Can You Classify What Makes Music Good?
from the objectively-define- dept
About the time I was starting Techdirt, a friend of mine started a company called Mongo Music. I remember getting lunch and hanging out in his living room, which was doubling as his office (surrounded by stacks and stacks of CDs) as he explained the concept. He was going to build up a huge database of music, and use people to define all the various characteristics of the song to identify "that thang" that made music catchy. The idea was that this information was objectively identifiable, and if you liked one song, Mongo's database would point out other songs that matched it on all the characteristics that were measured. It was an interesting idea - but I wasn't convinced "that thang" was objectively identifiable. Microsoft disagreed and eventually bought the company - but never really introduced the service Jeremy described to me in his living room that day. Now, it appears that another startup is trying to do the exact same thing. Soundflavor is trying to recommend music based on breaking down each song into more than 700 component parts and having human listeners define each and every one to figure out what makes the song sound the way it does. I'm still not convinced what makes music good can be defined in such a calculated way, but it seems that everyone is trying to figure out the best way to recommend new music to people. Of course, I still stick by what I've said in the past. This isn't a problem that is solved by technology and analysis, but by people. Some of the music I enjoy most was recommended to me by friends who know my tastes and can suggest what they know I'll like. For example, I'm now completely hooked on a CD from a band I'd never heard of two weeks ago. But, over Thanksgiving I saw an old friend, who knows my musical tastes, and as we were driving somewhere said "Hey, check out this CD I got. I know you'll like it." He was right, and the next day I went out and bought the CD myself - and now can't stop listening to it. It's the human connection that made this possible. I should also note, by the way, that the CD cost me about $5 and came with not only the CD but a DVD that includes concert footage, interviews and random extras about the band. Whether done on purpose or not, this band gets it. They're offering you something extra of value for buying the CD.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Of course, as was the point of the post, I'm sure not everyone would like this kind of music (which is why I didn't link to it directly from the post - that wasn't the point). But if you (as I am) are a big fan of early ska, rocksteady or roots reggae - then it's a really nice album.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sampling Error?
The problem I see is that the listener would have to listen to a huge sample size in order to reduce the sample error of the 700 variables to acceptable levels. Additionally, how would it account for multi-modal tastes? What if a listener likes music genres A and B, but not AB hybrids?
Also, how do we form accurate coordinates of the music samples? When they build this database, I'm assuming they have testers populate the linear coordinates. How would the testers agree on consistent score for each variable? It doesn't sound like it could be automated by machine either, given the subjective nature of music. Are there plans for longitudinal regression?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sampling Error?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting real life physical analogy
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=000BD464-9228-1FD7-922883414B7F0000
Ar e not musical tastes like sand dunes, drifting through the whims of taste as a function of time?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here we go again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here we go again
fscking-A
I thougth that was the entire point.
Currently, I'm listening to Atari Teenage Riot remixes of Bork that I probably whould have thought to be completely unlistenable at another point in life. ...and for once in my life I finally understand the whole genre of dissident music... something my "appreciation of music" class I took in college completely failed to do.
Go figure...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
all previous posters are fscking morons...
Hell, if people are willing to part with money (esp. these days), then the music is probably "good".
Reminds me of the psychologist who was interviewing a famious bank robber and asked him "why do you rob banks?" in the hope of finding some deep Froidian need that drove them to banks. The answer (blindingly obvious): "Because that's where the money is."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I buy music...
Do they have a variable for that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]