Slashdot Mirror
Software Predicts Music Success
Frankenbuffer writes "The Globe and Mail today reports that MIT researchers have developed a computer program to analyze pop music and predict how people will react to it. The method, developed at MIT's Media Laboratory, analyzes the pitch, rhythm, and other characteristics of music. What makes the technology unusual is that it also takes into account social responses to hit music gathered from weblogs, chat rooms, music reviews, and other online discussions, and correlates this data to the music to guage the popularity of a particular sound. According to the researchers, the software has accurately predicted Billboard hits for the past several months."
the record labels are going to get ahold of this and turn it around to actually produce the music. then it will all sound the same.
wait....
Once this program is trained enough, join it to a noise generator and a "natural selection" algorythm (typing intended), and you'll have an automated hit composer!!
It will eventually compose the "perfect hit", and kill art as we know it.
Can Independant artists who want to see how well their songs are going to do be able to use this software for themselves?
I'm not sure I care whether or not this software can predict the next pop craze... but I wouldn't mind a more personalized version. Maybe something that analyzes my mp3 collection, and then automatically checks new releases and looks for tracks that correlate well with my preferences? It would be nice to have a system that pulls out the things I'm most interested in. And a piece of software would be more impartial than the media executives and promoters who want to sell me the "next big sound."
I think lots of people would love something like that. If iTunes automatically integrated technology like that, I think it would be a hit. And best of all, it would level the playing field. Small bands could "get noticed" by the common person if their sound was something that the given person liked.
... if the fed Miles Davis' Bitches Brew into this.
:-)
Darn thing would BSOD right on the spot, I'll bet.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Now if they could just crack the algorithm the music industry uses to generate music, all of the geeks of the world could create free music that sounds just like Britny Spears/P Dilldy dooldy whatever/Pop or Rap Group D'jour....
No wait, on second thought I'd rather keep my sanity.
Joking aside, this sort of research might be interesting from a psychological point of view. If they've developed an algorith that can tell what music is "good" it seems like with some proper research it might provide some insite into the way the brain process music, which could help scientists to better understand the way the brain interprets patterns, etc. If such an algorithm could be used to generate "good" music, it might be useful for things like games, where the game could provide parameters based on what's going on, and algorithmically generate appropriate music.
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
According to the researchers, the software has accurately predicted Billboard hits for the past several months.
... maybe I'm in the wrong business.
Hell, I can do that. My friends have noticed that, for a long time, any piece of popular music that I can't stand to hear becomes a hit. Hm
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I guess that means it has been in active use for YEARS already.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
This is not the first such program, and I suspect it shares the failing of its predecessors... It will not predict new trends, it will only follow existing ones. The more it is used to decide if an artist is going to be promoted, the less variety we will see in the music world. When new artists can no longer make it unless they are cookie-cutter copies of current acts (which has arguably already happened), the mainstream music scene will cease to evolve, and the really progressive, groundbreaking groups with a chance to become superstars and jumpstart new genres will be buried even farther under a pile of sameness.
for up-and-coming artists? Music companies will be able to use this to pay artists less because the computer doesn't like their music.
MAL (Music AnaLyzer): "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I don't like that."
"Scud Storm!" -- Jeremy of PurePwnage.com
If that's the case, the results may look a little like google. For example, a review of Gwen Steffani's new album: An upbeat, poppy sound, Gwen Steffani nude, Gwen Steffani fakes, free nude Gwen Steffani pictures, free nude celebrities, with more complexity than her previous albums.
I wrote a predictor too. It's a neural net, actually.
int music_predictor(int artist_type,float rhythm, int genre, int tempo, int male_or_female, int quality, int singing_quality, int band_quality, int number_of_band_members) {
if (artist_type == BIG_NAME_POP_ARTIST_WITH_STUDIO_BACKING)
return true;
else
return false;
}
Ok, so it's a one-axon neural net. But it gets 99%+ accuracy.
On a personal level, I think we're going to head into an era where experimentation and unique sounds will be cherished. We've been listening to this sort of tin-pan alley redux for about 10-20 years now, and a lot of people sense discomfort with the existing pop music trends. Look at the 40s-70s and I think you'll see the same sort of musical revolution in the next 30 years.
Dupe! ;)
"Some people really care about instrument sounds and complexity of the music," Mr. Whitman said. "But the 14-year-old teenage girl could care less, as long as her friends are listening to it."
I maintain that the friends of this teenage girl are listening to whatever is playing on Cool Hitz 9602KXQZ.
The article does make one mention of the software picking up on a popular band that record companies had passed over, but which had a growing underground fan movement. Again, so what -- they say themselves that one of the main things their software does is analyze popular music discussion in forums, chat sites, etc. For all we know, the only thing that happened in this case is that the software noticed a lot of people were talking about the band "Crossfade."
We don't need software to predict how many posts will mention Britney Spears even though she faded away years ago. She's no longer an appropriate proxy for manufactured pop music. Pay attention people. It's 50 Cent's world, we just live in it.
robotic taste-shaping overlords
Most people don't know it, but that level of technological sophistication was achieved nearly a century ago.
Nowadays, we call them "studio executives". They used to work reasonably well, but nobody has updated their programming since 1957.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Even though a system such as this would seem to have the logical result of killing the art of music, it simply can not.
As a musician I have noticed that the more I study music theory (theory is really just the language to describe music) the more I come to realize that almost all music is the same. You can spot similarities between four hundred year old classics and current "Indie"/Pop/Rock/Whatever, the connection is there.
So what might you ask makes it different?
The style makes it different. The way the individual artist performs/arranges/records a piece. Not to mention that lyrical content adds a whole new dimension?
Saying something like this will ruin the art of music is like saying that the grammar checker in any document editor ruins the art of writing. Though it is neat that a program could possible sort out "popular" music, which just means it's able to emulate the human ear just a little bit.
Read the whole story, at: http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/worth.htm
If you're interested, Greg Egan's site: http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/
.sigs: Just Say No!
The secret to success is apparently: more cowbell.
Did you know you can fertilize your lawn with used motor oil?
People today have easy access to a broader cultural experience than ever before. People who in the past could not afford to spend a lot of money taking chances on esoteric music can just take it now, whether or not the artist wants them to. The legal and moral implications are another debate entirely, but there's no question that the average person can now have more diverse music than ever before. There are entire genres that I never would have gotten into if not for the internet. That's a lot of CDs and concert tickets that wouldn't have been sold, albeit not by the folks that are handing out subpoenas.
If you think there isn't any good music being made today, either you're ridiculously picky or you just aren't looking. Yes, 90% of the music sold in America is (in my opinion mostly bland) pop put out by just four record labels. The breadth of the rest of it is astounding.
Trying to shape a song so it becomes successful has been tried many times before - with unsatisfying success. On a higher level it led to the categories of music we know today, like Blues, Trance, Metal, etc.. On a lower level we see follow-ups to first hits, that use the same kind of harmonies, rhythm and sounds. But there still are a lot of songs that become successful not because they sound the same like other songs but because they are innovative, think Kraftwerk or Nirvana.
Music trends are a system between unification and diversification. The more songs sound alike, the more people will appreciate songs that differ and vice versa. This system is very hard to predict. I am sure the music industry tries to predict it and synthesize hit records and I think this is why there are so few truely creative artists with a contract from a major record label.
On se Internetz nobody noes your German.
Editors at popular geek site slashdot.org have created an algorithm which predicts the success of any potential duplicate story on the web site, and are using it to make usch posts with increasing regularity. The software determines whether the original story contains any letters from a to z (case-insensitive), and of it finds them, the post is deemed to be dupe-worthy. This program has been in operation now for more years than anybody care to frickin' remember...
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
> It would be nice to have a system that pulls out the things I'm most interested in.
;)
;)
What you are talking about is a spam filter for music! Well.. that would be wonderful.
But then you would have to wait some weeks until you could listen to the next hour of music, because most radios and other sources would return quietness for most of their time.
Or you would have to push EVERY music on the planet trough it. Even the street musicians from some mountan village in nepal oder the whate-veryo-ucall'me-islands.
Surely this would be great, and theoretically it would surely be possible.... but practically... well...
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
When the Play button was pressed it made an instant but highly detailed examination of the subject's music-appreciation buds, a spectroscopic analysis of the subject's metabolism and then sent tiny experimental signals down the neural pathways to the hearing centres of the subject's brain to see what was likely to go down well. However, no one knew quite why it did this because it invariably delivered three minutes of sound that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Britney Spears.
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
Yeah, really. How far do you think the Enterprise D would have gone at the end of the premiere episode "Encounter at Farpoint", if Captain Picard had raised a finger towards the viewscreen and said, "Lets see what this Galaxy Class starship can do! Enguage!"
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Even stuff like the Kinks and the Beatles were regarded as fluff in their day - the thing that will kill music is control of distribution, and patenting of production and arrangement (the RIAA is buying the legislation for one, and I seem to recall a recent /. story about patenting a story theme - if that's true, music arrangements and production styles will surely not be far behind. I've posted about it before, but I always sound like the musician's Stallman )
I'll be practicing with my band no sooner than tomorrow for my own rock show - played in front of tens of people. So can't we all just get along, and buy my t-shirts? ;)
First of all, the big claim made is that "the system has been predicting Billboard hits with surprising accuracy over the past several months." They achieve this one simply by reading weblogs. That is ridiculously simple to do: count the number of times a song is mentioned. Predict based on this value. They have not claimed that they are able to predict success on NEW songs based on scanning the music, they have simply claimed, as above, that they can predict billboard hits. Another easy method for doing this is as follows: Take todays hit-list. Copy it identically. That's tomorrows hit-list. There is not that much change over a day -you will get pretty good accuracy.
Second, the software picks out little known groups with popular sounds that agents have missed (ex. Crossfade). How does the network achieve this amazing (sarcasm) feat? By noticing a spike in focus-group data; "HitPredictor struck gold again in late 2003, when its computers flagged a blip in the focus-group data." Hoorah! MIT has invented an algorithm that finds spikes in data.
Thirdly, the software describes the music it hears, from "sexy to romantic to loud and upbeat". Again, this is not complicated. Just look at weblogs and attach to any song titles nearby descriptor words from a small set. This of course is just an example of a simple way to do it. I'm sure there are others.
But there must be some reason for us reading about it? Mustn't there? Well yes. Firstly, there is profit to be made by individuals offering services. Secondly, you can't write or post stories titled "MIT project achieves nothing interesting".
Some of the lamest most predictable "funny" comments are in this thread. People you're not funny.
eTrade SUCKS
It makes perfect sense really. Remember that Hertz is 1/seconds. So we use doller/second to measure popularity. That fits perfectly.