Why iteration matters more than the first version

Sarah Eve Hazan

December 3, 2025

The more time I’ve spent DJing, especially playing live, the more clearly I’ve seen how similar that process is to working in UX. The biggest overlap isn’t creativity or taste — it’s iteration.

 

When you’re mixing live, the first version of your set is never the final one. You might come in with a plan, a rough sequence, or a general vibe in mind, but once you start playing, everything becomes responsive. The crowd reacts, the energy shifts, and you adjust. You swap tracks, change pacing, extend something that’s working, or move on quickly from something that isn’t. A good DJ is the one who knows how to iterate in real time.

 

UX works the same way.

 

Early in a project, iteration might look structured: wireframes, prototypes, feedback sessions, usability testing. But over time, especially in real products, iteration becomes continuous. You ship something, watch how people use it, notice where they hesitate or work around it, and make it better. Then you repeat that process again and again. There’s no true “final” state, just better and worse versions based on what you learn.

 

What makes live mixing such a good parallel is that feedback is immediate and unavoidable. You don’t need someone to explain what’s working — you can feel it. UX feedback isn’t always that obvious, but it’s still there if you pay attention. Metrics, user behavior, support tickets, and conversations all point to where an experience holds up and where it starts to break down.

 

Both processes also require letting go of ego. In DJing, sticking to a track just because you planned it doesn’t make sense if the room isn’t responding. In UX, holding onto a design because it made sense in theory doesn’t help if users struggle with it in practice. Iteration only works when you’re willing to admit that the current version can be improved.

 

Over time, iteration stops feeling like a phase of the process and starts feeling like the process itself. That’s true in DJing, and it’s true in UX. The most effective teams I’ve seen aren’t chasing perfect solutions — they’re committed to continuously improving what already exists.

 

That mindset has shaped how I approach design work. I spend less time trying to get things “right” upfront and more time thinking about how a system can evolve. User experience doesn’t stop once something ships, and neither does a live set once the first track plays. Both are shaped moment by moment, through attention, feedback, and adjustment.

Related Notes

Article

How Djing mirrors the UX process

Thoughts on how DJing and UX end up feeling surprisingly similar, from working within constraints to testing ideas in the real world.

View More

Why iteration matters more than the first version

Sarah Eve Hazan

December 3, 2025

The more time I’ve spent DJing, especially playing live, the more clearly I’ve seen how similar that process is to working in UX. The biggest overlap isn’t creativity or taste — it’s iteration.

 

When you’re mixing live, the first version of your set is never the final one. You might come in with a plan, a rough sequence, or a general vibe in mind, but once you start playing, everything becomes responsive. The crowd reacts, the energy shifts, and you adjust. You swap tracks, change pacing, extend something that’s working, or move on quickly from something that isn’t. A good DJ is the one who knows how to iterate in real time.

 

UX works the same way.

 

Early in a project, iteration might look structured: wireframes, prototypes, feedback sessions, usability testing. But over time, especially in real products, iteration becomes continuous. You ship something, watch how people use it, notice where they hesitate or work around it, and make it better. Then you repeat that process again and again. There’s no true “final” state, just better and worse versions based on what you learn.

 

What makes live mixing such a good parallel is that feedback is immediate and unavoidable. You don’t need someone to explain what’s working — you can feel it. UX feedback isn’t always that obvious, but it’s still there if you pay attention. Metrics, user behavior, support tickets, and conversations all point to where an experience holds up and where it starts to break down.

 

Both processes also require letting go of ego. In DJing, sticking to a track just because you planned it doesn’t make sense if the room isn’t responding. In UX, holding onto a design because it made sense in theory doesn’t help if users struggle with it in practice. Iteration only works when you’re willing to admit that the current version can be improved.

 

Over time, iteration stops feeling like a phase of the process and starts feeling like the process itself. That’s true in DJing, and it’s true in UX. The most effective teams I’ve seen aren’t chasing perfect solutions — they’re committed to continuously improving what already exists.

 

That mindset has shaped how I approach design work. I spend less time trying to get things “right” upfront and more time thinking about how a system can evolve. User experience doesn’t stop once something ships, and neither does a live set once the first track plays. Both are shaped moment by moment, through attention, feedback, and adjustment.

Related Notes

Article

How Djing mirrors the UX process

Thoughts on how DJing and UX end up feeling surprisingly similar, from working within constraints to testing ideas in the real world.

View More

Home

Why iteration matters more than the first version

Sarah Eve Hazan

December 3, 2025

The more time I’ve spent DJing, especially playing live, the more clearly I’ve seen how similar that process is to working in UX. The biggest overlap isn’t creativity or taste — it’s iteration.

 

When you’re mixing live, the first version of your set is never the final one. You might come in with a plan, a rough sequence, or a general vibe in mind, but once you start playing, everything becomes responsive. The crowd reacts, the energy shifts, and you adjust. You swap tracks, change pacing, extend something that’s working, or move on quickly from something that isn’t. A good DJ is the one who knows how to iterate in real time.

 

UX works the same way.

 

Early in a project, iteration might look structured: wireframes, prototypes, feedback sessions, usability testing. But over time, especially in real products, iteration becomes continuous. You ship something, watch how people use it, notice where they hesitate or work around it, and make it better. Then you repeat that process again and again. There’s no true “final” state, just better and worse versions based on what you learn.

 

What makes live mixing such a good parallel is that feedback is immediate and unavoidable. You don’t need someone to explain what’s working — you can feel it. UX feedback isn’t always that obvious, but it’s still there if you pay attention. Metrics, user behavior, support tickets, and conversations all point to where an experience holds up and where it starts to break down.

 

Both processes also require letting go of ego. In DJing, sticking to a track just because you planned it doesn’t make sense if the room isn’t responding. In UX, holding onto a design because it made sense in theory doesn’t help if users struggle with it in practice. Iteration only works when you’re willing to admit that the current version can be improved.

 

Over time, iteration stops feeling like a phase of the process and starts feeling like the process itself. That’s true in DJing, and it’s true in UX. The most effective teams I’ve seen aren’t chasing perfect solutions — they’re committed to continuously improving what already exists.

 

That mindset has shaped how I approach design work. I spend less time trying to get things “right” upfront and more time thinking about how a system can evolve. User experience doesn’t stop once something ships, and neither does a live set once the first track plays. Both are shaped moment by moment, through attention, feedback, and adjustment.

Related Notes

Article

How Djing mirrors the UX process

Thoughts on how DJing and UX end up feeling surprisingly similar, from working within constraints to testing ideas in the real world.

View More