![]() ![]() What you do care about is that the two approaches give significantly different results. The suggester implementation you select has significant implications for what is suggested and how it is built. Each has a different suggester implementation. ![]() There are two different “styles” of suggester I’ll touch on now, FST-based suggesters and AnalyzingInfix suggesters. There were a number of tricks we could utilize to make it seem like it was suggesting in a more context-sensitive way, all of which took effort and produced results that were of varying quality. The approaches Apache Solr has used in the past usually centered around terms considered in isolation. The idea is that based on partial input, suggestions for query terms typed so far are returned, think “type ahead”. How We Used to Make Suggestions:Īutosuggest has been around in various more or less sophisticated forms for a while. In fact, if you throw > 32K fields at these, they error out. The implication here, of course, is that by and large these are not suitable for large text fields. This is much different than term-based suggestions because the user sees coherent suggestions for query terms from documents in your index. The huge difference with these suggesters is that they return the whole field where the input is found!. At the end of this post are links to several backgrounders that are interesting to me at least. Along about Solr 4.7 or so support made its way into Solr so you could configure these in solrconfig.xml. There’s been a new suggester in town for a while, thanks to some incredible work by some of the Lucene committers. More on these suggester implementations later. One note, the first two above are from an FST-based suggester, and the second two are are from an AnalyzingInfix suggester. This blog is about how to configure the suggesters to get this kind of response, and also talk about some of the “gotchas” that exist. The Solr/Lucene suggester component can make this happen quickly enough to satisfy very demanding situations. It feels like cheating sometimes, but as a hobbiest without formal training in music theory, but a decent ear for progression and melody I think it’s a much more effective way to teach yourself chord voicing and progression than someone dictating the rules for you to follow.How would you like to have your user type “energy”, and see suggestions like: I have seen hardware solutions such as kordbot, and to some extent old yamaha QY sequencers that can play a similar role, but they are expensive and not the most convenient to always have on your person when the inspiration strikes. Having this capability as an ios app is incredible as it allows you to “sketch out” progressions whenever and wherever and take them back home to play through synths via midi or learning them by hand having the best of music theory in your pocket is especially rad if you commute by bus/ train! Really cool to be able to create the building blocks of a chord progression and then try alternate scales and uncommon chord voicing that you might not come up with intuitively against that basic framework. ![]() Was looking for something to break out of that habit and found the Suggester app. Have a bad habit of using the same chords and scales in my synth music. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |