25

    Sharp cut on the drop

    High-impact transition typical of the genre, perfectly timed with the vocal hook.

    85
    14:08

    Double drop layering

    Masterful layering of two high-energy tracks, creating a massive wall of sound.

    92
    17:32

    Quick EQ swap

    Slightly abrupt mid-frequency jump, but energy is maintained through the hype vocal.

    78
    24:12

    Perfect Drop Swap

    100
    28:05

    Minor High-End Clash

    strategic_disruption

    82

    Technical subscores

    84

    EQ balance

    93

    Beat alignment

    91

    Energy control

    93

    Tempo stability

    87

    Loudness control

    86

    Musical coherence

    81

    Harmonic compatibility

    86

    Transition cleanliness

    Measured (DSP)

    21 ms

    Beat-grid drift (median)

    Typical gap between the two tracks' beats while they play together. Lower is tighter.

    202 ms

    Drift p95

    Worst-case drift: 95% of the set stays tighter than this value.

    2,697

    Boundaries detected

    Points where the audio changes track or section.

    28

    Hard cuts / h

    Abrupt track changes per hour, with no blend between the two records.

    587

    Clipping events

    Moments where the recording hits the ceiling and distorts.

    116

    Level jumps

    Sudden volume steps between tracks.

    Measurement confidence 99% · 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× (14:08, 17:32).

    • Repeated volume jumps

      Gain-staging mismatches break perceived continuity and force the crowd to readjust. Detected 2× (14:08, 17:32).

    • Long static loops (1×)

      Sections sitting on the same loop without layering, EQ moves or tension shifts (39:15). Long loops kill dancefloor momentum.

    Timeline

    • 13:45Peak Energy Drop
    • 19:15Melodic Reset
    • 17:32Risky pressure or vibe dip

    Coaching notes

    • Experiment with 'silence as a weapon'—brief pauses before massive drops to heighten anticipation.
    • Explore more complex harmonic layering during breakdowns to add emotional depth.
    • Vary the transition techniques slightly more to avoid predictability in the fast-cut style.
    • Refine mid-range EQ during peak drops for greater clarity.
    • Experiment with longer, more cinematic build-ups.
    • Incorporate more call-and-response elements for crowd interaction.
    • Explore a wider emotional palette to add narrative depth.
    Listen on SoundCloud

    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 Yellow Claw's Yellow Claw Mixtape #12 get?
    Yellow Claw Mixtape #12 scores 84/100 in the SOONOS Mix Database (club ready), based on audio measurement plus multi-agent listening.
    How long is Yellow Claw Mixtape #12?
    The analysed recording runs 45 min.
    Which part of the mix scores best?
    IDENTITY is the strongest category at 90/100, while SURPRISE is the lowest at 82/100.
    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 Yellow Claw sets analysed

    Similar trap edm sets

    Live Club Simulation

    Test how a set like this one would land in a club, a beach club or a festival.

    Analyze my mix

    Get the same breakdown on your own set: transitions, energy arc and measured execution.

    Guides: How SOONOS works · DJ guides and research

    All Yellow Claw analyses

    Drop your mix. See what happened.

    Upload without an account. Create your free verified DJ profile to unlock the complete report.

    Drop your set. We listen to it in full, like a human.

    MP3 / WAV / AIF / AIFF / FLAC — min 1 min, max 200 MB

    Up to 15 minutes for long sets — coffee recommended ☕

    Upload without an account. Create your free verified DJ profile to unlock the complete report.

    Upload without an account. Create your free verified DJ profile to unlock the complete report.