• admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Topic: Redesigning the public songbooks

I have started redesigning the public songbooks. I have gotten several good ideas from the users, and I think the new version will be really amazing..<img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_smile.gif" border=0 alt="Smile">


I do however need some help from you. The new books will be divided into categories/genres. Please help me in deciding what these categories should be.


Here is the first draft:

* Absolute beginner

* Blues

* Campfire songs

* Country&Western

* Easy songs

* Goldies

* Holiday collections

* Mandolin collections

* Misc songs

* Oldies

* Praise&Worship

* Rock

* Uke collections

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Your genre idea has merit.  We could all quibble endlessly about the various categories & names, but the general direction you want to take it seems to be a logical next step.


A few of questions:


"Oldies" and "Goldies" . . . Please articulate what these labels mean. Perhaps "Golden Oldies" is what you mean?


Perhaps a category called "Traditional" might be useful?


Would an entire songbook be listed under one category, or would the individual songs be tagged separately?


Thanks for striving to make Chordie.com even better!

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • upyerkilt
  • upyerkilt
  • Unofficial king of Scotland
  • Offline
  • From: Balloch, Scotland, UK, Earth
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 3,290

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

yeah a traditional/folk would be good, but as I understand some american folk is actually country music ? ( only what  igot told) then there is woody guthrie and bob dylan which is condidered as folk, but then so is john prine but could also be country.

So instead of having folk and traditional seperate have them together. This is the way I have my music books in my folders ( not folders on the computer)


there are so many categories of music I tihnk some would have to be joined together like James say with golden oldies.


with redesigning songbooks, does that mean everyone would have to have several different songbooks wiand categorise their own songs into different books?


Ken

ye get some that are cut out for the job and others just get by from pretending
  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

These categories should be applied to complete songbooks.


The reason for them are twofold:

* There are more than 300 public songbooks today, and it is impossible to find the real gems in there. I have to divide them into groups somehow.

* I think the best books are the ones with a theme, and I want to encourage such books. If you choose a theme/category/genre your book will get a more prominent place and it will be viewed by more people.


The plan is to also have a category that is called "single artist". Like "Bob Dylan" or "Pink Floyd"-songbook. This can be applied to songbooks where all the songs are by one artist. These books will also be listed on the artist-pages. I am however not sure if this will be available in the first revision.


It will not be possible to publish a songbook under multiple genres/categories (at least not in the beginning). But you can publish it under "Misc songs" of course.


I am adding "golden oldies" and "folk & traditional" to the list.

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

I like the idea of songbooks with a discernable theme - it will help make the Chordie Songbook feature a much more usable resource.  Ken, you bring up a good point about your own folders of printed music: You have them organized into categorical system that makes sense to you . . . this proposed genre approach would provide the same sort of organizational logic.


Another benefit would be that users would have an incentive to put some thought and effort (editing for layout & accuracy) into their selections before posting a songbook.  It would encourage songbook posters to not just post books containing lists of dozens and dozens of 'un-improved' songs.


Ideally, the Chordie Songbooks should contain song versions that are 'better' than what can be found on dozens of sites by doing a basic web search.  With this genre system, Chordie will eventually amass a fine collection of very nice songbooks.

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

One of the new features are that you are able to see how many of the songs in a songbook that are edited/refined. (Im looking for a good word/phrase to explain this. Please help ..<img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_smile.gif" border=0 alt="Smile"> )


It would say something like "65% edited".


Im planning to use this together with the star-rating to form an overall rating that the songs are sorted after.

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Yes - having an indicator of whether a songbook is "raw" files or "refined" would also be a very good feature.  If I understand correctly; If a book contains 10 songs, and if 9 of those selections have editing improvements then it would say something like "90% Refined" or "90% Edited".


I don't know what the best terminology for the editing/refining/improving would be, but it would certainly be helpful to encourage improvements.  What about something like:


"Chordified" or "Chordie-fied" or "Chordie-ated" or "Chordie-licious"


Kind of corny, but somehow referencing the site's unique name would also help promote this unique feature.


Have you figured out how to make the star rating system work correctly?

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 61

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

My two cents worth re: the public songbooks...

I posted my rather eclectic songbook (yep, no identifiable binding genre) more as a means of soliciting comments/assistance on the songs within it.

While I have edited most of the songs in it to some greater or lesser extent, some remain unedited because, either I liked it as I found it, or I have yet to focus on the particular song (I have a short attention span and new songs come to mind on a regular basis, so I find them and store them for later dissection).

From the gist of this conversation, I may have missed the general intent of posting a song-book. As I said, for me, it's a means of getting feedback and suggestions on the songs within.

Should I make it private again if it's not going to be in line with what's been mentioned in the prior posts?

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Hello tunedeaf - Eclectic songbooks are just dandy - the proposed new genre scheme will have a category called "Miscellaneous Songs" which,  I believe, will be just for books that contain a wide variety of selections.


I think what Chordie's creator/administrator is trying to do is simply encourage users to post more books with higher-quality or improved versions of the songs that Chordie finds on the web.  Much of the "raw" material on the web is 'good' but it can be made 'better' with some basic editing.


When the new songbook system starts, you can probably take some the selections in your current songbook and move them into new books that would fit into some of the proposed categories.


I see the proposed new system as a way to improve my playing & singing skills, broaden my musical horizons, and learn some new songs . . . which is exactly why I found Chordie, and why I keep coming back.

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 61

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Hey James...heck, I'm just here for fun <img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_wink.gif" border=0 alt="Wink">.

Really, I'm here for pretty much the same reasons and because Chordie is such an excellant source for songs for me to try and practice on.

On another note tho, I was just browsing thorugh the highest rated book in the public books and noticed that the song I looked at (Time of your Life) had numerous comments attached. I think it would be very neat to have songs that had received comments have some form of notation in the title list in the book...like an asterisk beside the title or something.

I'd also like to know when someone had left a comment on one of my entries. As I mentioned earlier, I welcome suggestions/comments on all of my re-workings.

And if someone could identify my made up chords, that would be great too! <img src="images/smiley_icons/icon_wink.gif" border=0 alt="Wink">

  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Just did a count on the public songbooks, and there are now 650+ books. This is definitely a good think, but the current system was not designed for that. The new system will adapt a lot better to this. The "misc songs"/"songs I like"-books are definitely the most popular "category", and the new design will take that into account.

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Over 650 songbooks is impressive - will it be possible to search the selections within the songbooks with the new system?  Thanks again for striving to make the site even more functional.

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

That is the goal. Unfortunately it turns out to be complicated to search the artistnames, but I am working with that and hope to fix it.

  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

If you publish a new songbook, you can now choose "category". You do that after you press "publish". To change the category for an already published book, you will have to "unpublish it" first.


Note: The categories do not have any visible effects yet!


However, I would ask all of you to assign categories to your current songbook. This will help me a lot in developing the new version of the public songbooks.

  • From: Starkville, Mississippi USA
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 2,069

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

Hello admin - I just categorized the songbooks that I had published over the last several months.  Since they were assembled prior to the new & improved system, it was a toss up as to where some of them would fit best.


I shall keep the new genre-based system in mind when assembling future songbooks.

"That darn Pythagorean Comma thing keeps messing me up!"
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_comma[/url]

James McCormick's Website

  • admin
  • Moderator.
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-02-26
  • Posts: 913

Re: Redesigning the public songbooks

The new public songbooks are now online. Please give feedback.