Slashdot Mirror


Project To Turn Classical Scores Into Copyright-Free Music Completed

yourlord writes "Just under two years ago Musopen launched a Kickstarter campaign covered here on Slashdot. Today that project is complete with the release of a large amount of classical recordings into the public domain. This brings an extensive collection of high quality classical music into the public domain. The project music is hosted on the Musopen site, and on archive.org."

290 comments

  1. It was me! by garglebutt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I invested in this. Great idea to set music free. Enjoy the downloads.

    --
    Do anything, anywhere, anytime.
    1. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Me too! Best $$ I've ever spent for music I think.

    2. Re:It was me! by Tough+Love · · Score: 0

      I am thinking of a couple of billionaire so-called philanthropists, and wonder if they can honestly say "it was me!" about anything half so fundamentally important.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:It was me! by mug+funky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      which ones? the billionaire philanthropist that springs most easily to my mind is trying to eliminate malaria, solve the energy problem and thus mitigate climate change, and his wife's attempting to fix population problems in countries that can't sustain their birth rates.

      but i listen to Beethoven every now and then i suppose...

    4. Re:It was me! by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think the main reason he's doing it is because Microsoft became really boring.

      Operating Systems? Meh. Office? Meh.

      What, in the world of pure software, is going to make a real difference in peoples lives (not just a marginal difference)? Or a real difference to his bank balance?

      if I was even 1 / 10,000th as rich as Bill Gates (a respectable $6,000,000 dollars) I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to gild my corporate cage a bit more ; I'd be working on problems that interest me.

    5. Re:It was me! by aztracker1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How do you figure... giving 100,000 of income to charity is at most a tax break of 50,000 or so.... would 100,000 not be more than the 50,000 in taxes? I always hate arguments like this.... donations are not 1:1 deductible from taxes.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    6. Re:It was me! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, he's doing it because it allows him to push IP treaties onto countries with growing economies and emerging markets that benefit his other investments.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:It was me! by mattr · · Score: 2

      Thank you! How wonderful. I see one recording has five stars and downloaded it. Though I didn't know the title or composer of course I knew the beautiful song as soon as it started streaming from my laptop.. Morning from Peer Gynt Suite No. 1, Op. 46. What a great project, kudos to you too!

    8. Re:It was me! by Ultracrepidarian · · Score: 2

      Me too. 1st work was one of my favorites, Brahms - Symphony No 2 in D major.

    9. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      They can still earn money by performing these compositions and recording them, it's just that the free versions will likely determine the minimum standards in terms of performance and recording quality. There still should be musicians and recording facilities that could match them or do better. Something unique in regards to a performance of a given work might also have a selling point too. (Nothing that says you can't modify the arrangement and do something like a jazzy version of these songs, or something similar.)

      Now if you're complaining about the bar being set too high, then maybe you're in the wrong line of work.

    10. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      What do you expect from those who only care about getting something for nothing. Their attitude is that the musicians (and by extension, all content creators) should create art/music/films/games/etc. for the benefit of the rest of the rest of us as a hobby (after all, it is not necessary for them to make a living from what they do), and that they should just quit complaining and get a day job.

    11. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Surely, what an achievement, you helped to undercut the last chance of already decimated orchestras around the globe to earn some money from their original interpretations and recordings.

      This statement has done nothing but fall on deaf ears of those who still actually attend live orchestras. To assume you would understand that niche industry's financial ebb and flow is an insult to the very snobs that continue to keep it alive. Do you honestly consider a digital recording even on the same stage as a live presentation when speaking to fans of this particular art? I know they certainly would not.

    12. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Their attitude is that the musicians (and by extension, all content creators) should create art/music/films/games/etc. for the benefit of the rest of the rest of us as a hobby "

      Not at all. We want them to get paid _once_ for their work, just like the rest of us.
      You don't pay the builders, painters, cleaners of your house every time you use it, why should you pay for the background music there?

    13. Re:It was me! by RaceProUK · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know about you, but I support musicians by seeing them live at gigs i.e. seeing them earn their money.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    14. Re:It was me! by chill · · Score: 1

      You didn't recognize those once they started playing? You've lived a sheltered life, musically.

      Pay the $50 annual subscription to Musopen and download various stuff at high quality (lossless AAC). You will not be disappointed.

      [The Peer Gynt Suite No 1, Op 46., I - IV are fantastic and the first pieces I downloaded.]

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    15. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Justin Bieber is still free to release his mini-pop versions of these songs and charge money for them.

    16. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The last time I tried to "fix the population problem" I was hunted down as a serial killer. If I was rich I'd be hailed as a philanthropist. Life is unfair.

    17. Re:It was me! by Merk42 · · Score: 4, Funny

      This statement has done nothing but fall on deaf ears of those who still actually attend live orchestras.

      If they're deaf, why are they attending an orchestra performance?

    18. Re:It was me! by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      The orchestras can perform new music and live auditions instead of re-selling the same old classical music for hundreds of years. If something has been part of human culture for so long, and the original creators are long dead, it feels morally right to be able to enjoy these works for free.

    19. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This makes no sense. He's giving his money away (the vast majority of it). He's repeatedly said that when he and his wife die, the foundation will give all of it's money away within X years (I think I remember the number being 10 or 20). When he makes more, he just has more to give away. So is this an evil plot to do more good?

    20. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't recognize those once they started playing? You've lived a sheltered life, musically.]

      Lol, get a load of this guy.

    21. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same billionaire philanthropist screwed said countries by getting them hooked on his product and then squeezing their balls. Same billionaire philanthropist invests his funds money in pharmaceutical companies also squeeze the balls of said countries. Make no mistake, they are paying through the nose for their charity.

    22. Re:It was me! by arose · · Score: 2

      I'll pass on supporting the crappy pay wall revenue model. Want to waste their bandwidth streaming? Go right ahead! Want to grab a few mp3s? For $50 you get lossless! Well, I don't care, not right now anyway.

      The only way I'd pay it is to put the whole lot on piratebay. You say that's not nice? Well, what's the point of it being public domain if you have to buy a subscription and it's mean to share it?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    23. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, he's right, it's a well-known piece - the kind of thing you're likely to have heard played in the background of commercials, videos, TV programs, etc - so you're likely to recognise it, even if you don't know the name of the music.

      The parent comment made sense - yours was just snarky and stupid.

    24. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They want to listen to Beethoven as the composer heard it?

    25. Re:It was me! by chill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      On the Internet, everyone may not know you're a dog but by the tone of your comments they can be damn certain you're a douchebag.

      Don't put words in my mouth. The reason I payed the $50 was to get access to the whole lot as lossless. I'm converting them from AAC to Ogg-FLAC with proper tags and will bundle them as a torrent. Pirate Bay is one of many places I hope to see them.

      That *IS* the point of them being public domain, after all. And the entire point of this project was to share quality music.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    26. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To gawk at the little Asian girl cello shredders of course.

    27. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you figure... giving 100,000 of income to charity is at most a tax break of 50,000 or so.... would 100,000 not be more than the 50,000 in taxes? I always hate arguments like this.... donations are not 1:1 deductible from taxes.

      And I always hate it when this is brought up, because it's a pointless argument that thankfully doesn't concern true philanthropists. Not all forms of payment or wealth in this world are measured in dollars. Only the ones still blinded by greed see donations as nothing more than a tax writeoff.

    28. Re:It was me! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I've not found info on the site about this...

      Can you use this music for your videos (even for money generating ones) for free??

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    29. Re:It was me! by Shagg · · Score: 1

      Because they can read the musicians lips, of course.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    30. Re:It was me! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I support musicians by seeing them live at gigs i.e. seeing them earn their money.

      I don't.

      I hate large crowds of people. Shit, I hate small crowds of , nm, I just hate people. Mainly in public gatherings.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    31. Re:It was me! by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think he's doing it for the same reason that Carnegie and Rockerfeller did. He didn't want to be remembered as a Robber Baron so he went to work trying to buy his way into a better image.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    32. Re:It was me! by rgbscan · · Score: 2

      Well, I think part of it is that the money he's 'giving' away is used to fund programs that help his investments. For example, from what I've seen in news coverage, the vaccine programs they set up buy drugs from Merck. Sure, the foundation goes in there and sets up a program and buys the first round of vaccines for children. Now the program is up and running. The foreign government keeps it going (or other aid organizations do with monetary contributions) and continue to buy discounted drugs for the program from Merck. This earns the Gates Foundation a return.

      Same with crops. They are heavily invested in Monsanto. Particularily GMO crops (a whole 'nother debate on the wisdom of that). They go in and buy seeds and agricultural equipment from Monsanto and give it to foreign farmers. As you may know though, these seeds have to be repurchased every year. It's not like traditional seeds that can be harvested and replanted. So the farmers become dependent on Monsanto, again earning the foundation a return.

      I really hope the news reports and blog posts are wrong, and that the foundation really is doing good in the world. All that money could do amazing things. A lot of sites though have demonstrated how the foundation could just be a huge tax shelter for the Gates' wealth. I suppose if they donate it all when they die, it doesn't matter..... but we don't know how serious this 'pledge' is 10 or 20 years down the road.

    33. Re:It was me! by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The people that paid will be getting nice DRM-free spinny discs. Once this is fully realized, we can start seeding torrents.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    34. Re:It was me! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The license for the recordings is public domain. Use it wherever you want.

    35. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 2

      Again, why is it bad that the foundation makes a return on it's endowment? Why is it bad that Merck sell drugs at a discounted rate? Why is it bad to become dependent on the only company that can help you grow enough crops to survive? (BTW the Gates foundation is getting Monsanto to give farmers royalty free licenses to use their protected technologies, i.e., seeds.)

      I guess if you assume lies and bad motivations, anything the Gates do can be viewed as malevolent...

    36. Re:It was me! by aarondunn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Aaron here, founder of Musopen. I think you would be hard pressed to find any evidence that Musopen, or really any free online music service (spotify, itunes, rdio etc) is hurting symphonies. If there is a decline in attendance its because of a chance in musical tastes, not mp3s shared on the internet. I know from personal experience that I only became interested in classical music when a CD was shared with me (illegally!) and I began searching out more on my own. I now attend concerts because nothing will ever match the quality of the sound, or the experience hearing it live. I know that for a fact because I've spent way to much on my stereo system.

    37. Re:It was me! by arose · · Score: 1

      I'm not putting worth in your mouth and hope to not hear any more of such accusations. You don't know a thing about me, much less be certain based on the tone my critical-of-musopen comment (I was trying to get some classical music for my mom who was recovering from some very serious surgery from a place that used to actually bring public domain music to people before they put up the paywall, for all intents and purposes they were just another paysite at $50, there's some fucking context for you), would you be so kind to stop the insinuations about my character and stay on topic?

      It's not about me and it's not about you either, so why you did or didn't pay makes absolutely no difference to Musopens deeply flawed approach to the issue. Musopen doesn't want torrents, musopen doesn't want you to have the music if you don't pay, it's very much like Mandrake back in the day (I haven't followed Mandrive, they might still do that) where they can't stop you because they do actually license stuff in-line with their beliefs, but will guilt trip you into paying instead. I have no problems with donations or funding (the kickstarter campaign was a great idea). I also understand covering your costs... as long as it is in line with the costs. A much more reasonable approach would be to charge for lossless (big) and streaming access (bandwidth intensive, but convenient, especially for smartphones). That'd look both like covering costs and charging for premium access up and above simple, small mp3 downloads.

      But no, this is a "you should support us or else move" and very much counter with the spirit they presented when the site originally came into being. Hope none of the initial contributors (performers who contributed before the paywall that is) just wanted people to be able to get unrestricted classical music, else they might feel kinda cheated. But who cares about them, the Project is more important than contributors or even its ultimate goals.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    38. Re:It was me! by Quirkz · · Score: 0

      You don't pay the builders, painters, cleaners of your house every time you use it, why should you pay for the background music there?

      Try telling that to your landlord. "I paid you rent last month. I shouldn't have to pay to live in this house *again*."

    39. Re:It was me! by gishzida · · Score: 1

      And I thank you and all who contributed to making this happen. The only thing missing to make it perfect is J.S. Bach's Little Fugue in G Minor.

        Too bad we can't do the same for the rest of our culture - arts, science, literature... and while we are at it reset the IP laws to reasonable limits.... but that isn't likely to happen is it? We have allowed our culture to be sold into the hands of evil masters.

    40. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, dedicated to the idea that people everywhere deserve the chance to serve their rightful owners." The Gates Foundation serves four principal purposes: 1) Preservation of repressive IP laws and treaties - i.e., African nations don't get "free" medicine unless they abandon efforts to reform international patent treaties to allow them to make their own medicines to meet emergency public health needs. 2) Leverage in commercial markets, i.e. the mass cancellation of orders for XO "One Laptop Per Child" orders from countries addicted to Gates Foundation drug deliveries, keeping Free Software and superior hardware out of the hands of children in tomorrow's "growth market" for consumer electronics. 3) Leverage in U.S. domestic policy, i.e. the Gates Foundation "grants" to public schools, a program that re-creates the No Child Left Behind program in districts where parents and teachers worked long and hard to throw it overboard. 4) Attempting to rehabilitate the public image of a vicious little thief whose sole claim to fame is that he was the smartest sociopath in the room at the beginning of the microcomputer revolution.

      Lots of people believe that the Gates Foundation is a charity, and that Gates is a philanthropist. "They" don't have access to relevant factual information on the subject. What's YOUR excuse?

    41. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm converting them from AAC to Ogg-FLAC with proper tags and will bundle them as a torrent. Pirate Bay is one of many places I hope to see them.

      The Apple lossless files have already been converted to FLAC and bundled as a torrent:
      http://pirateproxy.net/torrent/7536456/2012_Musopen_Kickstarter_Project_[FLAC]

    42. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely right! Paul McCartney doesn't pay his architect, builder or interior decorator (all professions that could be considered art) royalties. Why should the offspring of these "artistes" enjoy a royalty cheque for 70 years after mummy or daddy kicked the bucket whithout doing a days work? Such a state of affairs has existed only very recently in human history ('tis but sparrow-fart at the end of time"). All that occured is a suitable majority of lawmakers was cajoled or bribed into passing laws that benefit this group - and there's no reason why given a suitable majority of population (voters or whatever your local equivalent) should not pass law to reduce or remove copyright, thus returning things to their natural order.

    43. Re:It was me! by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Difference is you own a Cd you don't rent them. (Usually)

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    44. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's giving his money away (the vast majority of it). He's repeatedly said that when he and his wife die, the foundation will give all of it's money away within X years

      That statement is the strongest evidence I've heard so far that he really isn't in it for doing good, but is instead just in it for personal self-aggrandizement.

      It *sounds* noble an altrusitic, but it falls utterly flat when you realize that there's vanishingly little chance that malaria, HIV, malnutrition, sanitation, etc. will magically disappear by 10-20 years after Bill & Melinda die. Why wind down the foundation then? Look at Rockefeller, Carnegie and Hughes. Assholes, the lot of them. But the foundations they've started are still going, and still promoting good works in education, arts, and public health. There's no reason that the Gates Foundation couldn't continue well after their death, wisely and ethically managing their endowment, and using the interest to continue to promote the goals of the foundation.

      Frankly speaking, the only reason I see to kill off the foundation after Bill & Melinda die is a philosophy of "Why do we need a foundation? It's not going to do anything for *us*, we're dead."

    45. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 1

      Well, if you are going to make the argument that all acts are selfish, it is hard to single out the Gates for personal self-aggrandizement as a criticism.

      You should read what he writes and says in interviews about what his motivations and goals are. Particularly the one where he tries to give Mark Zuckerberg advice on his vast wealth.

        "Frankly speaking, the only reason I see to kill off the foundation after Bill & Melinda die is ..." look further.

    46. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 1

      This is baseless and shallow.

    47. Re:It was me! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of Bill Gates, of course, who's notable for not giving any money to charity until he was so rich he had no hope of spending all his money himself. And once he did start being a philanthropist, there was a big element of ego in it. For example, the goal of his anti-malaria campaign is complete eradication of the disease. Experts agree that this is impractical, and more suffering would be eliminated if he concentrated on prevention and mitigation. But no, he wants to go down in history as the guy who killed malaria. It's all about him, not the people who need help.

      The kind of philanthropist I admire is Joan Kroc, who often tried to give away huge sums creatively and anonymously. For example, people who'd lost their homes to the 1997 Red River flood received large anonymous gifts from her. Of course, you can't give away that much money at one time and not be found out.

    48. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're both wrong. Try reading and comprehending. He said he didn't know the title or composer, but DID know the song as soon as it started playing.

    49. Re:It was me! by westyvw · · Score: 1

      Ah but continue the train of thought: The landlord would not come by ever again to do any upkeep, pay property taxes, or maintain the grounds.

    50. Re:It was me! by strikethree · · Score: 1

      You are partially correct. Bill is doing it for the same reason that Andy and John did: It is part of the entrance requirements when you have been accepted to The Club.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    51. Re:It was me! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      To assume you would understand that niche industry's financial ebb and flow is an insult to the very snobs that continue to keep it alive.

      Wait... someone who enjoys classical music is by definition a snob, as opposed to somebody with a broad musical education and perhaps discerning ears?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    52. Re:It was me! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I think you would be hard pressed to find any evidence that Musopen, or really any free online music service (spotify, itunes, rdio etc) is hurting symphonies.

      As with the pop music industry I fully expect you would find the opposite... broad based distribution of free recordings encourages those who have the means to make additional purchases and seek out live performances.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    53. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should consider suicide. That would solve all of your people hating problems.

    54. Re:It was me! by lerxstz · · Score: 1

      No it's actually well researched and true. Don't for a second think ol' billy boy is doing it out of the goodness of his heart.

      Just google the the links between the Gates foundation, Monsanto and Syngenta (GMO) and his investment into the doomsday seed bank (which houses non-GMO seed there thank you very much). There's a lot of strings attached to his "donations".

      --
      I chose to end my comments, not with a rim shot, but a long decaying F#7sus4
    55. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You joke, but I have actually chatted with some deaf people (over IM) who do go to raves specifically to feel the thumping bass.

    56. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the trick is to "give" money to charities that you actually secretly control. Like when people "give" money to their own religious cult.

    57. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 1

      Except Gates doesn't benefit, so it doesn't make any sense.

    58. Re:It was me! by RDW · · Score: 1

      There still should be musicians and recording facilities that could match them or do better.

      It's rather sad to note that, at the same time this worthy project was being completed, our elected representatives in the EU extended copyright on recorded music from 50 to 70 years:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/12/musicians-copyright-extension

      This means that while many of the great performances from the classic mono era can still be made freely available (and some of these have arguably never been bettered), we won't see legendary early stereo recordings like Solti's complete Ring cycle, finished in 1965, in the public domain for another couple of decades. It is, of course, a complete coincidence that the pop music cash cows of the 60s were also about to go out of copyright...

      One practical consequence of this is that we'll presumably see fewer of the excellent restorations that companies like Naxos have done on public domain material, often producing better releases than the original record companies, even without access to the master recordings.

    59. Re:It was me! by lerxstz · · Score: 1

      Sure he benefits. By coercing third world countries to adopt U.S. style IP laws, he (and his heirs) have more future sources of revenue from their patents. By partnering with Monsanto and their ilk, IF they are successful in supplanting non-GMO food sources, they would be sitting on the most valuable IP patents of all time (seed patents).

      He benefits more from that than he does from good will, so if anything doesn't make sense, it's his philanthropy imo.

      --
      I chose to end my comments, not with a rim shot, but a long decaying F#7sus4
    60. Re:It was me! by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      So buy their CDs and T-shirts instead, or just send them cash. If you want to support them, you can find a way that's compatible with your particular neuroses.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    61. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 1

      But he doesn't own the Foundation or the Trust. The Gates give more to the Foundation and Trust each year than their combined incomes. The Foundation and Trust must spend a minimum of ~$1.5 billion per year on philanthropic work to maintain its status as a charitable foundation (which it continues to maintain). Additionally, it must give another ~$1.5 billion per year on philanthropic work as a condition of Buffet's donation. All of the resources of the Trust and Foundation will be spent within 50 years of the Gates' deaths. Neither Bill Gates nor any of his family draw a salary from the Trust or Foundation.

      Further, the foundation has convinced Monsanto to give its IP royalty free to the farmers the Foundation is trying to help.

      None of what you claim adds up.

    62. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't pay the builders, painters, cleaners of your house every time you use it, why should you pay for the background music there?

      Try telling that to your landlord. "I paid you rent last month. I shouldn't have to pay to live in this house *again*."

      In fact that is exactly what happened when I purchased my house. I thanked the original owner, shook hands, and we parted company.
      I never once spoke to him after that, and if he did happen to show up in my life asking me to pay him a second time for my home, I would in fact tell him to go pound sand, and would be within my legal and moral right to do so

      Of course I am fully aware you are trying to purposely confuse renting something with purchasing something, but that's no ones problem but your own.

      In order for an exchange to legally be a rent instead of a purchase, it must be stated up front that it is a rented item and not a purchase, and the terms must be stated in advance so I have an opportunity to agree or walk away. With homes this is exactly the case.

    63. Re:It was me! by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Of course I am fully aware you are trying to purposely confuse renting something with purchasing something, but that's no ones problem but your own.

      Sure, kinda. But I think the "you should only get paid once for your work" argument is weird attempt to wriggle around other perfectly valid business models, which includes things like rent, or interest, or selling a book in large volumes at a small cost to make it worthwhile. I think it's silly to pretend the only way to make money is in a direct, one-time exchange for an hour's effort, and no number of plumber analogies will convince me there's something inherently wrong with *some* business models that don't work that way. It gets old seeing people insist there's one and only one way to do business. Or only one "moral" way to do it.

    64. Re:It was me! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Wait. So GP (and me, and several thousand other people) paid to commission a recording with full transfer of rights to the project - and now that we released those rights that we legally purchased and own to everyone for free, we "only care about getting something for nothing"?

      You know what? Go fuck yourself. With a rusty fork.

    65. Re:It was me! by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      we won't see legendary early stereo recordings like Solti's complete Ring cycle, finished in 1965, in the public domain for another couple of decades.

      You can buy it on Amazon. What's the problem? It's always been the case that you've had to pay for great music in the past. Civilisation still hasn't collapsed.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    66. Re:It was me! by chill · · Score: 1

      The only way I'd pay it is to put the whole lot on piratebay. You say that's not nice? Well, what's the point of it being public domain if you have to buy a subscription and it's mean to share it?

      That is putting words in my mouth, and what I objected to.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    67. Re:It was me! by RDW · · Score: 1

      You can buy it on Amazon. What's the problem? It's always been the case that you've had to pay for great music in the past. Civilisation still hasn't collapsed.

      I already bought it, thanks, back when Solti was still alive and hopefully in a position to benefit from my purchase. Civilisation was getting on perfectly well with an already generous 50 year copyright term at the time.

    68. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Their attitude is that the musicians (and by extension, all content creators) should create art/music/films/games/etc. for the benefit of the rest of the rest of us as a hobby "

      Not at all. We want them to get paid _once_ for their work, just like the rest of us.
      You don't pay the builders, painters, cleaners of your house every time you use it, why should you pay for the background music there?

      That is not how it works. There are royaltees that are expected and part of the deal that was in place for at least some of the musicians.

    69. Re:It was me! by arose · · Score: 1

      It's not, the yous in that quote are people who hold that attitude in general and the people who made such a contradictory decision at musopen in particular.

      The first paragraph does address 'you' as well, and it's not /. user chill there either. You seem to recognize the fact, so why, even after clarification of what my complaint is and who it is directed at, do you insist that the second paragraph must?

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    70. Re:It was me! by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      to be honest, the reason for philanthropy doesn't concern me if real good is done.

      someone like Gates has such an unbelievably rare opportunity to pursue "saving the world" without being held back by politics - he can play at being the benevolent dictator of his own little world, and if that makes things better for everyone else, than it's worth it.

      i wont buy windows 8 though :)

    71. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also don't pay for the CD or downloaded album every time you listen to it!

      You pay once and listen to it for a million times if you want.

    72. Re:It was me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get their point quite clearly, and I have a non-verbal learning disability. Doesn't say much for you, does it?

      The point they were making is this:

      Worshippers: Oh look, such a wealthy man is doing so much good with his money, for no personal gain whatsoever! What a guy!

      Others: He is most certainly getting benefit from it - power, money, influence, tax breaks.

      You: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? WHAT ARE YOU? A COMMUNIST? OH MY GOD YOU'RE EBIL! EBIL!!!!!!!

      But I suspect you'll throw some kind of tantrum and try and point out that's not what you've claimed, so I'll just do a quick cut'n'paste:

      This makes no sense. He's giving his money away (the vast majority of it). [...] When he makes more, he just has more to give away. So is this an evil plot to do more good?

      Again, why is it bad that the foundation makes a return on it's endowment?

      So, let's look at that a little more closely: he's making money, increasing influence and power - basically putting others under his thumb, and yet people like you are almost down on your knees begging for a taste of cock because he's being so good and kind and moral and blah blah.

      It's almost amusing that you think he's doing this out of the kindness of his heart, but it's really rather pathetic. TANSTAAFL, and this guy ain't giving out free lunches. He's giving out the bill.

    73. Re:It was me! by glodime · · Score: 1

      He is most certainly getting benefit from it - power, money, influence, tax breaks.
      he's making money, increasing influence and power

      I'll give you the Tax break part, but it seems irrelevant. The tax breaks pale in comparison to the amount he gives away. He's giving away way more than he makes each year and has been doing so since circa 1994. If that is the way he is increasing his influence. I'm OK with that. Why aren't you?

      You haven't answered any of the questions I posed. You've continued to assume malice on the Gates' motivations. Yet you have no support for your claims. His actions since 1994 have indicated that he is genuinely interested in helping as much as he can with his philanthropy. Have you even read their audited financial statements that they are not required to share but do anyway?

      WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? WHAT ARE YOU? A COMMUNIST? OH MY GOD YOU'RE EBIL! EBIL!!!!!!!

      Um. No. Not even close.
      If you want to bitch about using foundations as a tax shelter while being minimally compliant for tax purposes look at Ingvar Kamprad and the Stichting INGKA Foundation and the Interogo Foundation

  2. Nicely done! by symbolset · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fantastic. Now let's do it again until more classical works are liberated. And visit their "donate" button.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Nicely done! by Rockoon · · Score: 2

      I might be persuaded to donate if there wasnt coughing and other noise in moonlight sonata

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re:Nicely done! by c0lo · · Score: 4, Informative

      And visit their "donate" button.

      FTFY (rationale: I read some comments indicating some have difficulties in finding their way on the site).

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:Nicely done! by CrashandDie · · Score: 5, Informative

      Indeed. I remember the kickstart project and all, and how the project went from "With a few grand we can do this" to "Oh wow, we've got 7 times what we asked for, let's do more".

      I don't think they should've done more than they originally set out, they should've increased the planned quality. What I mean by that is that it is likely the initial budget they asked for was way too low, anyway, for what they wanted to do.

      Indeed, the quality of the recordings is poor, at best, and there are a great number of mistakes in the performances. Yet none of those care, because for maybe one of the first times, there are actual, recent recordings in the public domains. But coughing? Seriously?

      Anyway, I'd like for MusOpen to take this chance to also distribute the works in the raw format they have, or .wav, or any other kind of lossless format, preferably not encumbered by patents or licensing issues. I'll even go ahead and offer a lot of bandwidth to help MusOpen achieve that goal.

    4. Re:Nicely done! by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yet none of those care, because for maybe one of the first times, there are actual, recent recordings in the public domains. But coughing? Seriously?

      Seriously.. 1st movement, after playing begins.. a cough...

      Apparently its someones recital.. sounds like a tape player is used to record it.. where you can even hear the noise of the spinning tape...

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    5. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It truly captures the open source experience!

    6. Re:Nicely done! by anom · · Score: 3, Informative

      From my understanding the moonlight sonata wasn't even one of the pieces performed by the orchestra in the kickstarter campaign? It isn't listed at any of the links in the article. Musopen compiles a bunch of different music from many sources and so some if it is complete crap, but my impression was that the point of this project was to get some better recordings of a select group of pieces.

    7. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      the ones they recorded are performed by "Musopen Symphony Orchestra"

      everything else on their site is a crapshoot from other sources.

    8. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell, this is what Kickstarter was about. The rest is just hosted there by MusOpen and comes from all kinds of sources, including college orchestras, army bands and this guy you might know from Slashdot (well, his braver cousin, anyways).

    9. Re:Nicely done! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Seriously.. 1st movement, after playing begins.. a cough...

      Please quite whining, go get a sound editor and edit it out. It's easy and that's exactly what a big label would do.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    10. Re:Nicely done! by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      they'd likely have recorded 2 or more performances as well. between all of them a cough can be got rid of without the digital spectral scar that a surgical editor would leave behind.

      though with a skilled operator, you can fix things and leave no sign at all behind. usually the music gets a bit fudgy though - best splice in something clean and make sure tempos match (in this day and age, an orchestra such as this should have earphones with click-tracks or something similar - conductors can get carried away)

    11. Re:Nicely done! by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      you could play moonlight sonata on an iphone with no musical training. it's not the most complex of tracks.

      which isn't to say it's not beautiful. just simple, like an Italian meal.

    12. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Click tracks for orchestra members..? Why not simply send a MIDI file to your sound synthesizer instead? Much cheaper, and less risk of interpretational variations.

    13. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds about right, I can play portions of it by ear with literally no training at all on the piano. I mean truly no training at all, I can't even play chopsticks. But the parts that most people think of are haunting in large part due to their simplicity.

      But, in some ways the more simple music is the most difficult to play sometimes as you can't get away with any errors as everybody notices them. More complex music allows for a certain amount of masking to take place over minor mistakes.

    14. Re:Nicely done! by drkim · · Score: 1

      This can be done by looking at the audio spectrum and 'healing' just the area of the cough. Not hard. (Adobe Audition)

    15. Re:Nicely done! by Swistak · · Score: 5, Interesting

      wav is not only losless format. Files are distrubuted also in m4f and flac ( http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/7536456/2012_Musopen_Kickstarter_Project_%5BFLAC%5D ) Quality of recordings done by kickstarter campaign is excellent. And there was poll amongst backers what to do with money. I as one of backers (overwheliming majority) decided we want to have more music with good quality, then one or two tracks with perfect quality. If you want perfect recording from best orchestra in the world, go and buy it on dvd.

    16. Re:Nicely done! by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      You can get the full ProTools files, with umpteen mics, if you want to. The project made them available as a torrent (quite a long time ago actually - the mixing took time, and apparently wasn't as good as it could have been). It's still superpermissively licensed, so you can fix it up yourself if you want to.

      I assure you all non-live classical recordings have similar fix ups.

      Aaron Dunn asked the contributors many times during the project how he should go at it - big name orchestra, or solid low-cost eastern european one? He even arranged blind listening tests. It took longer time than expected, in part due to things like orchestras and conductors bowing out at the last moment, but all in all I'm very happy with the project. If you aren't, hey, maybe you should have contributed to it ;)

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    17. Re:Nicely done! by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      you could play moonlight sonata on an iphone with no musical training.

      I'd like to see that. Maybe you could play a few bars of the most famous part.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    18. Re:Nicely done! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      in this day and age, an orchestra such as this should have earphones with click-tracks or something similar - conductors can get carried away

      You are quite the comedian, aren't you? But decent commentary on the sound editing. It's hardly rocket science.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    19. Re:Nicely done! by BenJury · · Score: 2

      Looks impressive. I do wonder why they don't add the ability to download the music via bittorrent. I know its available else where, but why not via the actual site? Surly that could cut the cost of hosting and thus would let people contribute to the project in a way other than cash?

      --
      Blatant Advert: Android Apps!
    20. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The torrent link is at the bottom of the archive.org page listed in the summary.

    21. Re:Nicely done! by olau · · Score: 1

      you could play moonlight sonata on an iphone with no musical training. it's not the most complex of tracks.

      You could, but it would sound so much better with a professional pianist with the right equipment. :)

    22. Re:Nicely done! by Alioth · · Score: 2

      The third movement, too?

    23. Re:Nicely done! by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Please quite whining, go get a sound editor and edit it out. It's easy and that's exactly what a big label would do.

      I dont have to go get a sound editor. I have the best one open source provides:

      Audacity.

      Now you tell me which magic filter I need to use, eh? The one labeled The Great and Awesome Love of the Rainbow Unicorn?

      Translation: Don't be an ignorant twit.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    24. Re:Nicely done! by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 1

      Shh, please. How dare you tell them that the "Moonlight Sonata", like all sonatas, has three movements, and that people only know the first?

      Let them fiddle on an iPhone (aside: can the iPhone or any other phone/tablet even detect 5-7 different fingers on the screen?) and enjoy the action/response of a mechanical piano yourself. :)

    25. Re:Nicely done! by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

      "I dont have to go get a sound editor. I have the best one open source provides:
      Audacity."

      And there, dear troll, is your problem. You see, while Audacity is great for the money, it is woefully behind the times in the included tools to shape, correct, and modify sounds. I know because I work with vocal tracks on occasion (I sing a cappella with an amateur group), and while you can record, amplify, cut, paste, and do lots of basic operations with Audacity, the results of the more challenging operations are pretty poor. A great example is tempo changes. Try slowing down a track in Audacity - you'll get all sorts of artifacts. It's not something you would want to listen to. Do the same thing in Adobe Audition and you'll get a nice, smooth track out that sounds far better with no (or very very few) artifacts. Slow it down too much and it gets a bit comical. Though I have not worked with it, I believe that more significant changes are better fed through Melodyne, which allows not just pitch correction, but finer grained adjustments like attack speed (which would be necessary on a 50% speed track to avoid the drunk/slurring effect).

      Please do not judge the ability of modern audio editing based on Audacity. I use it, too - but only because I know it better than other programs and haven't had the time to learn a more complete software package.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    26. Re:Nicely done! by tomknight · · Score: 1

      One thing I'd never want is for my copy of Tchaikovsky's 6th (Pathétique) conducted by Wilhelm Furtwangler to lose the coughs and slight hiss. This is what makes this recording special for me.

      --
      Oh arse
    27. Re:Nicely done! by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      The moonlight sonata was not recorded as part of this project.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    28. Re:Nicely done! by Vintermann · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not quite, those which are recorded as "Musopen String Quartet" are also from this effort.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    29. Re:Nicely done! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      From my understanding the moonlight sonata wasn't even one of the pieces performed by the orchestra in the kickstarter campaign? It isn't listed at any of the links in the article. Musopen compiles a bunch of different music from many sources and so some if it is complete crap, but my impression was that the point of this project was to get some better recordings of a select group of pieces.

      Cool of them. But if the quality is lacking, i can still get better music of the same type from piratebay. I'm cool with what the person is doing, but if the quality is sucking like people are saying (will check it out later), then honestly, it's a waste of time. All you are doing is adding fuel from the Music Industry saying that CC stuff is crappy quality compared to what they put out. And they'd be right. Don't make the AA right.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    30. Re:Nicely done! by uigrad_2000 · · Score: 1

      Aren't you helping make his point?

      Tough Love (great-grandparent of this message) suggested that MusOpen shouldn't need to edit out coughs because we (as the downloaders) should be capable with tools at our disposal to do it ourself.

      You seem to be saying that Audacity is far behind the tools that the studios have. So, you, also should be arguing against the comment from Tough Love.

      The person you called a troll was simply saying that Audacity, the best freeware tool available, is not up to par.

      --
      Free unix account: freeshell.org
    31. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is that while the overall quality of the musopen database might be low, the kickstarter project was an effort to change this -- and the quality of the pieces that came out of that effort -- e.g. the pieces linked here: http://musopen.org/music/by/performer/Musopen-Symphony-Orchestra -- is quite high.

    32. Re:Nicely done! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The iphone is not pressure-sensitive. You really can't play it and have it sound very good. Do any iPhone piano apps even have pedals?

    33. Re:Nicely done! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Hope it's part of their next one. Ever since I heard that haunting melody in the video game Resident Evil, I have loved it. And then I've hated it when it was remixed for a Tampax Sport commercial.

    34. Re:Nicely done! by aarondunn · · Score: 2

      Hi there. We actually did post all the original lossless recordings, including all the ProTools files. As for the mistakes, they are definitely in there. I wouldnt not call the recordings poor overall, but they do vary. What's important to me is 1) These are the first recordings every released into the world unencumbered by copyright restrictions 2) They are overall excellent performances. I would even argue many could be held up to some of the most notable orchestras Quality is ultimately subjective, so we have to realize part of this is legitimate mistakes, and a large part is also people just preferring recordings they already know, other halls, conductors etc. Regardless, given the ratio of money/ hours of music we got, the quality is pretty good considering.

    35. Re:Nicely done! by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      As well as the Musopen String Quartet link: http://musopen.org/music/by/performer/Musopen-String-Quartet

    36. Re:Nicely done! by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      We have a library of music that is unrelated to this project, that is one of them. Cheers, Aaron

    37. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds about right, I can play portions of it by ear with literally no training at all on the piano.

      All three voices? I don't think so. It sounds simple, but the first movement is actually rather tricky. The right hand has to do plenty of stretching.

    38. Re:Nicely done! by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      Wish you'd stop referring to ProTools files. Aren't they just .wavs or .aifs? You may as well call them Ableton Live files or Logic Pro files. Pah.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    39. Re:Nicely done! by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      FYI Moonlight wasn't included in this project, and secondly, many live performances have coughing, thought our recordings for this Kickstarter were very clean.

    40. Re:Nicely done! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I'm always amazed at the slow progress of audio software in the open source space. You would think the projects would be swarming with physics majors and the like, with awesome signal processing skills. But no, it seems to be programmers without any such math skills actually coding the sound editing software. Sigh. Well notice, I did not say anything about a *free* audio workbench. That's another important issue, but it's not a precondition to generating free content.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    41. Re:Nicely done! by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      What Tough Love suggested is that there is way too much whining and not enough doing in this thread.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    42. Re:Nicely done! by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      The Czech orchestra that did this for Musopen have actually played original music for many computer games, among them Civilization 5 and Halo Wars.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    43. Re:Nicely done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Tough Love always talk about Tough Love in the third person?

  3. There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by rueger · · Score: 4, Informative

    The great weakness with this is that the value of sheet music is in the edition. Just as books benefit from a good editor, so does music.

    My girlfriend has a music degree, and is an accomplished teacher of piano. She pulls her hair out whenever a student shows up with something downloaded from the Internet, or even worse, one of those oddball cheap Chinese editions. How the music is edited really does affect how it is played.

    Aside from that, it's weird that the music listings aren't by composer. Do these folks not know how many "String Quartets in C major" have been written?

    1. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

      The composition has to be a relatively ancient edit to qualify for public domain status in the performed work.

      At the bottom you will see the option to filter by composer.

      And of course you're welcome to repeat the effort if this one doesn't suit your standard. In the meantime the rest of us will set about setting our slideshows, presentations, home movies and youtube clips to this public domain classical music.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    2. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's weird that the article doesn't link to the Homepage of the project or at least to the main music browsing page which features, besides others, a list of composers to select from.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Aside from that, it's weird that the music listings aren't by composer. Do these folks not know how many "String Quartets in C major" have been written?

      Here's some assistance for the vision/browsing impaired - pick your criterion.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    4. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the meantime the rest of us will set about setting our slideshows, presentations, home movies and youtube clips to this public domain classical music.

      And probably will get it taken down or muted because Youtube's filter system isn't smart enough to know the difference.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    5. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by darkfeline · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed. I've been using Lilypond for a while now, and when you actually arrange and play your own music, you are enlightened to all the little details that unconsciously distract or help you. But note that it also depends on the person to a certain degree as well, e.g. some people just happen to read music written one way better.

    6. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by metrometro · · Score: 2

      If by "great weakness with this" you mean, "inherent problem with the Internet, which focused, thoughtful projects by people who care about quality - like this one right here - are solving", then sure, I agree with you.

    7. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Informative

      You think the weakness is the quality of the sheetmusic? Did you actually listen to any of the performances? For example, see if you can listen to the first movement of Beethoven's fifth here, without cringing. People are out of tune, off beat, and at times sound like they are overwhelmed by the difficulty of the piece (listen at 1:19, the horns don't have a consistent tone, sound squeaky at times, with the strings in the background poorly articulating their notes, some of the instruments are out of tune, and the wrong parts are emphasized).

      And those are just technical details. Even if they reach perfection in the execution of the notes, they are completely missing the interpretation. I would gladly pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretation of the second movement of the 5th symphony. No one else even comes close to the softness and love of his interpretation.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by deek · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've never had a problem with using urtext sheet music; by definition, untouched by an editor. Your girlfriend should have no problem with students that show up with urtext copies, many of which are freely available on the internet. She is a teacher, so should help them to interpret the piece which is played, not play along with the interpretation of some editor. Besides, interpretation can be a very subjective thing; I've often disagreed with edited music and the changes they've made to the original piece. Then again, I've been known to disagree with the original composer, preferring to play dynamics in my own way, or to go with a staccato feel, rather than the legato that's marked on the music, or change a dozen other possible things you can when playing music.

      In that way, editing music is very much different to editing a book. You can't play around with written passages the way you can with music. Music is much more open to interpretation and change. It's why it is so fascinating listening to different performers play the same piece of music, and not so interesting listening to the same prose read by different people.

    9. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by dbc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      hmmm.... I found a page for sheet music listed by composer, and the search function will hit on composer names.

      As to editions, my daughter plays violin, so yeah, I understand the edition issue -- editing is huge with string instruments because the editor usually puts in bowings and sometimes suggested fingerings. But in the case of one Pablo de Sarasate piece that I looked up, it looked like the sheet music was a scan of an out-of-copyright edition from a prominent 19th Century German publisher. So the edition question probably hangs on what they managed to find where the copyright hasn't been kept up. Anyway, that's my one data point, so this being slashdot and all, one data point seems more than sufficient to jump to a conclusion. Excessive, even.

      Aside about editions: my daughter is currently studying the Bach sonatas and partitas for violin -- the edition our teacher recommended has both edited music in modern (OK, 80 or so year old) engraving and a facsimile of the original manuscript. It is interesting to look at the differences -- the original was very spare in terms of even the most basic articulations. I wonder if the Musopen project will be scanning facsimiles? For serious students being able to compare editions not only to each other but to the original manuscript is useful and sometimes important.

    10. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by RivenAleem · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All the better, enough complaints that legitimate music has been blocked may perhaps force them to come up with a better system.

    11. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      The great weakness with this is that the value of sheet music is in the edition. Just as books benefit from a good editor, so does music. My girlfriend has a music degree, and blah blah blah drivel drivel [appeal to authority]...

      Well I have a music degree and I just read through a good chunk of the Goldberg variations and I am pleased with the quality of it. I will print it out and enjoy playing it. As for your Slashdot post, I would respectfully ask you to refrain from further damaging your own credibility with respect to this subject, of which you are by all appearances completely ignorant.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    12. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by mug+funky · · Score: 1

      i think google would do well to release a (reasonably feature-complete) video editor for the purpose of embedding it's clips with metadata in case it's filter fails.

      it would be very nice to be able to use whatever you want and get warned about possible filterage beforehand - and override it with relevant citations, right there in your editor's media bin.

      also, the tightars- uhm, FOSS world needs a good video editor. blender's sequence editor is the best there is and it's a piece of shit - completely inadequate for proper editing.

    13. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 2

      I've never had a problem with using urtext sheet music; by definition, untouched by an editor...

      Not bad post, especially considering the nonsense you responded to, however... you're not right about the definition of urtext. Perhaps you have not heard of Wiener Urtext Edition? And by the way, I always play from urtext when I can get it. It is very definitely an edition.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    14. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      I tried just about every non-linear video editor I could find in the Ubuntu package repository a couple of years ago and settled on Kdenlive. I didn't realise Blender had one, though. What does Blender's do better?

    15. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You realize that was performed a by a college orchestra and has NOTHING to do with the recordings financed with the kickstarter, right?

    16. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Vintermann · · Score: 2

      Editions typeset in Lilypond are usually very good. They're almost always better than the stuff musicians print out from Finale from their own purposes, and they're on average better than professionally set editions printed today. Old editions can measure up well, but new ones, not so much IMO.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    17. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Vintermann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably not. The reason they have such a draconian system is that music companies insisted on it in order not to sue all of YouTube into pieces.

      I'm hoping one day Google will give the treatment to music companies that they're giving to broadband companies in Kansas city.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    18. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Vintermann · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Beethoven's fifth you linked to is performed by a small town college orchestra, not the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (really the Czech National Symphony Orchestra, but I don't know if Musopen are allowed to say that in advertising!). Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy.

      During the Kickstarter, Aaron Dunn wrote to us and we discussed extensively whether we should get a few works by a "big name" orchestra, or several from a less-known one. We did blind listening tests, too.

      You still have the option to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations. In fact, you probably will always have to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations, the way copyrights are being extended... but now you also have the option of hearing some solid renditions of Brahms symphonies by a professional Czech orchestra, for free. For ever.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    19. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As for your Slashdot post, I would respectfully ask you to refrain from further damaging your own credibility with respect to this subject, of which you are by all appearances completely ignorant.

      wow, why so angry? I'm just an amateur but in my experience the GP's statement that there is a big difference between good and bad editions is obviously true.

      The differences start with purely cosmetic issues like "Are page turns at sensible points?", "How well are the other voices represented during rests?", "Are there fingering suggestions in complex passages?", "How are repetitions handled? (does the editor make me flip back through three pages while I don't have a rest?)" and go on to encompass basically everything related to dynamics, articulation and timings.

      Yes, some soloist who has the luxury of working on one piece for weeks will have memorized his parts and will have worked out his own interpretation so most of this is at best a starting point for him - but meanwhile the rest of us (who show up, get the sheet and play) are happy to have decent editions that make our lives a lot easier.

    20. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by mortonda · · Score: 1

      The link is to the music specifically recorded by this project - the site hosts other music recorded by ... not so good talent. Thus the link provided is the most relevant to the story. Be sure you are listening to a piece performed by "Musopen Symphony Orchestra"

    21. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's because Google is playing nice, they were sued and won. They are trying to work together, but they don't have to.

    22. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy...

      Uh, when it comes to works of classical music, I seriously doubt you're going to have even a single fan take their stance here. Hell, I'd rather read the notes on paper than listen to a midi version.

      Sorry, but midi renditions should have probably stayed within the era they were birthed from. It's like trying to justify a world of 8-bit graphics to my eyes.

    23. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You really should shut the fuck up because mentionning the era of 8 bit games automatically makes you lose credibility. MIDI is only a standard that says how peripherals, like midi keyboard, communicate with the software or hardware synths.

      There is no such a thing as "midi rendition", but what you probably meant was the sound produced by soundblasters in the dos era with shitty soundbanks.

      MIDI can be used in conjunction with this :
      http://www.synthogy.com/products.html

      Which is almost indistinguishable from the real instrument. This is a bank of 77 gigabytes of piano sample, plus the right software to make the sample sound right and follow the pressure of a sensitive "MIDI keyboard".

    24. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Nyder · · Score: 1

      The Beethoven's fifth you linked to is performed by a small town college orchestra, not the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (really the Czech National Symphony Orchestra, but I don't know if Musopen are allowed to say that in advertising!). Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy.

      During the Kickstarter, Aaron Dunn wrote to us and we discussed extensively whether we should get a few works by a "big name" orchestra, or several from a less-known one. We did blind listening tests, too.

      You still have the option to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations. In fact, you probably will always have to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations, the way copyrights are being extended... but now you also have the option of hearing some solid renditions of Brahms symphonies by a professional Czech orchestra, for free. For ever.

      I can get the stuff, without errors, for free. In fact, I have a few diffferent Beethoven's works on my computer now.

      Here's the deal, shitty stuff is shitty. No one wants shitty stuff, mainly when you can still get the better quality of the same music for free (legal or not). I'm all for what Musopen is trying to do, but what is has done so far (from what i heard) hasn't been impressive. And this is supposed to be an example of legal free music? Seriously?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    25. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      A clueless moron layman is talking out of his ass and spreading disinformation?

      If it was my field, it would probably be "angry".

      So I can totally empathize with the actual expert here.

      Some people take their profession seriously.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    26. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by el+jocko+del+oeste · · Score: 2

      The Beethoven's fifth you linked to is performed by a small town college orchestra, not the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (really the Czech National Symphony Orchestra, but I don't know if Musopen are allowed to say that in advertising!). Anyone can contribute to Musopen - you'll even find midi keyboard renditions there. It's better than nothing, is Musopen's philosophy.

      snip

      You still have the option to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations. In fact, you probably will always have to pay money to hear Bernstein's interpretations, the way copyrights are being extended... but now you also have the option of hearing some solid renditions of Brahms symphonies by a professional Czech orchestra, for free. For ever.

      I think the project is valuable, I like the idea of having good recordings of these works available for free. For those who can't afford to spend the money or who want to reuse the works in some creative way, this is a real boon. It opens up the music to a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise have access to it.

      On the other hand, I don't think the project is going to have any real impact (at least not yet) on the community of listeners who have a love of the music and the resources to indulge their passion. I buy lots of music and will continue to buy lots of music. Not because I enjoy spending the money, but because it's more important to me to have a recording (or even multiple recordings) that I really like. The cost relative to my enjoyment is really pretty minimal. If the free recording is worth having, I'll add it to my library. But I'm happy to pay for a recording if I like that one better.

      And I'm not real hopeful that these recordings are quite there yet. I found the Musopen Symphony Orchestra recording of Beethoven's Symphony No. 3. My initial take was that the playing was good, but the sound quality was less than ideal. For example, there's an intermittant but very distracting hissing noise at the beginning. I'm not an audio technician and I couldn't tell you what causes it, but I know that it makes the recording less desirable for me.

      Still, I'm glad the project exists. Making this music available to the widest possible audience is a good thing. That's something to applaud.

    27. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I've had properly licensed royalty-free music be blocked from a Youtube video. I didn't have the time to bother contesting it because the video was 5 years old and I'm not sure where the documentation is for it.

    28. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Xibby · · Score: 1

      And probably will get it taken down or muted because YouTube's filter system isn't smart enough to know the difference.

      I don't know how YouTube's automated systems work, but that shouldn't be the case. Two different performances, two different recordings, even if they are of the same music with same arrangements should still be different and identifiable. It will come down to how much differentiation YouTube's automated systems allow for when fingerprinting audio.

      --
      I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
    29. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      Every single musopen piece added to youtube is marked as copyright infringement. Its very frustrating for our users, and despite my pleading youtube hasn't been able to accomodate our site.

    30. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Aaron, by providing music that's public domain in this quality you have virtually assured that someone with deep enough pockets to defend it will use it and fix this problem.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    31. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by iamnobody2 · · Score: 1

      That is minimally exceptional. Perhaps a change.org petition or something is in order.

      --
      nobody's perfect
    32. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      I can get the stuff, without errors, for free.

      Not legally, you can't. And although you won't get caught (unless I go to the RIAA and show them this comment, muahahaha!) you would get into trouble if you wanted to use the music for anything, e.g. in a game you wrote, or sampled in music you made yourself.

      Listen to the stuff by Musopen Symphony Orchestra / Musopen String Quartet, they're indicative of the quality of this project. I think it's pretty good. Maybe the mastering could have been better (it took far longer than Aaron said, I don't think the people doing it had much experience with classical music), but since we have the raw data the mix was made from, a better mixed version can be made at a later point, should someone take an interest.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    33. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Not sure if you've ever seen originals, but they're messy as hell, and a good amount of it is barely legible. Urtext just means no changes to the content, but somebody still had to go clean up the original score and interpret the (often numerous) ambiguities.

      You want an original, go try interpreting off a facimile.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    34. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They could just outright buy the entire music industry without much second thought.

      They should do that.

    35. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by yourlord · · Score: 1

      I think that noise is something in the hall resonating or something. It might be worth downloading the tracks for that composition and see if it's most dominant in one mic and attenuating that track a bit to reduce the effect.

      The score sounds great to me, but I agree that noise is bothersome.

      The beauty of this project is that not only are the final mixes released and available for free, but so are the original master tracks. You have the option of using the Musopen supplied mixes, or you can completely remix and remaster the composition as you see fit. In fact, I might just load that one into Ardour and give it a shot.

    36. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by deek · · Score: 1

      Thanks. You're right, I wasn't precise in what "urtext" (original text) means. Urtext edition sheetmusic has been cleaned up from the mess the composer jotted down, but essentially left unchanged.

      It's an "edition", meaning that it has been converted into clean notation, thus changed from the original scrawl. But, it's not an "edition", meaning that there are no alterations or additions to the music. The original poster was clearly aiming at the second meaning.

    37. Re:There's Sheet Music, and Sheet Music by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Ah, but then, why didn't the summary mention this? It's not as if the web site's name gave a hint about this.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  4. Awesome! by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    Nothing puts me in the right frame of mind for some serious coding than classical music. Can't wait to check this one out.

    1. Re:Awesome! by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Nothing puts me in the right frame of mind for some serious coding than classical music. Can't wait to check this one out.

      Different strokes for different folks. I prefer video game music and VG remixes, eg: Stuff from Rainwave and OCR.
      Sometimes just environmental electro. I "graduated" from classical when I was a teen, just got burned out on the same tunes and themes.

      One thing I have found is that few coders I know prefer lyrics in their programming music...

      Oh, and before you think I've abandoned that great orchestral sound altogether, right now I'm listening to the London Philharmonic Orchestra and Andrew Skeet: Legend of Zelda: Suite
      May the Triforce be with you.

    2. Re:Awesome! by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Right on bro...whatever does it for you. When I listen to music with lyrics or something really intense I focus more on the music than the task at hand. But yeah, it's good to mix it up a bit sometime to keep things interesting.

    3. Re:Awesome! by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I hear you on not liking to code to lyrics, for similar reasons I don't like to code with people talking nearby. My hypothesis is that we're wired to process voices as "high value input", and doing so draws on the same symbolic processing systems that are used for writing code.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  5. But how did he make money?! by LordLucless · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought the recording industry had definitively proved that if you didn't assert copyrights, there was no possible way for the starving artists* to be compensated for their hard work, and it would spell the end of recorded music?

    * all artists are starving. That's why they look good in music videos.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    1. Re:But how did he make money?! by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      * all artists are starving. That's why they look good in music videos.

      I thought it was because they regularly vomit in the bathroom, take a lot of laxatives, and eat adderall like it's candy...

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:But how did he make money?! by LordLucless · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some people starve because they don't have enough food. Others because they're just stupid.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:But how did he make money?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copyrights don't have to be asserted -- you're probably thinking of trade marks.

      Copyright is not granted for 'hard work' or 'sweat of the brow'. It's a protection for artistic form, and (internationally) there is not even a requirement that it has to be registered or that it has to be 'good' in any usual sene of the word.

      And artists are compensated by their own work (selling their own music), or the contracts they write with the music industry. If they are not adept in creating those contracts, and end up in a situation where they think they don't benefit from the contract, it is almost always possible to renegotiate or terminate it.

    4. Re:But how did he make money?! by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      No, I'm thinking of copyrights, although I may not have used "assert' in the technical, legal sense. But by explicitly placing the works into the public domain, he has deliberately declined to assert his copyright.

      And artists are compensated by their own work (selling their own music), or the contracts they write with the music industry.

      And the music industry has stated that without copyright enforcement, those sales would not happen, and those contracts would not be written. This guy has demonstrated that that claim is false.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    5. Re:But how did he make money?! by Required+Snark · · Score: 1

      You realize that since this is classical music that the composers are dead, right? So this whole starving thing is a bit off topic...

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    6. Re:But how did he make money?! by LordLucless · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do realize that the orchestral performers are still artists, right?

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    7. Re:But how did he make money?! by metacell · · Score: 1

      * all artists are starving. That's why they look good in music videos.

      Meatloaf?

    8. Re:But how did he make money?! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      You realize that since this is classical music that the composers are dead, right?

      See? They all died because there was no copyright back in the days. Had there been copyright, they'd still alive today! :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  6. FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Unfortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format instead of a widely used, open, non-patent-encumbered format such as FLAC. Plus, the official torrent contains a single gigantic zip file.

    There is a torrent containing all 145 separate tracks in FLAC format here:
    http://pirateproxy.net/torrent/7536456/2012_Musopen_Kickstarter_Project_[FLAC]

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

      But a good torrent program will let you pick a choose what files from the torrent you want. You don't have to download the whole collection all at once.

    2. Re:FLAC by nmb3000 · · Score: 2

      But a good torrent program will let you pick a choose what files from the torrent you want. You don't have to download the whole collection all at once.

      Uhhh... that was the OP's point:

      the official torrent contains a single gigantic zip file

      No matter how good it is, no torrent client will allow you to choose the files inside a zip file inside the torrent.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    3. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe there was some client which could do this, probably a plugin for Azureus/Vuze.

      After you've downloaded ZIP file's header and file catalog, you can calculate which pieces contain which block, and partially damaged ZIP archives can be processed, so it's doable.

    4. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The ALAC decoder and encoder is opensource under the Apache 2.0 license, which essentially grants a world wide cost free and irrevocable* patent license in addition to the copyright license for the code itself.

      Claiming ALAC is patent encumbered is just plain bullshit, since patent licenses are granted free of charge. Claiming ALAC is not open is also clearly pure bullshit as the reference encoder and decoder is freely available.

      * Unless you decide to sue Apple for patent infringement, in which case your license will be revoked.

    5. Re:FLAC by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format instead of a widely used, open, non-patent-encumbered format such as FLAC.

      It's lossless, duh. Transcode it.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    6. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's lossless, duh. Transcode it.

      The files are 24-bit and support for decoding 24-bit Apple lossless in Linux is lacking. Being lossless is nice only if it's in a usable format.

    7. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if unless I'm missing something the GP is free to transcode the collection to something else and put it up as a torrent.

    8. Re:FLAC by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's lossless, duh. Transcode it.

      The files are 24-bit and support for decoding 24-bit Apple lossless in Linux is lacking. Being lossless is nice only if it's in a usable format.

      More whining, it's getting old. Transcode it on an Apple computer if you must. Feh, what kind of geek are you.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    9. Re:FLAC by fa2k · · Score: 2

      More whining, it's getting old. Transcode it on an Apple computer if you must. Feh, what kind of geek are you.

      The .m4as play fine in VLC. It outputs 32 bits per sample to PulseAudio. (Note that PulseAudio resamples everything to 16 bit 44 kHz by default and you need to edit "daemon.conf" to change that) And no, "go buy a Mac" is never a constructive comment, unless the question was "I want a computer". (The Musopen people are also in their right to release in whatevery format they please, as long as they said so on the Kickstarter, and they are still doing a great thing. But it's also OK for us to whine !) And the music sounds great.

    10. Re:FLAC by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      It's linux: write your own and quit whining, you leach.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    11. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The kind of geek that doesn't have an Apple computer at hand. Fuck you BTW, you are the one whining. His complaints are valid, there was no reason to do it this way.

    12. Re:FLAC by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      No matter how good it is, no torrent client will allow you to choose the files inside a zip file inside the torrent.

      Do you understand how torrrents or zip files work? From a technical perspective chosing files from a zip inside a torrent isn't really much harder than chosing files from the torrent itself. Just download the central directory (at the end of the file), read it and you know what parts of the zip file you need for the files you want to extract.

      There will be some overhead because you have to download complete peices to verify them but the same applies to multi-file torrrents (there is nothing to ensure that file boundries and peice boundries line up)

      Note: this is only possible for zip because it has a central directory in a known place and is not a solid archive, you can't pull off the same thing with a tarball.

      Whether any torrent client actually implements this I do not know.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    13. Re:FLAC by omnichad · · Score: 1

      All it takes is one person to transcode it and put it up on torrent. These were released as public domain and I'm sure someone has the time.

    14. Re:FLAC by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      Noted. Next time (if there is one) we will include all the files separately. This happened because i uploaded everything in a zip to archive.org and they turned it into a torrent for me. This was done because people wanted to download everything in one batch. Separately, I went with Apple lossless because it is also now open source and most of our users use iTunes, and flac would confuse the hell out of them. However, I'll also try to include FLAC from now on.

    15. Re:FLAC by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Still, it's a valid point, even if there may be exceptions if you have a particularly versatile client. Since the files are already compressed using a domain-optimized algorithm the zip file doesn't contribute anything, and it interferes dramatically with a common bittorrent use-case - I know I'm annoyed that I have to wait for the whole frakking thing to download before I can start listening. Not to mention having to extract the files from the zip after the download doubles the free space required while adding extra time and effort to an otherwise straightforward process.

      Whoever prepared the file before release should rightfully be chastised. Whether through ignorance or carelessness their decision imposed an elevated cost not only on themselves (in the time it took to create the archive) but on every person who downloads it - even if it's only 30 seconds of added effort per person on average that's 8.3 man-hours of wasted effort in the world for every thousand downloaders, and presumably they hope that a lot more than 1000 people download it. Sure, not much in the grand scheme of things on its own, but all those little pointless costs in the world add up.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    16. Re:FLAC by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format instead of a widely used, open, non-patent-encumbered format such as FLAC.

      Fortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format, which is usable without installing any additional software on most computers, and which also plays without any effort of the user on the majority of portable music players.

    17. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> the official torrent contains a single gigantic zip file

      This is nearly as bad as using RAR in Torrents
      http://web.archive.org/web/20080724050712/http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3559946/Why_RAR_archives_do_not_belong_in_torrents
      https://torrentfreak.com/unpack-rar-archives-before-you-release-a-torrent/

      It is a shame that people continue to do this and unfortunate that the torrent programs do not make more effort to guide users to the right thing.

      > No matter how good it is, no torrent client will allow you to choose the files inside a zip file inside the torrent.

      No Torrent program I know if is good enough yet but some archive programs are very clever and it wouldn't be impossible to make a torrent file that did more with ZIP files. I'll explain...
      Technically ZIP is more than just a file format it is also a file system. ZIP unlike RAR is not one big single *solid* file, and it is possible with ZIP files to extract individual files from an archive without needing to unpack the entire archive. In practice this is more complicated when you do not have a full and complete archive but at least in theory torrent programs could be made more ZIP aware and proiritize the file index and other essentials from within the ZIP.

    18. Re:FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knowing how torrents and zip files work doesn't do me any good if I can't find a torrent client that seems to know how zip files work so that it can download enough of the zip to give me only the files I wanted.

    19. Re:FLAC by yourlord · · Score: 1

      Your install has issues..

      Every Linux machine I own can decode ALAC just fine..

      It's an open format.

    20. Re:FLAC by teg · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, Musopen provided the content in Apple lossless format instead of a widely used, open, non-patent-encumbered format such as FLAC. Plus, the official torrent contains a single gigantic zip file.

      There is a torrent containing all 145 separate tracks in FLAC format here: http://pirateproxy.net/torrent/7536456/2012_Musopen_Kickstarter_Project_%5BFLAC%5D

      Apple Lossless is officially open sourced by Apple. And there have been unofficial open source implementations around for six years or so.

    21. Re:FLAC by JoSch1337 · · Score: 1

      That torrent only includes 16 bit per sample FLAC. The original audio is 32 bits per sample so quality is lost.

      This torrent uses 32 bit per sample FLAC: http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/7544348

  7. Score! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Finally! A Fifth completed! Ode to joy!

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Score! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would be a ninth completed.

  8. For those looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    the torrent link is: http://archive.org/download/musopen-lossless-dvd/musopen-lossless-dvd_archive.torrent

    1. Re:For those looking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  9. What about quality? by gaspyy · · Score: 1

    Last time I checked them (about 2 months ago), most of their music was in rather poor quality - lots of background noise, soundproofing issues and although I am not a music expert, the performance seemed lacking somewhat.

    1. Re:What about quality? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      If you heard these works two months ago, you

      1. are a contributer to the kickstarter, and
      2. what you were listening to was the raw, unedited ProTools files. They were all that was available then (to backers only, I believe).

      Maybe you're confusing this with all the other works on Musopen. They have widely varying quality, as anyone can contribute.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  10. Dvorak by guttentag · · Score: 2

    If you browse the music by composer, the list starts with Dvorak, Antonin... then Albaniz, Isaac and all the composers whose last names start with A... then Bach and the Bs... Chaliapin and the Cs... It looks familiar but not quite what we're accustomed to... like something is slightly off. Whoever created the list must have been using a Dvorak keyboard!

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

      Quite confusing also, Antonin is the firstname, then Albeniz is the last name...

  11. Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by drdrgivemethenews · · Score: 1

    Possibly the project's initial goals were completed, but that's hardly what springs to mind when one hears the phrase in the context of the classical repertoire.

    That said, I'm listening to Eroica, and it actually ain't bad.

    WRT the print edition quality, most world-class musicians prefer autograph scores. Heavily edited scores are more suited for amateur performers. An exception is Sussmayer's version of Mozart's Requiem, which has a lot of rough spots, and is usually performed from later fixed up versions.

    1. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by drdrgivemethenews · · Score: 2

      Wow, I take it back. Some of this music is pretty awful. A good MIDI performance expert could do better. Oh god, listen to the french horn in the 2nd promenade in Pictures at an Exhibition. Oh, and the violins at the end of that. Shiver. Ouch. Damn.

    2. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by anom · · Score: 5, Informative

      A number of people seem to be confusing the overall musopen library with the recently completed project.

      Musopen has been around for some time collecting non-copyrighted performances of various classic works from whatever source was available. For example, you'll note from the musopen page that the Pictures at an Exhibition was performed by the Skidmore College Orchestra.

      The Kickstarter project musopen undertook was to professionally record a few of the classics. On the Musopen site, you'll see "Musopen Symphony Orchestra" listed as the performer -- those pieces are listed here: http://musopen.org/music/by/performer/Musopen-Symphony-Orchestra

    3. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here.

      Full list with links to torrents is here

    4. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by loneDreamer · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. If that's not informative I don't know what is.

    5. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me contrast your whining with what they say on the site:

      Please feel free to share, edit, re-mix, download, and encourage others to do the same, thats the beauty of public domain music.

      Now let's compare that with you:

      Oh god, listen to the french horn in the 2nd promenade in Pictures at an Exhibition. Oh, and the violins at the end of that.

      So tell us, are you this this boorish in real life or is it just an act you put on to impress people who have a boor-fetish?

    6. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      WRT the print edition quality, most world-class musicians prefer autograph scores.

      Eh, no they don't. This is an autograph score.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    7. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Vintermann · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yet another poster who has not understood what Musopen does or what this Kickstarter was. Pictures at an Exhibition was not recorded as part of this project. In fact it was freely contributed to Musopen by an amateur orchestra.

      A good MIDI performance expert could do better.

      Didn't it tip you off that a lot of the music on Musopen actually are midi performances? Anyone can contribute!

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    8. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Vintermann · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'd like to add that the Musopen Symphony Orchestra is, in essence, the Czech National Sympony Orchestra. They're a very solid commercial symphony orchestra (i.e, mostly playing for films and commissioned concerts, as opposed to being attached to an institution or subscription program).

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    9. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

      Autograph scores? As in, a facsimile of the original manuscript? Maybe for purposes of reference or scholarship. They tend not to be very useful as working scores (assuming they are available to the performer at all). Or did I misunderstand what you are saying?

    10. Re:Completed? That's a bit of a laugh by aarondunn · · Score: 1

      Some of the music you mention wasn't part of this project and was recorded by a college orchestra. I did want to re-record it, next time maybe.

  12. Artistic quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't been able to listen yet, I was curious how the artistic quality is compared famous recordings of these pieces?

    Also I find it a very strange (but fixable) oversight that the composer is not in a browse column.

    1. Re:Artistic quality? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I was looking at this too. As far as I can tell, you're not going to find any of the "name" orchestras or performers. There's a bunch of stuff by The Army Band, the Musopen Symphony Orchestra (!?), and the like. You wouldn't pay for these performances... but since they are free, you're not out anything (other than your time) if you download several and have a listen. It's always possible there's a hidden gem in there.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Artistic quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Musopen Symphony Orchestra and Musopen String Quartet are recordings made for this Kickstarter project.

    3. Re:Artistic quality? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      After looking around, I did find a well-known (and well-respected) group. Musopen has a recording of Mozart's Symphony No. 40 done by the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields.

      I was surprised (and a little disappointed) they don't have some well-known classical music pieces - stuff that most people would recognize, even if they don't know its name (e.g. Debussy's Reverie). I'd think popular pieces, even if performed by unknown artists, would do a lot to drive this project forward - but that may very well come with time.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Artistic quality? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks for the explanation. I hadn't realized the different aspects of this project at first.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Artistic quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Musopen Symphony Orchestra = Czech National Symphony Orchestra, and many people do pay for their performances.

    6. Re:Artistic quality? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Oh, that is good to know! Where'd you find that out?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:Artistic quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Different AC) It's mentioned in a few places through-out this thread.

  13. new problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All that openness being lost if the new international agreement comes into effect allowing the first broadcaster of a work to claim the rights to it. This will take things that are currently in public domain to be taken out and copy controlled, not quite copyrighted, simply by the process of having someone broadcast it.

    1. Re:new problem by metacell · · Score: 1

      That sounds scary. Where have you heard about this?

    2. Re:new problem by omnichad · · Score: 1

      This is all I could find on the WIPO Treaty:
      http://boingboing.net/2012/08/11/wipos-broadcasting-treaty-is.html

      Wouldn't put public domain things back into copyright, per se, but says that recordings of broadcasts of public domain material would be under copyright. Still silly, and should be shot down.

  14. And Such Small Portions! by guttentag · · Score: 4, Insightful
    To quote Annie Hall:

    Two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of 'em says, "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions."

    Reading the criticisms levied against the site is like listening to those two elderly women who just like to complain: "Boy, the music at this place is really terrible." "Yeah, I know; and there isn't nearly enough of it!"

    I think quantity needed to be more important than quality for this project. Sure, they need to have a minimum standard of quality, but the idea was to free as much music as possible. Some kid somewhere in the world would never have heard this music because he's not going to pay $1.29 for some music he's never heard (that they're not playing on the radio) and the sheet music isn't exactly jumping off the page to ensnare his imagination. However, something that's well-written and decently-performed on this site may get his attention and maybe someday he'll perform a better version and give back to us all. But that won't ever happen if he never hears it. That first exposure is key.

    The first time I heard Scheherazade it was in a movie (The Man With One Red Shoe). I didn't know what it was, but it got my attention. I was about seven. Years later I came across it again as a track that was tacked onto a $3 budget classical CD, and it got my attention again. I suggested it to the orchestra director in my high school and hundreds of people got to hear it. It's all about the exposure.

    If you want to be a snob about the quality, go pay for a performance and share it with the rest of us so we won't have to live our lives not knowing what good music sounds like. Frankly, I prefer the Scheherazade recording on that budget CD to any I've found on iTunes. The first performance of a piece is often the one you like best, because it's the one you fell in love with. I have a very old recording of Stokowski and the NY Philharmonic performing Stravinsky's Firebird suite that is full of hiss and crackle, but I prefer it over a clean-sounding recording of Bernstein and the Israel Philharmonic performing the same piece. Bernstein's performance, which is well-done, just doesn't sound urgent enough to me because I heard Stokowski's first. Perhaps what you're really concerned about is the possibility that the masses may come to prefer a version other than what you like.

    There's still a lot to be added, so go ahead and donate. Sure, they've got Stravinsky's Firebird, but not The Rite of Spring. The Rite of Spring was so radical and jarring to the ears of the "more cultured representatives of society" at its 1913 premiere in Paris that the audience began yelling so loudly no one could hear the music. Eventually the scene devolved into chairs being thrown and fires set. So go ahead, throw your chairs at this new site in disgust because it doesn't agree with your notion of how the music should sound. The music that stripped away the cultured veneer of those Parisans is worth hearing, and a public domain music site that so-ruffled the feathers of the "free-as-in-beer" and "information wants to be free" slashdot crowd is worth visiting.

    1. Re:And Such Small Portions! by sowth · · Score: 2

      Eventually the scene devolved into chairs being thrown...

      Microsoft was invited to the party? I didn't know they were around in 1913.

    2. Re:And Such Small Portions! by metacell · · Score: 1

      I wonder what those people said when they first heard of the Linux kernel...

      "What crap is this? It only handles the most basic of hardware and has almost no optimisations!"
      "Who's going to use that? It's just a kernel, there's nothing you can run on it!"
      "Who needs this 'Linux' when there's Minix?"

    3. Re:And Such Small Portions! by mellyra · · Score: 1

      There's still a lot to be added, so go ahead and donate. Sure, they've got Stravinsky's Firebird, but not The Rite of Spring. The Rite of Spring was so radical and jarring to the ears of the "more cultured representatives of society" at its 1913 premiere in Paris that the audience began yelling so loudly no one could hear the music. Eventually the scene devolved into chairs being thrown and fires set. So go ahead, throw your chairs at this new site in disgust because it doesn't agree with your notion of how the music should sound. The music that stripped away the cultured veneer of those Parisans is worth hearing, and a public domain music site that so-ruffled the feathers of the "free-as-in-beer" and "information wants to be free" slashdot crowd is worth visiting.

      you forgot to mention the part about Stravinsky moving the US, selling out and creating a horribly mutilated version of the Rite of Spring...

      the Rite of Spring is probably one of the pieces where a bad conductor/orchestra can cause the most damage to the music ending up with a barely bearable mess that is just "loud", so I don't really think it is the most suited piece for a project of this sort.

    4. Re:And Such Small Portions! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      ..
      I think quantity needed to be more important than quality for this project. Sure, they need to have a minimum standard of quality, but the idea was to free as much music as possible. ...

      no, you are wrong.

      Quality is important, because we can get the quality stuff for free. Sure, it might be copyrighted, but a lot of people don't give a damn about the copyright laws as they are being used by the Music and Movie industries. While I applaud what Musopen is doing, I believe they are hurting themselves by having crappy quality recordings in the collection.

      This day and age, when you can get anything that can be digitalized for free, why the hell do you want to compete with good quality stuff with crappy quality stuff? Seriously, wtf?

      Why do I want to listen to Bach with bad sound, errors, coughs and tape recording noise when I can listen to it without those problems?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    5. Re:And Such Small Portions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what those people said when they first heard of the Linux kernel...

      "What crap is this? It only handles the most basic of hardware and has almost no optimizations!"

      It only supported 386 and up (still true, w/r/t x86, though other processor families have been added), and wouldn't even run on "the most basic of [PC] hardware" at all.

      Welcome to Linux, newbie.

    6. Re:And Such Small Portions! by metacell · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot, troll.

  15. The power of fragrances to launch the madness by perfumes · · Score: 0

    Something that you place becomes your own statement, and surely this is the one that everyone will be following. The magical spray makes the world dance around you, and most importantly, act as the true indicator of your mood. From www.rightshopping.in/Perfumes-deo-india-online.html

  16. Search sucks by heikkile · · Score: 2

    It is really good to have music in the free. But it could be organized better. I tired to search for "Locatelli", a baroque composer I know a little about. The first hit found a "piece" with a headline "Battista, Locatelli & J.S Bach - Concetos". What passes for a comment for the music is some details about Vivaldi's life, and under that is a composer Bio, also of Vivaldi. The "piece" consists of four parts, starting with a Concerto Grosso by Vivaldi, followed by Pergolesi, something by Bach, and finally a single movement of a Locatelli concerto. Last there is a fact box that lists Vivaldi as the composer, and fails to mention anything about the performer or period...

    --

    In Murphy We Turst

    1. Re:Search sucks by aarondunn · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the comment. Please feel free to shoot me an email at aaron [at] musopen.org and I'll see what we can do to improve it. Keep in mind most of the things that are lacking like that are due to volunteer constraints, if we could get more time we could add quite a bit.

  17. Whinge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds fine to me. And even if it wasn't, what are you expecting? Stop being such a whiner.

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

      Sounds fine to me. And even if it wasn't, what are you expecting? Stop being such a whiner.

      If I want some mediocre interpretation/recording I already can get it basically for free from Naxos (they usually charge 4-8€ per CD. There is already so much competition in the low-end market that i don't really see what yet another offer really adds.

      What gets expensive because there is very little competition are the quality recordings which usually fall into the 15-20€/CD range.

      http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/12/08/17/024247/project-to-turn-classical-scores-into-copyright-free-music-completed#

  18. IMSLP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see why there's musopen. The main internet site for free sheet music is IMSLP http://www.imslp.org/wiki/
    They have 58,527 works 213,783 scores 20,183 recordings 7,838 composers 199 performers
    That's a lot more than musopen. Could it be a kickstart scam? Should be easy to copy some stuff from IMSLP onto your website and sell it as something new to people who don't know.

    For sources to sheet music (if you want to edit it), see Mutopia: http://www.mutopiaproject.org

    I consider IMSLP valuable to look for music, but am aware that much of the content are scanned editions from the 1940s and earlier, due to copyright issues.
    The available content does not reflect the current state-of-the-art of editions of classical music. In that time it was still popular that editors romanticize old music to adapt it to the taste of the time. Music from more recent composers like Shostakovich are not available ( http://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Shostakovich,_Dmitry ) either.
    Of the music I want to play, therefore I usually buy good modern editions even if the sheet music is available on IMSLP.

    1. Re:IMSLP by metacell · · Score: 1

      MusOpen is for music recordings, not sheet music.

    2. Re:IMSLP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      MusOpen is for music recordings, not sheet music.

      No.
      Musopen provides sheet music and recordings.
      IMSLP provides sheet music and recordings.
      From the database size it seems that IMSLP has more sheet music and more recordings than Musopen.

      From a IMSLP board message http://imslpforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=840 I conclude that Musopen was founded in a response to a temporary shutdown of IMSLP for almost a year in 2007. When IMSLP re-opened, Musopen didn't shutdown but continued their own platform.

    3. Re:IMSLP by abirdman · · Score: 1

      Reading your comment between the lines reveals you believe the following three things:
      1. The website with the highest number of "units" wins, and no website with a lower number is legitimate.
      2. Any single example of a "unit" is the same as any other, hence generic. The only important comparison value is quantity vs. price.
      3. Despite this flattening of value, expensive somehow trumps free, and newer is better than older.


      These ideas are quite current, and popular, but I think they're rarely examined. And I disagree.

      --
      Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
  19. Complete Bach Organ Works by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.blockmrecords.org/bach/ Played by James Kibbie, and as a quote from the website: "This project is sponsored by the University of Michigan School of Music, Theatre & Dance, with generous support from Dr. Barbara Furin Sloat in honor of J. Barry Sloat, and with additional support from the Office of Vice-President for Research, the University of Michigan."

    1. Re:Complete Bach Organ Works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However apart from "free downloads", I cannot find any licensing information on that page. So what am I allowed to do with those? Only play them at home? Or also play it at public? May I send a copy to a friend? May I put them on a web site? Or on a file sharing network? May I use them as background music of YouTube videos? And if so, do I have to license the videos in a certain way? May I format-shift the files? May I distribute format-shifted files? May I edit the files? May I distribute edited files?

    2. Re:Complete Bach Organ Works by GlobalEcho · · Score: 1

      Wow, thank you for that link! I had been waffling on spending $250 for the complete works on CD for four years.

    3. Re:Complete Bach Organ Works by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Just saying: This is the complete organ works, not the complete works.

  20. No it isn't by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sound editors aren't magic, you can't take a bad performance and make it great, and you can't edit out systemic noise like wow and flutter from a tape. You also can't edit out a sound from under another sound, without major audible artifacts.

    What a big label would do is go and use better quality equipment to record the track. It isn't even that expensive these days. Then they would record multiple takes as necessary and edit those together.

    Hell forget big labels, this is what a university recording studio would do. It is not too much to ask that if the idea is to get "open" replacements to professional music that a professional job of it is done.

    1. Re:No it isn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > you can't edit out systemic noise like wow and flutter from a tape. You also can't edit out a sound from under another sound, without major audible artifacts.

      Wow and flutter can be removed by analysing the shifting of the bias frequency and compensating for the speed change. This is quite new technology, but has already been used on a few re-masters from tape. It sounds really solid!

      Sounds can also now be removed by 'painting' them out on a spectrogram. Wavelab 7 does this. Sony also has a new tool that lets you remove notes intelligently, by finding the harmonic series using a generic process that doesn't have to be taught.

      > What a big label would do is go and use better quality equipment to record the track.

      Ah, I wish this happened more often.

    2. Re:No it isn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What a big label would do is go and use better quality equipment to record the track. It isn't even that expensive these days. Then they would record multiple takes as necessary and edit those together.

      You are correct, I've actually played in professional orchestra's and solo piano performances that had been professionally recorded. Usually you play the song through a few times normally then someone, usually a conductor picks a few spots where mistakes were made. You then start the song a few measures before the mistake to let allow the acoustics and such play out as they recorded it again. Then some poor editor spends hours and hours piecing it back together the good parts and adjusting levels. Neither experience is very fun, after awhile all parties get sick of the song but the quality is there.

      That all said there's something special and beautiful about mistakes and imperfections, its what makes a live concert better than listening to the recording and professional recordings of them kind of squeeze some of that magic out for the sake of perfection.

    3. Re:No it isn't by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      You also can't edit out a sound from under another sound, without major audible artifacts.

      Rubbish, it's no harder than photoshopping an unwanted object out of an image. Just like photoshopping, you pick up the sound you want from somewhere else in the recording, take it to the right frequency, stretch, repeat, overlay, whatever to the right length and mix it in. I used to do that by slicing and dicing magnetic audio tape which is a lot more of an art because you don't have nearly the signal processing options. These days it is a piece of cake particularly for a single sound event like a cough.

      Too many posers with no experience whatsoever posting to this thread, hoping to sound authoritative.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    4. Re:No it isn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I hate is professionally recorded singing. It is the same experience that you described, but your voice slowly goes downhill the more you use it. They also recorded us all together, then individual parts. They also had multiple microphones spread around so that, worst case, they could just quiet the microphone where the person gasping for air is. There is literally some songs that if I never heard them again, it would be too soon. Ask any a Capella group what their least favorite song is, and I am willing to bet it is "The Lion Sleeps Tonight"; everyone wants to hear it and everyone thinks you are doing it wrong. The only two I never got sick of, even while performing it, was Mozart's Requiem and Good Vibrations.

  21. prior art by StripedCow · · Score: 2

    Perhaps we can now start a project to match new popular music against this database, and figure out that all new music is just a shameless copy/basic rewrite of existing classical music.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    1. Re:prior art by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we can now start a project to match new popular music against this database, and figure out that all new music is just a shameless copy/basic rewrite of existing classical music.

      This is such an absurd statement that I don't know how to refute it without sounding absurd myself.

      I know it's a joke and that you're probably trying to make a sensible statement about the formulaic quality of most pop tunes, but it comes off as pure snobbery.

    2. Re:prior art by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we can now start a project to match new popular music against this database, and figure out that all new music is just a shameless copy/basic rewrite of existing classical music.

      This is such an absurd statement that I don't know how to refute it without sounding absurd myself.

      It's not absurd at all. Ask google about "George Harrison" "He's So Fine" for a canonical illustration of why not.

      The main word in dispute above is actually "shameless", since even the judge in Harrison's case agreed that it probably was a case of "subconscious plagiarism". Even if you don't know you're copying, the legal system will still convict you and hand you a hefty fine should you accidentally "copy" something that was composed in the past century or so.

      Actually, I've asked several reps of music publishers how I might go about determining if a tune I have in my mind (and am thinking of playing at some event that's coming up) is something that they own the rights to. They have all replied that I should buy a copy of everything they've published, and search it all for the tune. As far as I can tell, they're not joking when they suggest this. I've replied that it could be more practical to visit the Library of Congress and do the search there, and they seem upset that I'd thought of this. (But they don't retract their suggestion .-)

      Of course, this isn't really practical. It'd probably take the rest of my life to do such a search there. And it would mostly only work for things published in the US; the LoC doesn't have copies of all music ever published anywhere in the world.

      So, seriously: If I have what I think might be a new piece of music in my head, how exactly would I go about verifying that it's not a "shameless copy" of someone else's music? Where do I get access to the needed data (all published or recorded music), and what's the algorithm for comparing the music in my head (which I can write down if you promise not to prosecute me ;-) with all the music in that database?

      Note that all existing music notation is rather variable, and it's always easy to write down a piece of music in several forms that are not obviously similar to a reader. Attempts to write code to do such comparisons have had only partial success. And most computerized music notation is presented either in PDF or in any of several proprietary encodings, none of which I can legally code for without permission from the owners of the encodings. And extracting musical info from a PDF-encoded score is a major AI task -- which most humans would fail.

      A practical answer to the above question would be a real benefit to musicians who don't want to replicate the "George Harrison" incident.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    3. Re:prior art by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we can now start a project to match new popular music against this database, and figure out that all new music is just a shameless copy/basic rewrite of existing classical music.

      [snippage]

      A practical answer to the above question would be a real benefit to musicians who don't want to replicate the "George Harrison" incident.

      Oh sure, it could be useful for that. Although I suspect one side-effect might be a flurry of lawsuits as every copyright holder on Earth searched the database looking for people to sue...

      Anyway, the reason I called the OP absurd wasn't because the idea of a "musical plagiarism search engine" was in itself a bad idea. It's not. What annoyed me was the implicit message that 1) modern pop music is written by imitative hacks who indulge in conscious or half-conscious plagiarism, 2) classical music suffered from no such problems, and 3) anything of musical value in pop music must have been plagiarized from a pre-twentieth-century source.

  22. Re:Limited, non-free site. Bad quality... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What site are you talking about? I did not see any download limit or fee. In fact, I just downloaded the full lossless (sic!) torrent linked from archive.org.

    As for quality, Musopen contains public domain recordings from various sources. If you look carefully, you'll see that some recordings are by high-school orchestras! TFA talks about the completed kickstarted campaign which includes works recorded by professional symphonic orchestras, you can clearly identify these by looking at the performing artist.

    Your complaint about lack of torrents and download limits suggests you are looking at a completely different website from the rest of us. Your whining is misplaced.

  23. Time to get up... by olau · · Score: 1

    Enjoy!

    I should have backed this.

    1. Re:Time to get up... by metrometro · · Score: 1

      RINGTONE.

  24. Freedom, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can they talk about freedom and use Apple proprietary format (M4A) to encode the files?

  25. Also the Italian LiberLiber project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is also the http://www.liberliber.itliberliber/ Italian project that let you:

    1) http://www.liberliber.it/musica/index.php/music from terminated copyright

    2) http://www.liberliber.it/libri/index.php/book in Italian language

    3) http://www.liberliber.it/audiolibri/index.php/audiobook in Italian language ...

  26. Also the Italian LiberLiber project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is also the http://www.liberliber.it/ LiberLiber Italian project that let you:

    1) http://www.liberliber.it/musica/index.php/ music from terminated copyright

    2) http://www.liberliber.it/libri/index.php/ book in Italian language

    3) http://www.liberliber.it/audiolibri/index.php/ audiobook in Italian language ...

  27. Re:Limited, non-free site. Bad quality... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *sigh*

    Please look at this: http://musopen.org/signup

    The torrent dvd doesn't contain everything on musopen.org.

  28. Thank You. by glodime · · Score: 1

    The first time I heard Scheherazade it was by recommendation of guttentag on slashdot.org who provided a link to a recording of it on musopen.org. I didn't know what it was, but it got my attention.

    Thank You.

  29. Go away, you're not 21 by tepples · · Score: 1

    Where does that leave fans in high school or the first two-thirds of college who can't get into gigs because they live in a 21-to-enter state?

    1. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Finding a venue that doesn't have insane age restrictions on gigs.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    2. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where does that leave fans in high school or the first two-thirds of college who can't get into gigs because they live in a 21-to-enter state?

      Gee, I don't know, you JUST went to school. Did you actually LEARN anything about politics, laws, and public debates?

      Seems to me if the main draw for local entertainment is at a bar that you should either A) look to find concerts elsewhere that allow 18+, or B) petition the business or local township to allow 18+ at concerts. Signatures on a petition like that turn into dollar bills when thrown in front of a business owner as they stare at all that lost revenue. You'd be surprised at how quickly laws get passed then.

    3. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      There are concert venues where alcohol is not served. Problem solved. Of course, it could be that musicians don't want to play in these venues, in which case they're jerks, but IME (I've done some volunteer work for such a scene in Oslo), that's not much of a problem. Many bands you'd never thought, are willing to play in these venues to give the lt 18 crowd access to their music.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    4. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Where does that leave fans in high school or the first two-thirds of college who can't get into gigs because they live in a 21-to-enter state?

      Wow..what concerts have you been to that had an age restrictions?

      I mean sure, if you're talking about bars...yes, they do...but when I think concert..I think of the ones at the local stadium....never seen age restrictions there...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Finding a venue that doesn't have insane age restrictions on gigs.

      Which includes, among other things, almost every venue for classical music on the planet. The Boston Symphony is not likely to turn away a 16-year-old who wants to attend their concert. In fact, they'll probably be delighted that younger people are taking an interest in what they're performing.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    6. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by tepples · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about places such as Piere's, which hold concerts yet are legally bars. Such smaller venues commonly host smaller acts that can't draw enough of a crowd to fill a local stadium or a local theater.

    7. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So bands will have to have adult fans, and can no longer make a living exploiting the poor taste of teenagers and freshmen? I'm trying to see why you portray this as a bad thing... you aren't perchance a nickelback fan, are you?

    8. Re:Go away, you're not 21 by Black+LED · · Score: 1

      Go to shows on Friday or Sunday. In fact, the very first concert ad I see on that site is for Static-X, playing on a Friday.

      It's really a moot point though. I doubt any classical musician is ever going to perform at a place like that.

  30. But is healing worth $350? by tepples · · Score: 1

    You mentioned Adobe Audition, which costs $350 by itself (source: Google search) or $600 per year as part of Creative Cloud (source: adobe.com). Is this also in Audacity? Or is "healing" patented? Or does it happen to be just not a priority for Audacity developers?

  31. But what can the fans do? by tepples · · Score: 1

    What should the fans of a musician do if that musician declines to move the concert from a venue that has insane age restrictions to a venue that doesn't? Must they learn to like a different musician?

    1. Re:But what can the fans do? by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

      If the musician won't listen to the fans, why should the fans support the musician? After all, ultimately it's the fans that may the musician's wages.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  32. Why admitting under 21 is unviable by tepples · · Score: 2

    Did you actually LEARN anything about politics, laws, and public debates?

    Yes, and after looking at the political action committees who determine who is allowed to actually get elected, I've determined that politics is controlled by the old-boys club. "After having considered your proposal, we have concluded that it is not in line with our current business goals."

    A) look to find concerts elsewhere that allow 18+

    Please see my reply to RaceProUK's comment above.

    B) petition the business or local township to allow 18+ at concerts. Signatures on a petition like that turn into dollar bills when thrown in front of a business owner as they stare at all that lost revenue.

    Not necessarily. In order for the state not to classify the establishment as a "bar", the venue would have to prepare and sell a lot more food. A lot of these venues make so much money from selling alcoholic beverages that it would exceed the marginal revenue from selling tickets to people not of drinking age.

    1. Re:Why admitting under 21 is unviable by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Depends on the state and local laws--where I live, there was nothing that kept me from walking into a bar when I was underage, they just wouldn't sell me alcohol. It's certainly feasible to campaign for a move towards having bars not required to simply refuse admittance to those below the drinking age, and once the desired change to the laws is made, to make sure venues are aware of the change & boycott any who continue to refuse underage admittance anyway, so they're undesirable gigs for musicians even if they don't lose significant enough business.

      If they want to be lazy about checking IDs...if the local government sponsors any events that includes some area with alcoholic drinks, how they handle it ought to be acceptable to them. (Where I live, they use wristbands that certainly are not removable intact; the sticky section shreds.)

  33. Bemani by tepples · · Score: 1

    To my formally-untrained ear, the third movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata sounds roughly comparable in complexity to Chopin's Revolutionary Etude in C minor. An arrangement of this Chopin piece by Takayuki Ishikawa and Naoki Maeda is playable in one of Konami's Dance Dance Revolution games under the title "Kakumei". DDR is ported to iOS. An arrangement of the third movement of another of Beethoven's sonatas is in Andamiro's Pump It Up, under the title "Beethoven Virus". Perhaps someone thinks "playing" a piece of music in one of Konami's rhythm games is as good as actually playing it, seeing as how the keysounded games (Beatmania, Pop'n Music, Keyboardmania) will play the note early or late if the player presses the button early or late. This is in contrast to Guitar Hero and Rock Band, which just mute or unmute the recording for missed notes.

  34. Thanks from Musopen by aarondunn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To everyone posting here, thank you all for the donations and thoughts. It was a long and challenging project but I am very proud of the end result. I'm considering a second project, if anyone is interested in hearing about it in the next couple of weeks, please make sure to follow us on Twitter/FB/our blog etc: https://twitter.com/ajdunn83 or /musopen or our blog at blog.musopen.org Thanks again, Aaron Dunn Musopen.org

  35. Feist in one country, the opposite in another by tepples · · Score: 1

    Copyrights don't have to be asserted

    I thought that if you fail to assert your copyright, your claims could be estopped by laches, and certain nonliteral elements could become generic (called scenes a faire in copyright).

    Copyright is not granted for 'hard work' or 'sweat of the brow'.

    It isn't in the United States (Feist v. Rural), but in some other countries it is. Australia, for example, has a precedent about telephone directories that's the opposite of Feist (Telstra v Desktop Marketing Systems).

  36. I bet it's not exactly free by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

    If I use one of these new recordings in a Youtube video for example, i'll probably still be screwed by the "Music Publishing Rights Collecting Society"

  37. Let me rephrase by tepples · · Score: 1

    I know it's a joke and that you're probably trying to make a sensible statement about the formulaic quality of most pop tunes

    Perhaps the argument is that if the major labels' works are so formulaic, they're probably not original enough to warrant the major labels trying to enforce their exclusive rights against the public in such a draconian manner. So if we can find some public domain sources matching various pieces of popular music, we can liberate them.

  38. Cap by tepples · · Score: 1

    you're not out anything (other than your time)

    What you say is true for those fortunate enough to live in the service area of wired broadband. Some people can only get wireless broadband (generally satellite and cellular), and this tends to have a single digit GB per month download cap that isn't designed for downloading a lot of lossless recordings.

  39. extensive collection? by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    Unless I am confused here there are like 20 songs, less than a CD normally (except that it is in lossless format so actually takes up far more).

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  40. WOW, I might even find mine royalty free there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My own classical scores no longer with me may end up in a free pool and ascribed to someone else! Great!

  41. Help me expose theft in Microsoft. Endangering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 1992 concocted one of my first (first) C++ libraries: charP.h. It was meant to handle char * strings, primarily to handle the formula

    cstr = strcpy(new char[strlen(str)+1], str);

    And indeed! I would use the library like:

    charP c;
    char *s = c.copy(string);
    function(c.cstr);

    By the second or third project I realized I was not using most other helper functions, it was a general dependency already and I had memorized the formula, so I stopped using the library. For several reasons I also decided that a string class was project specialized and string Pointers were so encapsulated that it was better to handle them case per case, including the testing for content.

    But the library trailed on in my installations, even after each of the ten milestone CRASHES and computers STOLEN, til it finally went away by about the sixth one... And it was then when Microsoft comes up with... String object! and the c_str member... Typical pattern: if I do not use it, they do and viceversa. And this is not the only example! If ALL my computers (all ten important ones) had not been stolen right after milestone achievement or product in beta testing, it would be DIFFERENT, but after two decades of the SAME the issue is very clear to me. Only I do not want to know it was Myhrvold or Simonyi, I claim the right to be the one pointing to whom I think are _my_ relatives; I want the other ones, the ones not famous ones who come up with the IDEAS, like the COM-registry one I discarded, or the superbrilliant C# name, or the phrase **Where do you want to go today?** or the dashboard-like band object, or the small icons (from Ami Pro), or dropping the start button (negative correlation) and other more technical details mimicking my programming (and the crashes and thefts), and NOW including a totally negative correlation, like adding those awful BANDS instead of the menu-small buttons interface I am SO USED to use...

    This is not the only case but for the target victim, I, it is obvious; only I do not have access to people in MS til after the facts but I am looking for a schizophrenics who can *hear*, is connected, and covers it up, including competition, with theft. Even if there is some _mother_ involved, I need people to point the people at me. At some times MS and others were buying the additions but in this case it has been easier to steal, you see? But they do know, and besides this explains the general state of disarray people do feel in Microsoft.

    Of course this is dangerous to me and dangerous to people who read this or are even in THIS channel. Which I use because I do not want revenge against my internet accounts, like the last 21-24 TIMES. Danilo J Bonsignore