Should it be harder to hit Top Match?
We think finding that you're a "Top Match" with someone should be a special thing.
Do you think it should be harder to hit this top level of match?
Meet people who share your tastes. | Sign up It's free and takes 2 minutes | to see your matches |
Let us know the features you'd like to see on Tastebuds!
Definitely. Maybe on the basis of how much one listens to a particular genre, or a group of similar artists. I don't know how you'd manage something of the sort though
Is there a distinction between 'Great Match' and 'Top Match'? If so, it seems pretty tough to find anyone fitting the 'Top Match' criterion for me :p My listed preferences contain a diverse collection of musical genres & artists (although my taste is quite specific within that), but maybe this high variance is causing Top Match to become realistically improbable.
Moreover - is the algorithm you use relative or absolute with regard to whatever metric you use to represent the 'degree of accordance' (or whatever) of any two users? I suppose it's probably a hybrid algorithm depending on the output of some classification function, but it'd be nice to be able to adjust the algorithm so it returns the top x% of matches from the user population, or so it returns all users over a y% score to be in the 'Top Match' group, maybe just a sliding scale marked 'granularity' that alters the 'Top Match' inclusion criteria (because this is just what you want to spend your valuable time doing, appeasing the pedantry of a pompous big-data analyst :D)
in fact we don't know what anyone else does on here. For all we know @MissNotorious is on the FBI witness protection program or is a secret spy and thats why she's notorious. Shouldn't we say what we do? ...just sayin
so from an engineering standpoint your algorithm or pattern matching formula pairs two people, right? what decides this? music? if music how? by genre? by age? by geography? what if they don't complete their music preferences? what about the non-music questions me and alot of other people filled out? where do they fit into the whole picture? my glass half-empty view: its way too difficult to so-called "match" ... whether its Match, Facebook, or Tastebuds
Yes I agree that it should be more difficult to get a top match. P.s. I'm excited for the iPhone app!
Yes. There are these cult bands/singers pretty much everyone put on their profiles and I seem to be 'top' match with pretty much everyone on this website as I listed a fair amount of artist on my profile.
Why should it be harder ? If its special then a message should pop, message that person, or a star.....
That is true, but Tastebuds does weight the 8 favourite artists users select so it's fairly powerful even without listening data on your long tail artists.
Unfortunately improving the matching algorithm is a huge job and would require duplicating Last.fm's data set. Also, the majority of Tastebuds users don't have a Last.fm account.
The algorithm is powerful enough to provide granularity in matching ranks at the stage. So back to the original question. Do you think it should be harder to reach "Top Match"?
Last.fm has more data. They have a record of not only which bands the user listens to, but also how much they listen to them. They can prioritize bands based on the percentage of listens when matching with other users. Here every listed band has to be weighed equally because there is no listening data.
Why's that?
See More
2010-2024 Tastebuds Media Ltd, All rights reserved
Handcrafted with love by musicians in London, UK