Slashdot Mirror


Bohemian Rhapsody On Old Hardware

eldavojohn writes "The sweet sweet melodies of Queen and the late Freddie Mercury are reproduced by hardware almost as old as the song is. 'There are millions of computers sitting idle at home consuming fantom electricity. Let's see where all that power is going. This is dedicated to all fans of Queen and hey let's not forget about Mike Myers and Dana Carvey of Wayne's World. Please note no effects or sampling was used. What you see is what you hear (does that even make sense?) Atari 800XL was used for the lead piano/organ sound, Texas Instruments TI-99/4a as lead guitar, 8 Inch Floppy Disk as Bass, 3.5 inch Hard drive as the gong, HP ScanJet 3C was used for all vocals. Please note I had to record the HP scanner 4 separate times for each voice. I tried to buy 4 HP scanners but for some reason sellers on E-Bay expect you to pay $80-$100, I got mine for $30.'"

137 comments

  1. Big whoop by DrMrLordX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nothing really matters anymore.

    1. Re:Big whoop by Alarindris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Either does timing, the parts aren't synced up properly.
      It appears that he split the midi tracks up between the instruments, but didn't align them up properly afterwards.

      Pretty impressive, but sort of poorly executed.

      I'm sorry, but the misalignment is bad enough that I couldn't make out the song for the first 30 seconds D:

    2. Re:Big whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Please submit a link to a video where you have done better.

    3. Re:Big whoop by Dextrously · · Score: 1

      Please submit a link to a post where you have done what you are asking of him.

    4. Re:Big whoop by badasscat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please submit a link to a post where you have done what you are asking of him.

      What, because he hasn't done the same thing, he has no right to criticize? That's fallacy. You may as well say nobody has the right to criticize the president because they've never been president.

      FWIW, I felt the same way as the parent - I couldn't even make out the song at first, and that ruined it enough that I just quit listening after about 30 seconds. Not to take away from the guy's effort - I'm sure it was a lot of work, and he should be commended for that - but it ends up just sounding like a bad MIDI recording.

    5. Re:Big whoop by Dextrously · · Score: 1

      I think you meant to respond to the anonymous coward. I basically made the same point as you did, but it was implied in that I was asking something from him that seemed equally ridiculous as what he had asked of Alarindris.

  2. Chiptunes... by edlinfan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...hell yeah!

    If you liked this, you might also check out the 8bitpeoples, who specialize in this sort of thing.
    http://www.8bitpeoples.com/

    1. Re:Chiptunes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      warning: link looks like a myspace page!

      *feels dirty after seeing that*

    2. Re:Chiptunes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And waaaaaay before 8-bit, Ernie Kovacs had the concept:

      musical office
        and
      kitchen symphony

    3. Re:Chiptunes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like using a Commodore 64 as a web server www.c64web.com show cased this site to a few colleague's the other day.
      The online games are run using jac64 a commodore 64 java emulator, but the html is served from this 1mhz 8 bit computer bult in the 80's.

  3. Takedown? by telchine · · Score: 4, Funny

    How long before the RIAA have this removed from YouTube for copyright infringement?

    1. Re:Takedown? by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Never -- the RIAA doesn't control the copyright of the melody itself, only recordings of it made by RIAA-affiliated performers. You should be worried about BMI instead, I think.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:Takedown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoooooosh!

    3. Re:Takedown? by captnbmoore · · Score: 1

      I would think that since it's not an exact replica (ie the timing is different and those are not notes) probably can't get em.

      --
      The Navy Motto "IF it ain't broke Fix It" "A day is wasted if you don't learn something new"
    4. Re:Takedown? by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Informative

      You'd be wrong. The composition is under copyright, regardless of what bizarre contraptions you choose to perform it on.

      Nothing to do with the RIAA, though.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    5. Re:Takedown? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Ah, that's a good point -- I guess you answered my question.

      Of course, even if the MIDI file was bad on purpose, it was still recognizable as Bohemian Rhapsody. I don't think it was changed enough to avoid being declared infringement if BMI decided to go after it.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Takedown? by Dutchmaan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No one will care... until it makes money, THEN someone will speak up.. guaranteed.

    7. Re:Takedown? by hawkingradiation · · Score: 1

      But there is a subtly here: this *is* how the RIAA produces its music nowadays. Case in point Sulja Boy et al. Computer programs checking other computer programs..I guess we are one step closer to artificial intelligence...sort of.

      --
      Society use your Sciences
    8. Re:Takedown? by pmarini · · Score: 1

      hold-on, so if I copyright my fart "noise", can I stop anyone else from farting the same peculiar notes?
      how long is a composition?

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    9. Re:Takedown? by pmarini · · Score: 1

      hey guys, reality check !
      he didn't change the song title, he didn't attribute the song to himself...
      what he could be forced to do is simply pay the royalty for a reproduction, much like bands do in your local pub/underground station... geez, get a life

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    10. Re:Takedown? by Hanners1979 · · Score: 1

      For a moment there I thought you were calling the grandparent fat...

    11. Re:Takedown? by PipingSnail · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No ocpyright infringement. This is an original recording of a unique arrangement. Copyright exists in this new recording.

      In the UK, the PRS (Performing Rights Society) will what a fee for the performance of this work because it is a derivative arrangement of an existing protected work. In turn the PRS will protect this arrangement and collect fees for that as well, should they accept a request to protect it.

      Just to repeat though - Nothing to do with copyright.

      The PRS perform useful and harmful work all over the UK. Useful in the for commercial performances they ensure the original composers and musicians get rewarded for their work.

      Harmful in that their enforcement is over-zealous and results in them regarding not-for-profit performances (you and your mates playing tunes on folk instruments down the local pub) as a revenue generating exercise. This imposese ridiculous fees on pubs etc and results in music sessions shutting down etc. Resulting in less music for everyone and less space for musicians to hone their skills who some of which become the very people the PRS need to protect. So short sighted. I know many PRS members, and non of them think the PRS treat music sessions correctly.

      The PRS are loathed just about everywhere for their heavy handed approach to licensing. They even insist that an employer is responsible for licensing an employees radio if used in that workspace (because everyone can listen to it, in theory, never mind the workspace is a noisy car mechanic workshop - yes, this went to court and sadly, the PRS won).

      Many parallels to the RIAA, where what they gain on one hand they lose with the other through insensitive, heavy handed greed.

    12. Re:Takedown? by adolf · · Score: 1

      One word: Parody.

    13. Re:Takedown? by newcastlejon · · Score: 2, Informative

      One word: Parody.

      A better word: Cover.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    14. Re:Takedown? by Bootarn · · Score: 1

      If this video is removed due to copyright reasons, I'll then officially have lost all hope in mankind.

    15. Re:Takedown? by boltik · · Score: 1

      hold-on, so if I copyright my fart "noise", can I stop anyone else from farting the same peculiar notes? how long is a composition?

      No one can't stop nobody from farting.
      But if you can afford 500k$+ copyright lawyer, you can extort somebody who farted.
      If you have millions - you can even jail them in some countries (USA,iran,russia. In sweden they will appeal).

    16. Re:Takedown? by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Of course, even if the MIDI file was bad on purpose, it was still recognizable as Bohemian Rhapsody. I don't think it was changed enough to avoid being declared infringement if BMI decided to go after it.

      It doesn't matter how terrible a rendition it was. If it sounds nothing like it then it can still infringe. It's called copyright infringement for a reason ... you infringe the persons legal right to a monopoly if you copy from them. That includes creating a derivative work _iff_ you copy from them. If your work was created independently (and you're going to need some evidence here I'm afraid) without copying then there is no infringement.

    17. Re:Takedown? by mike2R · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it count as a cover version? If so, then if this was being sold on CD then he would need to buy a mechanical licence (about 10 cents a copy I believe). Not sure how that applies to a non-commercial digital distribution though.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    18. Re:Takedown? by p!ngu · · Score: 1

      Guy, I think most slashdotters should be worried about their BMI.

    19. Re:Takedown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do, of course, realise, that you just can't shout "parody!" to assert fair use every time you want to keep something from being taken down?

      It's not a magical incantation, you know. Some things are parodies, yes. Not all things are, though, and I think it's quite clear that this isn't. Novel and interesting, yes, creative, certainly, but a parody? No. Sorry.

    20. Re:Takedown? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Where does something like that get recorded?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    21. Re:Takedown? by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Informative

      >>>RIAA doesn't control the copyright of the melody itself, only recordings of it made by RIAA-affiliated performers. You should be worried about BMI instead, I think.

      It doesn't matter.
      - If they yank my video I will upload it again.
      - If they ban my account, I will create a new one.
      - If they ban my IP, I will just roll-over to a new IP.
      - If they sue me in court, I won't even bother to show up.
      - If they win the case for 2 million dollars per current law, I will not pay. Instead I'll be picking-up the phone and calling CNN, FOX, NBC. I'll be blogging the internet and visiting radio talk shows in order to stir-up outrage among the American people, because 2 million dollars for a single song is cruel and unusual punishment. Unconstitutional law is invalid law. The resulting protests will scare the ____ out of the leaders and change will happen.

      C'mon people. Where's your hacker spirit? Fight the man.

      More likely it won't escalate that far, so no worries. The video will continue to be spread across the net either by youtube or bittorrent, and Liberty will win by default.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    22. Re:Takedown? by Jurily · · Score: 1

      Never -- the RIAA doesn't control the copyright of the melody itself, only recordings of it made by RIAA-affiliated performers.

      You mean how Disney doesn't control Mickey Mouse?

    23. Re:Takedown? by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      You don't say parody... you say parley!

    24. Re:Takedown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there is a subtly here: this *is* how the RIAA produces its music nowadays. Case in point Sulja Boy et al. Computer programs checking other computer programs..I guess we are one step closer to artificial intelligence...sort of.

      So Skynet was originally a program made by the RIAA and MPAA people? That explains a lot.

    25. Re:Takedown? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why I felt necessary to link it.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    26. Re:Takedown? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      No, I mean like how Disney doesn't control Speedy Gonzales [because Warner Brothers* does instead].

      (*For the purpose of this post, assume that Warner Bothers is equally obnoxious as Disney even though it isn't in reality.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    27. Re:Takedown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll see your word and raise you three

    28. Re:Takedown? by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      My guess is that it'd just nix public performances; private poots would still be allowed... The only mainstream artist I know that uses flatulence is "Weird Al", you might want to check to see if your rump-riff is already copyrighted.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    29. Re:Takedown? by TurboNed · · Score: 1

      If they yank it and you try to re-upload it, make sure you re-encode it with different settings first. They store a hash of the original video, so if it's bit-for-bit exact, it'll never show up the second (or subsequent) times. All that being said - I don't expect you'll have a problem with it. Haven't seen it yet (at work), but I've got it saved to check out when I get home!

    30. Re:Takedown? by MadCow42 · · Score: 1

      What the copyright holders often fail to consider is the beneficial aspects of stuff like this:

      How many Slashdotters, after seeing this video, have gone out and bought the iTunes version of this song? I guarantee there's someone out there!

      Kevin.

      --
      I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
    31. Re:Takedown? by rackserverdeals · · Score: 1

      whoooooosh!

      You only get to "whoooosh" when someone makes a joke and someone doesn't get it.

      Whooosh doesn't apply when someone botches a joke.

      And while I'm at it, let me just add, cause you people have been using wooosh too often lately. Something funny could be a stupid phrase, but just because you say something stupid, doesn't mean it's funny.

      It's like that old mathematical explanation of sets. For example, all mom's are female, but your mom's a fat skank.

      Get it?

      --
      Dual Opteron < $600
    32. Re:Takedown? by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      The only mainstream artist I know that uses flatulence is "Weird Al", you might want to check to see if your rump-riff is already copyrighted.

      The noises you're thinking of (prominent in several of Al's older songs such as "Another One Rides The Bus" and "I Love Rocky Road") aren't really flatulence; they're hand noises created by "Musical Mike" Kieffer. He can be seen in the video for Headline News; the hand noises start at 2:39 and Musical Mike can be seen making them at 2:48 and 3:04.

      Yes, I am white & nerdy, how did you know?

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    33. Re:Takedown? by adolf · · Score: 1

      I think it is, by sheer virtue of the absurdity of the whole thing.

      Parody doesn't have to be funny. It doesn't have to be good. It doesn't have to be insulting.

      The man simply made a good parody of a good Queen song. Not a remix, not a cover, not a flailing attempt to repetitiously exploit a riff or a bassline. Just a parody.

      IMHO.

  4. Cool, but needs syncopation by mrchaotica · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The reproduction sounds too -- excuse me -- mechanical. I wonder, was it due to limitations in the timing granularity of the devices used, or just a bad MIDI file?

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by Dreadneck · · Score: 1

      Of course it sounded mechanical. All of the notes were being made by various hardware. I doubt anyone could coax human-like musical performance out of the hardware that was used, but the performance kicked ass given the choice of 'instruments' imho.

      --
      Power does not corrupt - power attracts the corrupt.
    2. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The timing is definitely off, and with the timing of each "instrument" a little off, they're not in sync with each other. It's close enough that you can tell what it should sound like, but it doesn't actually sound like that.

      For example, the rhythm of "easy come, easy go" starting at 0:36 is clearly wrong. The bass part starting around 1:30 isn't bad by itself, but it's not in sync with the other parts. 3:09 to 3:31 is pretty bad too.

      I suspect it was easier to get the timing right with some "instruments" than others. The bass part, by itself, seems very rhythmically solid, particularly from 3:29 all the way through to the end, it's just that the other parts aren't in sync with that.

      Overall, a brilliant piece of work. If these minor timing details could be cleaned up, it would be awesome.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    3. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think it was necessarily a limitation of the instruments; the problem was -- as I said before -- timing, not timbre. It was inadequate in the same way that a perfectly normal instrument played by a robot would be. I think it was simply that the person who made the (presumably) MIDI file used to drive the thing just did a poor job of it, and that it would have sounded just as wrong if it had been played back using the sound card's synthesizer.

      Some of the pitches weren't quite right either, but that really would be a limitation of the hardware, and I'm not complaining about it. Far from it; I think the hardware aspect of it was brilliant! I just wish he'd used a better score.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    4. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. I thought it seemed pretty well in tune; it was the timing that was off.

      If the creator is reading Slashdot: perhaps you could make some of your source material public, so we can see how you programmed each device to play its notes? Perhaps we could help work out some of the rhythmic details.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    5. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by zmollusc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I concur re the timing. I suggest replacement of the old hardware with some modern synthesisers and drum machines so that they all stay in time with a master clock. Maybe even get some humans to sing parts of it.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    6. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by pz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The timing is definitely off, and with the timing of each "instrument" a little off, they're not in sync with each other. It's close enough that you can tell what it should sound like, but it doesn't actually sound like that.

      For example, the rhythm of "easy come, easy go" starting at 0:36 is clearly wrong. The bass part starting around 1:30 isn't bad by itself, but it's not in sync with the other parts. 3:09 to 3:31 is pretty bad too.

      I suspect it was easier to get the timing right with some "instruments" than others. The bass part, by itself, seems very rhythmically solid, particularly from 3:29 all the way through to the end, it's just that the other parts aren't in sync with that.

      Overall, a brilliant piece of work. If these minor timing details could be cleaned up, it would be awesome.

      The OP neglected to take into account (or neglected to do a good enough job taking into account) the latency for each command to each instrument. This is especially evident with the scanner: it has a long startup time, but, once running, does well. When it first starts up after a period of silence, it's horribly late, but if it is just changing pitch, it's snappy. The same is true, but to a lesser extent, with the floppy drive -- but it also is producing a louder tone for the initial few hundreds of milliseconds and then quiets down.

      In all, I concur: a very good start at something that could well be brilliant, if a little more time had been spent obsessing.

      One of the things that makes the original a phenomenal performance is the non-robotic timing (the grace notes, for example, are not performed the way they appear on the score; the rising lead guitar arpeggios accelerate, as another example). A serious job would have tracked down not only all of the latency idiosyncrasies of the hardware, but also the subtle timing variations. And it might have mixed the recording a little better, too.

      Good start, though.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    7. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so why don't you just make it yourself to see how hard is to actually DOING IT and how easy is to BITCH after the work of another dude?

    8. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by Myrimos · · Score: 1

      ...I wonder, was it due to limitations in the timing granularity of the devices used, or just a bad MIDI file?

      Your suggestion that there are good MIDI files confuses and angers me.

      --
      Internet scofflaw
    9. Re:Cool, but needs syncopation by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      You say that because you've likely only experienced it played through a crappy sound card synthesizer. Remember, the thing about MIDI is that it's not an audio file. It's more like a musical score -- the result depends both on the MIDI file itself (the arrangement) and the synthesizer (the "musicians"). Play a well-composed MIDI file through a decent sythesizer (a newer SoundBlaster that supports those "soundfont" things would probably work, but a standalone one or MIDI keyboard that you'd find at a musical instrument store would be even better), and you'll be more impressed.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  5. Have you heard the rumour? by spankyofoz · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...about the HP Scanjet 3C?

    (not that there's anything wrong with that)

    --

    - There is no point, it's like a sphere -
    1. Re:Have you heard the rumour? by Inner_Child · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not a rumour, it really does prefer a male-to-male adapter.

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
  6. Queen Bohemian Rhapsody Old School Computer Remix by omar.sahal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is mad, but something makes me respect the artistry that you have done this with.

  7. Well duh! by dr_wheel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone can see that. Carry on.

    1. Re:Well duh! by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Well, nothing really matters to me.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  8. one thing......... by omar.sahal · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Some marketing weenie is going to take this idea and use it in some television advertisement.

  9. Bismillah! by Eternal+Vigilance · · Score: 1

    That was very cool - like a cross between Queen and Futurama.

    Allah your bass are belong to us.

    1. Re:Bismillah! by crazybit · · Score: 1

      It's Lieutenant Commander Data trying to conquer a Mainframe

      --
      - Human knowledge belongs to the world
    2. Re:Bismillah! by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      But without his emotion chip.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  10. Radiohead did it first..... by __aahcue4670 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or at least one of their fans did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOswq2P-pAs

    1. Re:Radiohead did it first..... by whyloginwhysubscribe · · Score: 1

      As a fan of the Bohemian Rhapsody song, Newton Faulkner did a fantastic version of this, which is also quite an accomplishment since I think queen user about 200 tracks or even more for the vocals :-)

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_k8_HSA1-o

    2. Re:Radiohead did it first..... by Guillaume+Castel · · Score: 1

      You know something's really wrong when the mixing on that thing sounds better than most hit albums out there...

  11. queen? by cheap.computer · · Score: 1

    What? Mercury? .... made in china?

  12. Don't watch youtube vids much by captnbmoore · · Score: 1

    That was an awesome job he/she did.

    --
    The Navy Motto "IF it ain't broke Fix It" "A day is wasted if you don't learn something new"
  13. Aaah by nermaljcat · · Score: 1

    Yet another way that computers have enhanced our lives =]

  14. no, it doesn't _ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (does that even make sense?)

    No, not really.
    What does standby power usage have to do with old hardware and music I don't personally like?

    I mean, you probably plugged in that stuff just so you could play that song.
    So, like.. unplug it. Problem solved.

  15. The only response by rossz · · Score: 1

    When I saw this video, the first thing that popped into my mind was Get a life!

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:The only response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember watching that sketch the night it first aired. But this version cuts off before he comes back and says under duress from Phil Hartman about how he was only kidding, playing the "evil kirk" from episode #22 or something or other...

    2. Re:The only response by rossz · · Score: 1

      It was the most complete version I could find. The SNL website doesn't seem to have any kind of search function.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
  16. Most parts are good, some are just pushing it by bersl2 · · Score: 1

    I wish there were another instrument. Some parts feel a little too sparse without one more voice.

    1. Re:Most parts are good, some are just pushing it by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I think it would be cool to dub in the vocals. Maybe run them through a vocoder first or someting.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  17. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    slow news week?

    1. Re:Hmm... by omuls+are+tasty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WTF dude. If there ever was a /. post worth of the "news for nerds" title, this is one.

      Absolutely freaking awesome.

  18. Kickass by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

    Incidentally, I just discovered that Alan Turing was gay while reading up for class.

    Seems like there's potential for some sort of a Turing-Queen tribute concert.

    Though perhaps this suffices.

    1. Re:Kickass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why haven't you read Cryptonomicon?

    2. Re:Kickass by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Because it's badly written, boring as hell and up its own arse trying to be clever with itself.

      Shit, I say that as a fan of Snowcrash and The Diamond Age...

  19. Re:WTF?..totally unrecognisg as pertinent by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    This is a 1970's tune that was not that big of a deal at the time....Yes, I graduated High school in 1976..don't try to B.S. me what was relevant then....I know better!

    Yeah, right. You're posting on Slashdot; you can't fool us! You were too busy listening to Mr. Spock's Music From Outer Space or something, and had no more clue about Queen than I do about Britney Spears (or whatever the Hell it is that popular assholes listen to these days)!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  20. It's like I always said....... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Easy come, easy go and Galileo.

    --
    Qxe4
  21. Yes, and the Vimeo version is MUCH better quality! by Wacky_Wookie · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The High Quality Viemo version can be viewed here:

    http://www.vimeo.com/1109226

    Radiohead were so impressed that hey linked to it from their homepage for a while.

  22. Freaking awesome is all I can say. by AgileGuru · · Score: 1

    Freaking awesome. This made my day. Can't say enough good things. :)

  23. the best part by ffflala · · Score: 4, Funny

    No Synthesizers!

    1. Re:the best part by leomekenkamp · · Score: 3, Informative

      +1, Funny

      For those who do not get the joke: go here and search for 'No synthesizers'.

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    2. Re:the best part by Artifex · · Score: 1

      No Synthesizers!

      What do you call the sound chips in the TI 99/4a and the Atari 800XL? ;)

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    3. Re:the best part by BluBrick · · Score: 1

      ---===WHOOSH!

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    4. Re:the best part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ---===WHOOSH!

      Ah, no. That would be the SN76489 and POKEY, respectively.

    5. Re:the best part by Artifex · · Score: 1

      You got me there. Didn't realize he was trying to be funny :)

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
  24. It's spelled... by AXNJAXN · · Score: 0

    "phantom".

  25. Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have some koks instead. (Weird and unsettling video that Youtube saw fit to link to the Bohemian Rhapsody clip, not safe for garden gnomes)

  26. any chance getting this as highquality mp3 o flac? by hoelk · · Score: 1

    would rock :)

  27. Re:Yes, and the Vimeo version is MUCH better quali by notseamus · · Score: 3, Informative

    And of course, the source for some of the tech he used for the art school project, http://www.afrotechmods.com/cheap/hdspeakers/hdspeakers.htm Almost as old as the internet itself

    --
    I dreamed of Freud: What does this mean?
  28. um... well, it's kinda similar, sometimes, I guess by Swampash · · Score: 2, Informative

    The sweet sweet melodies of Queen and the late Freddie Mercury are reproduced by hardware almost as old as the song is.

    This statement holds true only if you use a very broad definition of "sweet".

    And "melody".

    And "reproduced".

    There were large segments where, if I didn't know in advance that it was supposedly "Bohemian Rhapsody", I would have had no idea wtf I was listening to.

  29. Re:WTF?..totally unrecognisg as pertinent by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    This is a 1970's tune that was not that big of a deal at the time....Yes, I graduated High school in 1976..don't try to B.S. me what was relevant then....I know better!

    Maybe in your neck of the woods but in this country (UK) it was massive right from get go. It was number one for nine weeks over the all important Xmas period and returned to number one later - the first single to do that. In 1977, only two years after its release, the British Phonographic Industry named "Bohemian Rhapsody" as the best British single of the period 1952-77

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  30. Oops by moosesocks · · Score: 0

    Looks like somebody left those computers in the car for more than a fortnight.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  31. Yeah, but... by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    That was fantastic.

    BUT, should someone with that much technical ability, creativity, and imagination, really be allowed to idle so much as to DO that? He should be curing cancer, or making space travel reasonable, or building giant robots to help me take over the planet! Don't you think?

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  32. "fantom" electricity ? by DaveDerrick · · Score: 1

    "fantom" electricity ? Is this a delicious pun, or terrible spelling ?

    1. Re:"fantom" electricity ? by phozz+bare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oddly enough, TFA (the YouTube info from which this text was copied) spells it correctly!

  33. Re:um... well, it's kinda similar, sometimes, I gu by Nutria · · Score: 1

    This statement holds true only if you use a very broad definition of "sweet".

    And "almost as old": BR came out in 1975, and the 800XL much later, in 1983.

    Or does that 8 year difference only matter to people born before 1965?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  34. A phenomenal waste of resources by EmagGeek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Given we now know the CO2 impact of traffic on the Internet, I almost can't believe we're incrementally destroying the Earth over this..

    1. Re:A phenomenal waste of resources by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You should waste your angst on Las Vegas or something.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:A phenomenal waste of resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feel free to plant more trees instead of whine. Faggot.

  35. Re:Shittunes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone else read that as "Shitpeoples" ?

  36. Re:Yes, and the Vimeo version is MUCH better quali by pbhj · · Score: 1

    The High Quality Viemo version can be viewed here:

    http://www.vimeo.com/1109226

    Radiohead were so impressed that hey linked to it from their homepage for a while.

    Was that "until their record company bosses noticed it was an unlicensed reproduction and sued their asses"???.

  37. Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SID) by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I enjoy the remix groups like the one you linked, but there's simply nothing as good as the original hardware. Ahhhh nostalgia. ;-) Unfortunately I cannot provide a direct link so you'll have to do a little bit of navigation to Internet Explorer (does not work on firefox) and click here: http://www.lemon64.com/music

    Then:
    - Click VARIOUS
    - Click M-R
    - Click Merman
    - Click Bohemian Rhapsody

    This version of Bohemian Rhapsody is "okay" but I've heard far better music than this coming from the Commodore=64, like the stuff in the 20CC folder (top directory). I like their TV Tunes Mix and 20CC/van_Santen_Edwin/Final_Axel and 20CC/van_Santen_Edwin/Enigma_Intro. Other favorite sidtunes: Galway_Martin/Arkanoid_PSID (songs 1, 2, 3, and 4) and Galway_Martin/Wizball and Galway_Martin/Never_ending_story. The "DEMOS" directory is also worth checking out.

