Google

Subject: Google
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:05 PM

www.google.com

Try it, it will allow you to answer most lyric requests, all by yourself!

Subject: RE: Google
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:12 PM

Well, yes, but if it's a folk song, we'd also like to see it posted here if we don't have it already. Best thing to do is search Mudcat first. If we don't have it, try to find it yourself and then post it (if it's folk or folk-related).

You can narrow down your Google searches if you search for a distinctive phrase - put it in quotes if you're using Google, and without qotes if using the Digitrad and Forum Search.

But if people request songs here, it's our policy to answer them helpfully. If you object to people requesting songs, you're in the wrong place. That's how we got our start. We also do other things now, but furnishing lyrics has always been our primary purpose.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Google
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:12 PM

Evil twin: Noooo, duhhhh???? Wow!! A SOICH engine!! That is SOOOOO kewlll!!! LOL!!

Better half: A kind impulse, sorry!

A

Subject: RE: Google
From: Sorcha
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:27 PM

Well, Google is actually much more User Friendly than several others. It has this nifty "Search Within Results" clickie.......you can put "lyrics" or "tab" etc. in there.......can't do that with Copernic or All the Web.

I really don't understand people who can't learn to do a simple search before they ask here. Maybe it's my "researcher" mind set, but even as a Web Neophyte I had sense enough to type a title or snippet into something that said "Search".........

I'll admit I get a little frustrated with people asking for things like the lyrics to Rocky Top, but being the "helpful Libra" that I am, I still usually respond.

Snide aside--my son says "Stupid people should not be allowed to breed". I say--just WHO defines "stupid"? I am still very ignorant about a lot of computer stuff, but I am not in-educable and not stupid. Well, that depends on who you ask.......

Then, there is JoeBro, who sends me messages saying--"I really wish you would learn Mudcat Internal clickies".....so I did. (grin) Now he seems to want ALL the lyrics I find............see "What is Folk?"---really BIG GRIN!

Hellfino what lyrics to actually post anymore.........('nother little grin......)

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:34 PM

yeah...search engines can give you lots of stuff....look at THIS one (my homepage for my browser is now at http://www.alltheweb.com/) ...but somehow it feels nice to share ideas and get help on music from folks who KNOW about it. I suspect that these wonderful search engines, (both external, like Google and internal, like SuperSearch) are part of the reason there is so much 'talk' on Mudcat...it really IS easy to get lyrics, tunes...etc. usinf a few mouse clicks...but where else can you get family traditions, or compare opinions about yogurt AND discuss the songs?

That being said, it IS a good idea to look around a bit before you post some simplistic request.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Sorcha
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:52 PM

Don't forget recipes, Bill!

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 07:57 PM

I 'almost' added that to the post..*grin*....but then I'd be tempted to add my chocolate-covered Saurekraut with lime jello, and that is a secret!

Subject: RE: Google
From: Amergin
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 08:08 PM

Sorcha....most of my customers should not be allowed to breed....

Subject: RE: Google
From: masato sakurai
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 09:42 PM

In addition to Google, I sometimes use Copernic 2001.
~Masato

Subject: RE: Google
From: Sorcha
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 11:07 PM

OOOO, does the Chocolate Covered Saurekruat Lime Jello have those little green maraschino cherries inside?

'Gin, should your customers be allowed to read even if they shouldn't breed?

Subject: RE: Google
From: Amergin
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 11:09 PM

welll..if they could read...it would probably make my job easier...or at least learn listening skills...

Subject: RE: Google
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 14 Dec 01 - 11:27 PM

I try to pitch in and answer any lyric request that interests me. That way the serious scholars around here can use their time on other things. Also, you never know when you might be talking to a young, impressionable kid who just might get a good opinion of folk music after a word of encouragement from this site.

I always remember the young girl who asked me why the words to Greensleeves didn't sound like what she sang at Christmastime in her choir.

Subject: RE: Google
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 06:11 AM

A request for a song can be the starting point for a thread that opens up the history and the variants of a song, and the different ways it can be interpreted and so on and so forth.

It can also be the way that someone finds their way into the Mudcat, and into the peculiar world of folk music, both on the net and in the face to face world.

When someone asks you a favour, and you are in a position to provide the help requested, without inconveniencing yourself, they are doing you a favour in the process.

Search engines are great, but they can't do all that. They only work so well because all over the world there are people who have gone to the trouble of putting the information we need on the net in an available form. Not just once, but time and time again, so that we can get different slants on it.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Susan of DT
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 02:15 PM

From dick greenhaus, the old curmudgeon

If it were that easy, you wouldn't need Digitrad. Google works fine if you know the title of the song. Digitrad lets you find it if you know a fragment of its content. A DT search for [with a memory] gets you San Antonio Rose; a Google search for "with a memory" doesn't. So there.

Subject: RE: Google
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 02:18 PM

And if you ask the forum a question such as "my Granny used to sing a song about a flower" sooner or later someone's going to come up with the right one.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 06:33 PM

well, not exactly, Dick G...a Google search on a partial phrase WILL get you what you want if it's out there (I searched on "deep within my heart lies" and got the lyrics just fine...but a search on just "deep within my heart" gets LOTS of other stuff too!And a search on "my heart" would get you more hits than you could ever track down.

So Digitrad's advantage is that ALL we have indexed is a certain class of songs.

Searches require, as you have said so many times, a little creative reasoning and care at spelling.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Snuffy
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 07:22 PM

like the 16 different ways of spelling Martin Wyndham-Reade?

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 08:09 PM

yup..exactly like that! *grin*...you just take the LAST name, which you 'probably' know is hyphenated and try a couple of different spellings in Google...one may give you 3 hits, another 247. Guess which one is likely to be right? Or, try searching on one of his songs which you DO know...or look at an album cover....there are VERY few names/songs that can't be narrowed down this way.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Amos
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 08:18 PM

And there is no guarantee that a given ballad -- easily found in the Digitrad -- will be somewhere accessible on the WWW; and even if it is, Google only crawls a fraction of the Web, let alone the rest of the net!

A

Subject: RE: Google
From: toadfrog
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 09:04 PM

Am I wrong, Amos? Usually if I do a googol search for something that is in digitrad, it will refer me to digitrad. I may be missing something there. I am not being a smart-ass, I'm curious. Is there something I'm missing?

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 09:24 PM

it often does do that, toadfrog..especially if digitrad is about the only one with that song...if there are lots of artists and versions, digitrad hits may be buried WAY down the list

Subject: RE: Google
From: Louie Roy
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 11:05 PM

I guess I am one of those stupid asses that shouldn't breed but after 56 years of marriage and 5 kids it's to late.Anyway when I saw googles listed here I thought they were talking about Barney Google who disappeared out of the funny papers in he late 1930s Louie Roy

Subject: RE: Google
From: lamarca
Date: 15 Dec 01 - 11:37 PM

My understanding of the way Google works is that it doesn't only search for the occurrance of a text string on a web page, but also for the number of other pages that link to the one containing the text string. Therefore, it gives more emphsis to those websites that other web sites have found useful enough to provide a link to. That being said, Google and most other search engines only have a minute fraction of the Web indexed and searchable...

Subject: RE: Google
From: Rolfyboy6
Date: 16 Dec 01 - 12:56 AM

I like google fine and it's lots of help. The Mudcat shines at elusive things that a straight search engine just can't do. Like allusions and cultural associations and versions. Context and history and the mythic elements of folk and blues songs are Mudcat things. If you ask, someone here is going to discuss the spanish elements in cowboy terminology. Google ain't set up for that.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Roughyed
Date: 16 Dec 01 - 05:13 AM

Why is Mudcat better than Google? Because you don't find friends on Google.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 01 - 12:29 PM

here is a page that compares features of different search engines.

and here is a graph of search engines by how many pages they index. It seems that in the last year, Google has pulled away significantly in the quest to be biggest. (But,,,that does NOT mean Google has everything the others have...)

which leads me to think that if you need to maximize your chances of finding an obsure term, name...etc...http://ixquick.com/ may be the way to go, as it uses all of the major engines in one search.....

Subject: RE: Google
From: pattyClink
Date: 17 Dec 01 - 12:20 PM

I'm with Masato. 'Copernic' is up there with Google, and has the advantage of automatically storing search results in a compact way.(you can quickly delete any you don't want to save. If you do any kind of research it's invaluable.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 01 - 01:40 PM

yes..Copernic can do a lot...but the 'Pro' version does cost $$$$...and remember, what Copernic does is search the same search engines you do .....it just has extra features for organization and sorting...if I was back in college or doing serious research, I might use it it a lot. As it is, I seldom think of it.

Subject: RE: Google
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 17 Dec 01 - 07:06 PM

Swan, I don't know why you say you can't find friends on Google. Every time I do a Google search, I hear from this sweet young thing who says "Oo-o-o-o-o-o"! She still hasn't told me her name, though.

Aloha,
Mark