Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Like a magnifying lens, only with rocks.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


           

Histogram Shuffle

Draw a Curve to Determine Song Frequency
  (+4)
(+4)
  [vote for,
against]

Imagine your music library lined up album by album on the X axis. The Y axis will be % of album to be played. Now, draw a line, squiggly, gaussian, whatever and avoiding (lower on the Y axis) some albums/bands/genres and increasing the frequency of other albums/bands/genres. This will adjust the frequency of the songs played in the shuffle according to your drawn curve. This would be an easy to steer your shuffle away from the stuff you gotten bored of and a faster way to change it around if you like.
leinypoo13, Sep 10 2010

Perhaps this will serve as an explanation. http://www.youtube....watch?v=pUlw3ACdN5s
[rcarty, Sep 11 2010]

[link]






       I like this idea, except that it might be a little self-prophesying. As the albums at the higher z lines keep coalescing back to the zero, the lower lines, farther along the x, will be increasingly less likely to pop up in a random draw. There may come a time when you think "why haven't I heard that one-hit-wonder song in a while?".   

       I wonder if there is a solution (middle-ground) for this...
Wily Peyote, Sep 10 2010
  

       You need to equate “high rated” with “not yet rated”, and differentiate both of those with “low rated” at the other end of the scale.   

       Incidentally, I have a problem with iTunes star rating, which I think I’ve documented already. I don’t know what the “two star” position is for. I don’t have a use for it at all. The five star rating cunningly looks like a linear scale, but upon closer and more detailed examination, it clearly isn’t. Or at least, not in the way I use it.   

       First, there’s no stars. That means I’ve not rated it at all, perhaps forgot, perhaps this is the first time I’ve been presented with the opportunity.   

       Then there’s one star. For me, that means I dislike it, but for some reason don’t want to delete it immediately (maybe it’s part of a compilation, but I’m half inclined to get rid of tracks I don’t like even though it messes up pre- arranged sets like that) (and sometimes not).   

       Then there’s three stars. For me, that means nothing more than: “I’m cognisant of the existence of this song, it’s neither so good I want to differentiate it from the crowd, nor so bad I want to avoid listening to it again.”   

       Then four stars. Better than three. I like it.   

       Then five stars. Better than four, so much that I’d like people to know I like this because I play it frequently.   

       What on earth does the two stars mean? Nothing. There’s no use for it. It has no meaning. It’s not a step between one and three stars at all. It’s a superfluous step. It clearly should go: 1,3,4,5.
Ian Tindale, Sep 10 2010
  

       That's a pretty insensitive appraisal considering [link].
rcarty, Sep 11 2010
  

       That would require one heck of a patient mouse hand! With discrete values along the X axis, you would have to pause at each value (album/band/genre) while drawing your line.   

       Now, if you could sort the albums/bands/genres such that they *were*, in a sense, continuous (e.g. similar genres beside each other, ordered by year of release, etc.), then you would have something cool. I can see drawing a continuous histogram curve through that.
Capt Skinny, Sep 13 2010
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle