Re: [DB] Summary of Current Suggestions

Martin Nilsson (martin.nilsson nospam at bigfoot.com)
Fri, 12 Mar 1999 01:00:23 +0100

Doug Linder wrote:
>
> I think genres are important to have, even though the lines are blurry in
> some cases. The trick to handling it would be flexibility. Have a few
> well-defined ones - rock, jazz, classical, etc. - but also have one or two
> user-defined fields.

A working genre system would really be a big benefit in many systems. I
am however not sure that this is one of those systems. The question is
how often people will look in the online database to find out what the
music style they are listening to is called (and agree with what they
see).

The second problem is that I have yet to see a good genre system. It
must cover all music and it must be unambiguous. With the three examples
you give you have already created problems. Is Jail house rock a
classical piece of music? Does the Star Wars theme fit as classical?
Will the new Star Wars music be sorted as classical? Will all orchestra
music be classical, no matter of how contemporary the composition is?

> Genres will be tricky, but very powerful and very useful if we get them
> right. It would be *very* cool to say "Computer, randomly select me a
> quiet symphony that I haven't heard in six months or more", or "computer,
> romantic atmosphere music".

Sure, but is a central database the right place for that information?

-- 
/Martin Nilsson - "We predict the future. The best way to predict the
future is to invent it."