|
Allen & Heath: Mixed In Key 3.0 (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Hasneez |
Is it true that in V 3.0 we'll need an internet connection to key tracks? what if im burning CDs at the gig (due to an emergency or something) and i dont have an internet connection?
And what is exactly being submitted over the internet for our tracks to be keyed? |
|
|
| nennon |
Hi,
There is more information on our Privacy Policy page:
http://www.MixedInKey.com/PrivacyPolicy.aspx
The information needed to verify the account and the melodic information about every file is uploaded online for analysis. Nobody (even the developers) can see what file names are being analyzed. That was one of the conditions to get top-name DJs to use the product. It's completely anonymous. The online connection is needed only because we use $30,000 worth of software to perform the key detection. It was the least expensive way for us to offer this technology to Mixed In Key DJs. The latest version was a free upgrade for everyone, as you already know.
The only statistic that we can see is how many files have been analyzed total. It's been approximately one month since Version 3.0 went public, and it has analyzed over 1.6 million audio files so far. My estimate is that it's about 34 terabytes (~34,000 Gb) of MP3 and WAV files. |
|
|
| Hasneez |
| quote: | Originally posted by nennon
|
thanks for the reply.. and would you know how much increase in accuracy is this version more than version 2.5?
thanks |
|
|
| nefardec |
so it compares melodic structures across an online database?
that's pretty cool actually.
that would be fascinating material for music research |
|
|
| nennon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hasneez
thanks for the reply.. and would you know how much increase in accuracy is this version more than version 2.5?
thanks |
It's a pretty crazy increase. I can tell you how we trained the artificial intelligence for Version 3.0:
We hired two professional musicians with near-perfect pitch, and asked them to analyze approximately 1000 songs. They keyed those songs independently, so they didn't know what answer the other person gave. In about 75% of the cases, their results matched. If they didn't, we asked both of them to rekey the songs.
At the end, we had a verified database of keys for Trance, House, Progressive, Breaks, Drum and Bass and other popular genres. We created an algorithm based on artificial intelligence that was taught to think like a human mind. So, the new version can actually correct Tim and Eli when they key new songs -- it can catch their errors before they do.
We don't have an exact answer about accuracy, but it's next-generation compared to Version 2.5 and before. |
|
|
| nennon |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
so it compares melodic structures across an online database?
that's pretty cool actually.
that would be fascinating material for music research |
Just a quick note: We don't keep an online database of results. Every time you key a song, the analysis is done from scratch. That way, we don't violate the privacy of our DJs because this information is not stored in any database. We are careful about that. |
|
|
| Hasneez |
| quote: | Originally posted by nennon
|
Nice.. thanks for the reply.. I think ill get it!! |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| I still don’t see the point of something that isn't 100% accurate. Learn to do it yourself. Its faster and cheaper and more reliable. |
|
|
| Fledz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
He's advertising something that benefits him directly. What else would it be? |
That's not spamming though. He's given an informative post on something new that was not mentioned here and is no doubt of interest to many posters here.
Advertising, yes. Spamming, no.
You have this habit of jumping on people for no reason at all, except to feed your hunger for abusing other posters. If this forum had more active mods, you would already be banned for intentionally setting people off and derailing perfectly good threads. |
|
|
| Rememberence_ |
BTW am I the only one who realises that this so called 'spammer' is actually in the thread with us, discussing the 'spam' that he posted? Sounds like your typical spammer huh!
Thanks for the info nennon |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rememberence_
BTW am I the only one who realises that this so called 'spammer' is actually in the thread with us, discussing the 'spam' that he posted? Sounds like your typical spammer huh!
Thanks for the info nennon |
gee, promoting his own profit-making enterprise, what a good bloke! |
|
|
| Rememberence_ |
| I was going to write some rhetoric in response to your post, then I realised you're Tasmanian. |
|
|
|
|
