Skip to main content

Comparing Audio Features and Playlist Statistics for Music Classification

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Analysis of Large and Complex Data

Abstract

In recent years, a number of approaches have been developed for the automatic recognition of music genres, but also more specific categories (styles, moods, personal preferences, etc.). Among the different sources for building classification models, features extracted from the audio signal play an important role in the literature. Although such features can be extracted from any digitised music piece independently of the availability of other information sources, their extraction can require considerable computational costs and the audio alone does not always contain enough information for the identification of the distinctive properties of a musical category. In this work we consider playlists that are created and shared by music listeners as another interesting source for feature extraction and music categorisation. The main idea is that the tracks of a playlist are often from the same artist or belong to the same category, e.g. they have the same genre or style, which allows us to exploit their co-occurrences for classification tasks. In the paper, we evaluate strategies for better genre and style classification based on the analysis of larger collections of user-provided playlists and compare them to a recent classification technique from the literature. Our first results indicate that an already comparably simple playlist-based classifiers can in some cases outperform an advanced audio-based classification technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    More details of the training data will be given in Sect. 3.1.

  2. 2.

    In a preliminary study, increasing this number to 20 did not lead to measurable improvements. Obviously, the optimal number depends on the category; this investigation is however beyond the scope of this first study.

  3. 3.

    The samples included about one million playlists from Last.fm and about 600,000 playlists from 8tracks, see also Bonnin and Jannach (2014).

  4. 4.

    The best performing method depends on the category. Moreover, the removal of a weaker classifier from ensemble of above mentioned methods led to a statistically significant reduction of performance in a previous study (Vatolkin et al. 2014).

References

  • Bertin-Mehieux, T., Eck, D., Maillet, F., & Lamere, P. (2008). Autotagger: A model for predicting social tags from acoustic features on large music databases. Journal of New Music Research, 37(2), 115–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume, H., Haller, M., Botteck, M., & Theimer, W. (2008). Perceptual feature based music classification - A DSP perspective for a new type of application. In Proc. IC-SAMOS (pp. 92–99).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnin, G., & Jannach, D. (2014). Automated generation of music playlists: Survey and experiments. ACM Computing Surveys, 47(2), 26:1–26:35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Celma, Ã’. (2010). Music recommendation and discovery: The long tail, long fail, and long play in the digital music space. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, B. (2011). Contextualize your Listening: The Playlist as Recommendation Engine. PhD thesis, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, J., & Kamber, M. (2006). Data mining: Concepts and techniques. The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hariri, N., Mobasher, B., & Burke, R. (2012). Context-aware music recommendation based on latent topic sequential patterns. In Proc. ACM RecSys 2013 (pp. 131–138).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lartillot, O., & Toivainen, P. (2007). MIR in Matlab (II): A toolbox for musical feature extraction from audio. In Proc. Int’l Conf. on Music Information Retrieval (ISMIR) (pp. 127–130).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lidy, T., Rauber, A., Pertusa, A., & Iñesta, J. M. (2007). Improving genre classification by combination of audio and symbolic descriptors using a transcription system. In Proc. Int’l Conf. on Music Information Retrieval (ISMIR) (pp. 61–66).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mckay, C. (2010). Automatic Music Classification with jMIR. PhD thesis, McGill University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, A., Ahrendt, P., Larsen, J., & Hansen, L. K. (2007). Temporal feature integration for music genre classification. IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 15(5), 1654–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mierswa, I., & Morik, K. (2005). Automatic feature extraction for classifying audio data. Machine Learning Journal, 58(2–3), 127–149.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Serra, X., Magas, M., Benetos, E., Chudy, M., Dixon, S., Flexer, A., et al. (2013). Roadmap for music information research. Technical Report, The MIReS Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T., & Waterman, M. (1981). Identification of common molecular subsequences. Journal of Molecular Biology, 147, 195–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturm, B. (2014). A survey of evaluation in music genre recognition. In A. Nünberger, S. Stober, B. Larsen, & M. Detyniecki (Eds.), Adaptive multimedia retrieval: Semantics, context, and adaptation. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8382, pp. 29–66). Cham:Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theimer, W., Vatolkin, I., & Eronen, A. (2008). Definitions of audio features for music content description. Technical Report TR08-2-001, TU Dortmund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzanetakis, G., & Cook, P. (2002). Musical genre classification of audio signals. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 10(5), 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vatolkin, I. (2013). Improving Supervised Music Classification by Means of Multi-Objective Evolutionary Feature Selection. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, TU Dortmund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vatolkin, I., Bischl, B., Rudolph, G., & Weihs, C. (2014). Statistical comparison of classifiers for multi-objective feature selection in instrument recognition. In Data analysis, machine learning and knowledge discovery (pp. 171–178). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weihs, C., Ligges, U., Mörchen, F., & Müllensiefen, D. (2007). Classification in music research. Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, 1(3), 255–291.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y.-H., & Chen, H. H. (2011). Music emotion recognition. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Igor Vatolkin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Vatolkin, I., Bonnin, G., Jannach, D. (2016). Comparing Audio Features and Playlist Statistics for Music Classification. In: Wilhelm, A., Kestler, H. (eds) Analysis of Large and Complex Data. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25226-1_37

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics