The NY Times today have a nice short article that clearly explains some of the more popular Internet radio services out there. These are web-based music streaming services that allow you to create a personalized radio station that chooses songs for you based on certain criteria. Those criteria vary depending on the service. Two of those services show the difference between using experts and the collective intelligence of the crowd to provide better recommendations:
Pandora uses “musicologists” who classify hundreds of thousands of songs and artists based on their musical “genetic” makeup. For example, the “genome” of Madonna’s “Let it be” is comprised of “electronica influences, danceable grooves, a subtle use of vocal harmony, use of string ensemble and a vocal-centric aesthetic.” As songs get played for you on Pandora, you can vote them up or down and thus teach your station to play better music for you.
Last.fm uses know experts but instead employs mathematical algorithms to analyze the playlists and listening habits of its members to create recommendations. In addition, Last.fm promotes itself as a social networking site, à la MySpace. Pandora does this a little bit by allowing people to share their personal stations, but not to the extent that Last.fm does.
Which one works better? I don’t know. I’m a loyal Pandora listener, especially for an instrumental jazz station that I have created and honed over the last few months. I have never used Last.fm. Whenever I go to its site, I get overwhelmed by the social networking bells and whistles. All I want is a simple, customizable radio station and that’s what Pandora gives me.
Maybe in the end that’s what matters the most. The quality of the recommendations by the two services is probably comparable. What’s different is their functionality and look and feel. One is a simple, no-frills, customizable radio station. The other is a full blown social network that’s centered around music and musical tastes.
Posted by technodarwinism 
