illusionofjoy | Last.fm: two months of scrobbling (Reply)

Nearly two months ago, I registered for a personal profile and downloaded the software necessary to run Last.fm on my computer. For those unaware, Last.fm is a customisable internet radio station along the same lines as Yahoo! LaunchCAST and Pandora. Unlike those two services, last.fm relies on user data to match people with potential artists and songs they may like. This data comes from two sources: the user's own computer, courtesy of a plug-in installed with the Last.fm player and other users – either user-defined "friends" or software-defined "neighbours."

So, the big question is this: does it work. As I said, I've been feeding it data for nearly two months at approximately two-four hours of music each day, amassing over 1,000 tracks on my user profile. Track data came from my personal MP3 collection as run through Windows Media Player and my personal Yahoo! LaunchCAST station (note: LaunchCAST scrobbling only works with a third-party plug-in). I recently launched the Last.fm player and set it running my "neighbour radio" to see what it would play. I am happy to report that with only 1,000 scrobbled tracks, the brief playlist it gave me matched my personal mixes very well.

By contrast, my LaunchCAST station has over 10,000 items rated and still throws curveballs at me from time to time. For example, LaunchCAST was recently spinning Linda Ronstadt songs into my rotation even though I have never rated nor shown any interest in said musician. Furthermore, on occasion under the slot for "reason played," the player will state cryptically that it was because a track is "recommended by Yahoo! Music" or "recommended for you." My suspicion is that this is Yahoo!'s way of saying that they have a promoter calling and pushing certain singles.

This doesn't surprise me as LaunchCAST is commercial in nature while Last.fm is more communal (the few advertisements the site does have are quite unobtrusive). Still, the LaunchCAST library of music is nothing to sneeze at, as it includes damn near every popular artist on the face of the planet and a hefty supply of independent and obscure musicians as well. Last.fm lacks many popular artists, however, they have a utility where artists and labels can actually upload their own music to the site. Last.fm's Illusion of Joy page lists pretty much everything I've ever recorded as available for streaming because I personally uploaded the MP3s. By contrast, I sent a promo for the single 'A Place Outside' to Yahoo! Music and while they've listed it in their directory, it is not available for streaming. I intend to contact Yahoo! Music before sending them a copy of The Forever Syndrome to see what steps need to be taken in order to assure them that, yes, indeed they do have my permission to play my music from their servers.

So, it would seem that the DIY and indie advantage lies with Last.fm. Overall, I've found that Last.fm actually works best for me in that it keeps track of how much of everything I'm playing, rather than as my primary source of new music over the internet. Perhaps if I had friends on the site as well as automatically generated neighbours, my song results and feelings would be different. I still like the idea and will turn to Last.fm for variety in my internet radio listening, but my primary music supply when I'm not making the playlist in WMP will remain LaunchCAST.

As an aside, I rank both LaunchCAST and Last.fm miles above Pandora, whose flash-intensive interface and narrow casting tendencies have turned me off to repeated listening. Also, if you wish to add me as a friend on last.fm, my username is warren33.