pop vs non-pop
How to organize/categorize one's music collection. This is a real problem. And with iTunes it seems like things would be easier. But they're not. You still have to come up with defining names for the playlists, how to separate, say, a Mort Aux Vaches CD by Staalplaat from Outkast. You could say one is pop and one is non-pop, but that doesn't help much at all, that distinction really has no relationship to my tastes and says more about the way academicians might consider things.
But what do I need? Well, I came up with the perfect system. I realized that for me, probably the most significant factor in categorizing music is the length of the piece. So I've come up with playlists that divide my ever-expanding iTunes library into groups based on length. Anything 2 minutes and under is relegated to one group, the next size up is between 5 minutes and 2 minutes, then 8 minutes and 5 minutes. Between 8 and 15 gets its own group, then 15 to 45 is a group of its own. Above 45 minutes is probably going to be Feldman, Mahler, AMM, or a PolyPunk download from Digiki. This simple taxonomical system is probably the only way such a disparate group could ever be combined!
And this fits really well with iTunes' weighted-random play feature, when I'm just casually listening to music, my tastes are more in tune with the length of each song than its genre. So if I'm in sort of a restless mood needing quick hits of music, random mode in the two minute and under playlist is going to bring up lots of Mae-Shi, Ryoji Ikeda, Matthew Herbert, Dat Politics, the Homosexuals, and a bit of Harold Budd. If I could find a DJ that would play such a mix, I'd certainly be enthralled.
Comments
that's why you've GOT to come to our hellaween party next, next weekend!
>If I could find a DJ that would play such a mix, I'd certainly be enthralled.
Posted by: r. | October 17, 2005 7:30 PM
see, there's a little bit of the librarian in all of us....
Posted by: janek | October 21, 2005 9:24 AM