    The 1982 SID sound chip uses just 3 voices and primitive Attack-Decay-Sustain-Release (ADSR) sound generation. No samples like in the later Amiga or Super Nintendo machines - just direct manipulation of the "instrument". It was the first home computer that sounded like music instead of a touchtone phone. In later years hackers learned to use the volume control to do voice generation such as in Impossible Mission where it says, "Ahh another visitor. Stay awhile. Staaaaay forever!" Another first for home computers.

    Yep computing in the 1980s was definitely not boring.
    Always somebody inventing something new and exciting.
    More information can be found here:
    http://www.exotica.org.uk/mediawiki/index.php?title=Special%3AHVSC&si=0&title=Special%3AHVSC&sr=0&md=qsearch&qs=arkanoid

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  38. wow by scharkalvin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Brings back memories of a road trip from NYC to Dayton OH to go to the hamfest.
    Must have heard that song a gazillon times on the radio. Also Layla.
    Maybe he can do Layla next.

  39. Metonymy of "RIAA" by tepples · · Score: 1

    Nothing to do with the RIAA, though.

    Slashdot users often use the term "RIAA" metonymically for its members, just as "the White House" is used for the U.S. executive branch. And many RIAA members, such as the big four record labels, also happen to be members of the National Music Publishers' Association.

  40. What precautions by tepples · · Score: 1

    If your work was created independently (and you're going to need some evidence here I'm afraid) without copying then there is no infringement.

    Say I write my own song, but I'm not trying to copy anything. What precautions should I take before I publish to avoid being sued for accidental infringement like George Harrison was?

    1. Re:What precautions by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      The ratio of your precautions to George Harrison's should be the same as the ratio between your fame and his.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:What precautions by pbhj · · Score: 1

      If your work was created independently (and you're going to need some evidence here I'm afraid) without copying then there is no infringement.

      Say I write my own song, but I'm not trying to copy anything. What precautions should I take before I publish to avoid being sued for accidental infringement like George Harrison was?

      There is no try there is only do .. or something.

      Either you copy someone (perhaps subconsciously) or you don't. The chances of creating a piece of music independently appear to be quite slim and so the court will probably have a high level of presumed guilt towards you. If you had manuscripts showing developments and adaptations of your own original song that might help.

      However, in the US I think a work that closely resembles a registered work may infringe automatically without and consideration of balance of probabilities or what have you??

      IANAIPL

  41. Fantom? by Porchroof · · Score: 1

    'There are millions of computers sitting idle at home consuming fantom electricity.

    Fantom? As in "Phantom of the Opera" or that old comic "The Phantom"? Nah, can't be. Not spelled the same.

    But, if in fact phantom was intended by the author, just what in hell is phantom electricity?

    --
    Fata viam invenient.
    1. Re:Fantom? by treeves · · Score: 1

      Well, "phantom power" has a specific meaning in the field of sound/audio engineering, but I don't think that was what was meant here.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  42. Reminds me of the Symphony for Dot Matrix Printer by pbarnhart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Reminds me of a project I ran into a long time ago - glad to see it still up - http://www.theuser.org/dotmatrix/en/intro.html

  43. Cool hardware, 4th grade rythm by just+fiddling+around · · Score: 1

    This sounds like 4th grade chilren playing music together: no one is on the same beat, and nobody follows the rythm. Technically, everybody follows the melody, but what a mess!

    Cool use of the scanner and the disk drive, tho!

    --
    You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
  44. Awesome, just needs a little more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... cowbell

  45. Bravo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I don't mean the cable channel. This is brilliant and fun and anyone who complains is just a big pimply butt.

  46. Re:Takedown?-- um No by secret_squirrel_99 · · Score: 1

    because 2 million dollars for a single song is cruel and unusual punishment.

    While I agree that it is ridiculous, your argument is factually incorrect. The eighth amendment deals specifically with criminal punishment. Copyright infringment and the associated penalties are civil matters

    --
    If privacy had a tombstone it would read "We did it for your own good" . -- John Twelve Hawks
  47. Make it into a ringtone by jbezorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and show off your true geekdom

    --
    I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
  48. Re:Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SI by Pikoro · · Score: 1

    Wholly fucking christ! heaven forbid you have a JVM open anywhere. That sounds like someone running that previous scanner sound through a carton of dry laundry soap.

    Close everything if you open that URL!
    Sounds fine after closing all Java instances.

    --
    "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
  49. Re:Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The SID is great and everything, but if that's the only chip you're listening to you really don't have a clue.

    Oh and 8bitpeoples is not a 'remix group'.

  50. Re:Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In later years hackers learned to use the volume control to do voice generation such as in Impossible Mission where it says, "Ahh another visitor. Stay awhile. Staaaaay forever!" Another first for home computers.

    Castle Wolfenstein was shouting "Achtung! Schweinhund!" at me on my Apple ][ well before Impossible Mission came out!

  51. The opposite: Humans singing electronic music by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
    ROYGBIV by Boards of Canada done a capella.

    Two guys singing, whistling, and otherwise imitating drum machines and synths. And a perky girl who pops up saying "LATE!"

    Sweet and kind work by nice people.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  52. Re:Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SI by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

    I didn't have any problems.

    Is the JSIDplayer not compatible with other java programs, due to high CPU usage? Hmmm. I see it is using 11% of my CPU; maybe I better close it before I go to lunch.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  53. Re:Takedown?-- um No by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

    Yes but...

    The original $2 million per song punishment was mandated by Congressional law (or so I've been told), and congressional law is limited by the Constitution, so the law would be invalidated by the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause. When you stop and think about it, a multi-million dollar punishment levied against a single citizen is the equivalent to a life sentence, because that's how long you would have to work to pay it off. Issuing a life sentence because you used someone's copyrighted song is cruel in my humble opinion.

    And ultimately when you have angered the People, who are the ultimate holders of authority, even if the law is declared constitutional it will eventually be changed by the scared Congress. No politician likes angry citizens. They don't want to lose the next election - or worse, get shot.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  54. And don't forget the Irish by Pictish+Prince · · Score: 1

    This is also an interesting take on the song.

    --
    Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
  55. Re:WTF?..totally unrecognisg as pertinent by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    You nuts. It made hit number 2 on the US charts and was the break through song for Queen.
    The album it was on hit number four, went triple platinum and was on the charts for 56 weeks.
    It may have been no big deal to you but it was a big deal to the music world. The fact that it got any air play at all was a huge deal when you think about how strange and long the song was.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  56. Re:Yes, and the Vimeo version is MUCH better quali by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was that "until their record company bosses noticed it was an unlicensed reproduction and sued their asses"???.

    It's still there.

    http://www.radiohead.com/deadairspace/index.php?a=377

    The song was released after they shrugged off their "record company bosses", so I believe they own all the copyrights. (It was written and performed back in '97-98, though, so I could be wrong.)

  57. ScanJet 3C by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    I knew that there was a reason (besides that fact that it scans legal size and few other so) that I kept that HP ScanJet 3C.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  58. Really Old School by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    I remember The Stars and Strips Forever played on a Control Data Corporation 3500 mainframe that used both a built-in speaker (controlled by the lower bits in a register) in the console, and 4 high-speed half-inch tape drives with three-foot tall vacuum columns for the bass section.

    And then there was radio static music on an IBM 1130 mini from a program written in Fortran IV. The bulk of the program, after reading in the data cards with the notes of the song to play, consisted of a DO loop containing about thirty CONTINUE statements. So much for any sort of optimizing compiler on the IBM hardware. I tried the same program on a CDC 1704 mini, which was considered a reasonably comparable machine at the time and the 3 minute song "played" in 3 seconds. I still consider it my first comparative computer benchmark run.

    Life was simpler and we were entertained more easily by clever hacks in those days.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  59. Yes, but compare to "Printer Jam" by FlameWise · · Score: 1

    Nice effort, honest.

    Still, that hurt a bit :)

    Here's one that was awesome instead of painful: Mistabishi: Printer Jam

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is-HVxmUELQ

  60. Re:um... well, it's kinda similar, sometimes, I gu by David+M.+Sweeney · · Score: 1

    It's not how well the bear dances, it's that the bear dances at all.

  61. Re:Wannna hear it on an ancient 1982 computer? (SI by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

    >>>The SID is great and everything, but if that's the only chip you're listening to you really don't have a clue.

    Yeah I agree its great. That's why it was picked as one of the greatest computer chips ever made by PC World. However I don't know what you're talking about in the second half of your sentence. I've listened to lots of different sound chips over the years, Paula on the Amiga (best pre-1990 computer), POKEY on the Atari 8-bits, and the chips that make IBM PCs go "beep". For its time (1982) SID was the best-sounding chip that came with a stock computer.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall