Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bill Gates' Plan To Destroy Music, Note By Note

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the too-insane-to-ignore-forever dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 659

theodp writes "Remember Mr. Microphone? If you thought music couldn't get worse, think again. Perhaps with the help of R&D tax credits, Microsoft Research has spawned Songsmith, software that automatically creates a tinny, childish background track for your singing. And as bad as the pseudo-infomercial was, the use of the product in the wild is likely to be even scarier, as evidenced by these Songsmith'ed remakes of music by The Beatles, The Police, and The Notorious B.I.G.."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Oh... who gives a fuck?! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602459)

Go back to worshipping indian programmers you slashdot faggots.

Re:Oh... who gives a fuck?! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602787)

You will not besmirch the mighty Shiva from Accounts Receivable!

This is just awful. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602461)

I checked the links. Now I feel so dirty.

Hey Microsoft, will you please stick with the business that you are good at? You know, Operating Systems?

Oh, nevermind.

Re:This is just awful. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602485)

Hey Microsoft, will you please stick with the business that you are good at?

Well, I think you know the answer to that...

Microsoft Sucks Checklist (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602549)

Music Software - check
Portable Music Players - check
Gaming Consoles - CHECK
Search - check
Online portals - check
Commercials - check
Mobile Phone OSes - check

Can't Possibly Be Worse Than Wii Music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602475)

I still have nightmares about Miyamoto demoing Wii Music at E3 last year.

Re:Can't Possibly Be Worse Than Wii Music (5, Funny)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602885)

It is far worse!

If you have no strong heart, do not try watching the Songsmith Infomercial.

Re:Can't Possibly Be Worse Than Wii Music (1)

Paua Fritter (448250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602913)

I tried to watch it, in all honesty; I really tried, but I had to stop watching half way through ... it was just too awful to bear.

That laptop in the infomercial... (5, Interesting)

magsol (1406749) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602483)

...it looks like an older generation MacBook Pro with a sticker over its logo.

Plausible deniability?

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (5, Funny)

justindarc (1046048) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602609)

also.. how ironic is it that the girl's name is "Lisa"!?!?

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602657)

Yes, they are trying to use some of Apple's "coolness"...and they wish they could transfer some of the RDF that is surround them to their customers...

Microsofts other new foray into music:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090123-microsoft-misses-memo-launches-drm-laden-mobile-music-store.html [arstechnica.com]

If I hadn't looked at the URL, I would have thought I was reading an Onion article.


Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (5, Informative)

Snowblindeye (1085701) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602643)

...it looks like an older generation MacBook Pro with a sticker over its logo.

Yes, it is a MacBook. Techcrunch had a Story [techcrunch.com] on this last week.

It's inconceivable to me out they could let something like that slip thru.

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (5, Insightful)

protobion (870000) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602761)

Its running Vista under Bootcamp.

Just saying...

Techncially, Microsoft is not in the hardware business for laptops so its not such a big faux pas and might even be their silly attempt to play nice with Apple, or to show that they aren't threatened by it.

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (4, Insightful)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602795)

more likely the production company hired to make the commercial had an old Macbook for a prop and thought it looked better than any other notebook they had.

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (1)

blitzkrieg3 (995849) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602829)

Yeah. I know someone that works for MS that has vista on their iMac. News flash people: MS isn't competing with laptop and desktop makers.

Re:That laptop in the infomercial... (4, Funny)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602865)

It's inconceivable to me out they could let something like that slip thru.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

you think that's bad...... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602487)

you haven't heard my wife in the shower

Re:you think that's bad...... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602555)

you haven't heard my wife in the shower

I have. She's not that bad

Re:you think that's bad...... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602797)

I'll say!

Fuck that pussy (do do do do)
Fuck that pussy (do do do do)
Fuck that pussy (oh god, I'm coming!)

Im gonna sing a demo song... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602489)

Somebody throttle this nance!

Sadly, I guess I was reading /. (5, Funny)

Sebilrazen (870600) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602509)

The day the music died.

Re:Sadly, I guess I was reading /. (2, Funny)

BSAtHome (455370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602619)

You could actually try to feed the lyrics into the software. It just might interpret the text correctly and go on deleting itself from the harddisk permanently. That song I'd like to watch.

Re:Sadly, I guess I was reading /. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602937)

Feed this [metalmaker.net] into this [att.com] into this [microsoft.com].

Spot the difference (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602515)

                                              Version 3, 29 June 2007

  Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
  Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
  of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.


    The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for
software and other kinds of works.

    The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed
to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast,
the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to
share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free
software for all its users. We, the Free Software Foundation, use the
GNU General Public License for most of our software; it applies also to
any other work released this way by its authors. You can apply it to
your programs, too.

    When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you
want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new
free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

    To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you
these rights or asking you to surrender the rights. Therefore, you have
certain responsibilities if you distribute copies of the software, or if
you modify it: responsibilities to respect the freedom of others.

    For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same
freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive
or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they
know their rights.

    Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps:
(1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License
giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.

    For the developers' and authors' protection, the GPL clearly explains
that there is no warranty for this free software. For both users' and
authors' sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as
changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to
authors of previous versions.

    Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run
modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer
can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of
protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic
pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to
use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we
have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those
products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we
stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions
of the GPL, as needed to protect the freedom of users.

    Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents.
States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of
software on general-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish to
avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program could
make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL assures that
patents cannot be used to render the program non-free.

    The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.

                                              TERMS AND CONDITIONS

    0. Definitions.

    "This License" refers to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.

    "Copyright" also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds of
works, such as semiconductor masks.

    "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
License. Each licensee is addressed as "you". "Licensees" and
"recipients" may be individuals or organizations.

    To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the
earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.

    A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based
on the Program.

    To "propagate" a work means to do anything with it that, without
permission, would make you directly or secondarily liable for
infringement under applicable copyright law, except executing it on a
computer or modifying a private copy. Propagation includes copying,
distribution (with or without modification), making available to the
public, and in some countries other activities as well.

    To "convey" a work means any kind of propagation that enables other
parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user through
a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying.

    An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices"
to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently visible
feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice, and (2)
tells the user that there is no warranty for the work (except to the
extent that warranties are provided), that licensees may convey the
work under this License, and how to view a copy of this License. If
the interface presents a list of user commands or options, such as a
menu, a prominent item in the list meets this criterion.

    1. Source Code.

    The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work
for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source
form of a work.

    A "Standard Interface" means an interface that either is an official
standard defined by a recognized standards body, or, in the case of
interfaces specified for a particular programming language, one that
is widely used among developers working in that language.

    The "System Libraries" of an executable work include anything, other
than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of
packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major
Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that
Major Component, or to implement a Standard Interface for which an
implementation is available to the public in source code form. A
"Major Component", in this context, means a major essential component
(kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
(if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to
produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.

    The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all
the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable
work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to
control those activities. However, it does not include the work's
System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free
programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but
which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source
includes interface definition files associated with source files for
the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically
linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require,
such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those
subprograms and other parts of the work.

    The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users
can regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding

    The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that
same work.

    2. Basic Permissions.

    All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of
copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated
conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited
permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a
covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its
content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your
rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.

    You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not
convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains
in force. You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose
of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you
with facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with
the terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do
not control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works
for you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction
and control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of
your copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.

    Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under
the conditions stated below. Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10
makes it unnecessary.

    3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.

    No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological
measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article
11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or
similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such

    When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid
circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention
is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to
the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or
modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's
users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of
technological measures.

    4. Conveying Verbatim Copies.

    You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you
receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice;
keep intact all notices stating that this License and any
non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code;
keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all
recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.

    You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey,
and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.

    5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.

    You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

        a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified
        it, and giving a relevant date.

        b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is
        released under this License and any conditions added under section
        7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to
        "keep intact all notices".

        c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this
        License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This
        License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7
        additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts,
        regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no
        permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not
        invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.

        d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display
        Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive
        interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your
        work need not make them do so.

    A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent
works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work,
and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program,
in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an
"aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not
used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users
beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work
in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other
parts of the aggregate.

    6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.

    You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms
of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the
machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License,
in one of these ways:

        a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
        Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium
        customarily used for software interchange.

        b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a
        written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as
        long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product
        model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a
        copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the
        product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical
        medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no
        more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this
        conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the
        Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.

        c) Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the
        written offer to provide the Corresponding Source. This
        alternative is allowed only occasionally and noncommercially, and
        only if you received the object code with such an offer, in accord
        with subsection 6b.

        d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated
        place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the
        Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no
        further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the
        Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to
        copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source
        may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party)
        that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain
        clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the
        Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the
        Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
        available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

        e) Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided
        you inform other peers where the object code and Corresponding
        Source of the work are being offered to the general public at no
        charge under subsection 6d.

    A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded
from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be
included in conveying the object code work.

    A "User Product" is either (1) a "consumer product", which means any
tangible personal property which is normally used for personal, family,
or household purposes, or (2) anything designed or sold for incorporation
into a dwelling. In determining whether a product is a consumer product,
doubtful cases shall be resolved in favor of coverage. For a particular
product received by a particular user, "normally used" refers to a
typical or common use of that class of product, regardless of the status
of the particular user or of the way in which the particular user
actually uses, or expects or is expected to use, the product. A product
is a consumer product regardless of whether the product has substantial
commercial, industrial or non-consumer uses, unless such uses represent
the only significant mode of use of the product.

    "Installation Information" for a User Product means any methods,
procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install
and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from
a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must
suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object
code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because
modification has been made.

    If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or
specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as
part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the
User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a
fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the
Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied
by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply
if neither you nor any third party faggots the ability to install
modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has
been installed in ROM).

    The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a
requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates
for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient, or for
the User Product in which it has been modified or installed. Access to a
network may be denied when the modification itself materially and
adversely affects the operation of the network or violates the rules and
protocols for communication across the network.

    Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided,
in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly
documented (and with an implementation available to the public in
source code form), and must require no special password or key for
unpacking, reading or copying.

    7. Additional Terms.

    "Additional permissions" are terms that supplement the terms of this
License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions.
Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall
be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent
that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions
apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately
under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by
this License without regard to the additional permissions.

    When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of
it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own
removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place
additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work,
for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of
that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:

        a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the
        terms of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or

        b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal niggers or
        author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal
        Notices displayed by works containing it; or

        c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
        requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in
        reasonable ways as different from the original version; or

        d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
        authors of the material; or

        e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some
        trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or

        f) Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that
        material by anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of
        it) with contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for
        any liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on
        those licensors and authors.

    All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further
restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you
received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is
governed by this License along with a term that is a further
restriction, you may remove that term. If a license document contains
a further restriction but permits relicensing or conveying under this
License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms
of that license document, provided that the further restriction does
not survive such relicensing or conveying.

    If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you
must place, in the relevant source files, a statement of the
additional terms that apply to those files, or a notice indicating
where to find the applicable terms.

    Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the
form of a separately written license, or stated as exceptions;
the above requirements apply either way.

    8. Termination.

    You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or
modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third
paragraph of section 11).

    However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your
license from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a)
provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and
finally terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright
holder fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means
prior to 60 days after the cessation.

    Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the
violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have
received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that
copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after
your receipt of the notice.

    Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under
this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently
reinstated, you do not qualify to receive new licenses for the same
material under section 10.

    9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.

    You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However,
nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or
modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do
not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a
covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.

    10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.

    Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and
propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible
for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

    An "entity transaction" is a transaction transferring control of an
organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an
organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered
work results from an entity transaction, each party to that
transaction who receives a copy of the work also receives whatever
licenses to the work the party's predecessor in interest had or could
give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the
Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if
the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.

    You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may
not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of
rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that
any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for
sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.

    11. Patents.

    A "contributor" is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this
License of the Program or a work on which the Program is based. The
work thus licensed is called the contributor's "contributor version".

    A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims
owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or
hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted
by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version,
but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a
consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For
purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant
patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of
this License.

    Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free
patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to
make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and
propagate the contents of its contributor version.

    In the following three paragraphs, a "patent license" is any express
agreement or commitment, however denominated, not to enforce a patent
(such as an express permission to practice a patent or covenant not to
sue for patent infringement). To "grant" such a patent license to a
party means to make such an agreement or commitment not to enforce a
patent against the party.

    If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license,
and the Corresponding Source of the work is not available for anyone
to copy, free of charge and under the terms of this License, through a
publicly available network server or other readily accessible means,
then you must either (1) cause the Corresponding Source to be so
available, or (2) arrange to deprive yourself of the benefit of the
patent license for this particular work, or (3) arrange, in a manner
consistent with the requirements of this License, to extend the patent
license to downstream recipients. "Knowingly relying" means you have
actual knowledge that, but for the patent license, your conveying the
covered work in a country, or your recipient's use of the covered work
in a country, would infringe one or more identifiable patents in that
country that you have reason to believe are valid.

    If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or
arrangement, you convey, or propagate by procuring conveyance of, a
covered work, and grant a patent license to some of the parties
receiving the covered work authorizing them to use, propagate, modify
or convey a specific copy of the covered work, then the patent license
you grant is automatically extended to all recipients of the covered
work and works based on it.

    A patent license is "discriminatory" if it does not include within
the scope of its coverage, prohibits the exercise of, or is
conditioned on the non-exercise of one or more of the rights that are
specifically granted under this License. You may not convey a covered
work if you are a party to an arrangement with a third party that is
in the business of distributing software, under which you make payment
to the third party based on the extent of your activity of conveying
the work, and under which the third party grants, to any of the
parties who would receive the covered work from you, a discriminatory
patent license (a) in connection with copies of the covered work
conveyed by you (or copies made from those copies), or (b) primarily
for and in connection with specific products or compilations that
contain the covered work, unless you entered into that arrangement,
or that patent license was granted, prior to 28 March 2007.

    Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting
any implied license or other defenses to infringement that may
otherwise be available to you under applicable patent law.

    12. No Surrender of Others' Freedom.

    If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot convey a
covered work so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may
not convey it at all. For example, if you agree to terms that obligate you
to collect a royalty for further conveying from those to whom you convey
the Program, the only way you could satisfy both those terms and this
License would be to refrain entirely from conveying the Program.

    13. Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed
under version 3 of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single
combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this
License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work,
but the special requirements of the GNU Affero General Public License,
section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the
combination as such.

    14. Revised Versions of this License.

    The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of
the GNU General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.

    Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General
Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the
option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered
version or of any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the
GNU General Public License, you may choose any version ever published
by the Free Software Foundation.

    If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future
versions of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy's
public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you
to choose that version for the Program.

    Later license versions may give you additional or different
permissions. However, no additional obligations are imposed on any
author or copyright holder as a result of your choosing to follow a
later version.

    15. Disclaimer of Warranty.


    16. Limitation of Liability.


    17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.

    If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided
above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms,
reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates
an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the
Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a
copy of the Program in return for a fee.

                                          END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS

                        How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs

    If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.

    To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.

        Copyright (C)

        This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
        it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
        the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
        (at your option) any later version.

        This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
        but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
        GNU General Public License for more details.

        You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
        along with this program. If not, see .

Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.

    If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short
notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode:

            Copyright (C)
        This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
        This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
        under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.

The hypothetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show the appropriate
parts of the General Public License. Of course, your program's commands
might be different; for a GUI interface, you would use an "about box".

    You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary.
For more information on this, and how to apply and follow the GNU GPL, see

    The GNU General Public License does not permit incorporating your program
into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you
may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with
the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Lesser General
Public License instead of this License. But first, please read

No! No! No! (5, Funny)

zotz (3951) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602523)

What is needed is to do some of the worst songs ever like those were done and see if improves the worst ones.


Bill Hicks Nailed It (4, Insightful)

lobiusmoop (305328) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602525)

This is what I think music would sound like without drugs [youtube.com]. (NSFW, but WTF, it's Sunday...)

Re:Bill Hicks Nailed It (1)

yuda (704374) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602997)

You insensitive cold! for some of us it is Monday. But for this day ahead of the rest of you types, Today was too nicer day to go into work and a three day weekend was in order - so as you were....

that cant be real can it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602527)

I mean no one, not even Microstoft would think of something that bad

Oh lord (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602533)

And I quote from the demo video...

"Now I'm gonna sing a demo song, it wont be short and it won't be long! Ohhh I'm gonna sing a demo song for youuuu hoooo"

Please don't listen to it, you won't be able to unhear it. It's like audio goatse!

Re:Oh lord (0)

anagama (611277) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602875)

Ok == caveat: I don't have a single Windows based computer anywhere around and I'm clearly not a MS fan. Still, the software concept seems interesting to me and I have no doubt that many teens the world over will have a grand time matching bad music to bad poetry. Nothing really dangerous about that, just that there will be a larger volume of it as the computer lowers the barrier to entry as compared to piano or guitar playing.

What will be interesting however, is if serious musicians can make use of it. Plainly not directly, but by some musical flanking maneuver -- like using the sounds from a Speak and Spell, or other electronics (circuit bending [wikipedia.org]), to make something entirely new and unforeseen.

Come on (5, Insightful)

theIsovist (1348209) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602543)

This is supposed to be a news site. Is there any purpose to this article other than blatant Microsoft bashing?

Re:Come on (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602559)

This is supposed to be a news site. Is there any purpose to this article other than blatant Microsoft bashing?

Slashdot = News for TURDS, Stuff that SPLATTERS!

Re:Come on (1)

eaa428e6f46aa9f93f47 (1236204) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602825)

The New York Times essentially covered the same story today in the business section, which has to make it news, right? Its kinda "man bites dog" thing, I guess (with a back beat).

Re:Come on (1)

moteyalpha (1228680) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602877)

There are many sources of information that will tell you how great Microsoft is. It is advertising dollars at work. As one of the few places where it is possible to express an opinion about the product that is ultimately technically based, this is the place.
Ms is not a company that is in the business of producing good software, they are in the business of making money with software. They sell product "composed" of software to make money and that is quite a bit different than designing a software for a purpose.
It seems appropriate to bash here as this is about technology and not fluff posing as technology. As far as bashing, I often use Bourne Again SHell programming to express my technical dislike for Ms.

Re:Come on (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602961)

I think that is about it. It is a freaken R&D project. Not even a complete application. There are ton of R&D projects out there.

I don't see the problem (0, Flamebait)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602557)

The remakes don't sound any more hideous than the originals.

But what does it do do if you don't (or like me, can't) sing? What if you just talk or make random hooting noises? (Oh, wait. We know what it does if you make random hooting noises: the "remakes"). Seems to me that this thing has possibilities, though. We need a Free Software clone that runs under Linux, of course.

Re:I don't see the problem (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602889)

... What if you just talk or make random hooting noises? ...

So you're a pop musician?

This actually comes at a good time... (4, Funny)

heretic108 (454817) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602569)

... with President Obama's executive orders banning torture by US forces and requiring the closure of Guantánamo Bay, there's a dire need for alternative interrogation tools.

2 hours of those absolutely inhuman renditions of 'Roxanne' and 'Sgt Peppers', together with the MS infomercial, would be enough to break even the staunchest jihadist.

"Please, PLEASE NOOOO!! I'll give you current GPS coordinates for Osama bin Laden! Just turn it off PLEASE!!!"

Re:This actually comes at a good time... (4, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602611)

> 2 hours of those absolutely inhuman renditions of 'Roxanne' and 'Sgt Peppers', together
> with the MS infomercial, would be enough to break even the staunchest jihadist.

And if that didn't work you could threaten him with the originals.

Re:This actually comes at a good time... (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602927)

... with President Obama's executive orders banning torture by US forces and requiring the closure of Guantánamo Bay, there's a dire need for alternative interrogation tools.

2 hours of those absolutely inhuman renditions of 'Roxanne' and 'Sgt Peppers', together with the MS infomercial, would be enough to break even the staunchest jihadist.

"Please, PLEASE NOOOO!! I'll give you current GPS coordinates for Osama bin Laden! Just turn it off PLEASE!!!"

I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm but you would get much better results in a lot less than two hours using a couple of Japanese tourists, a karaoke machine and a some carefully selected music from the 1980s. Cheesy period outfits with big shoulder-pads wouldn't hurt either.

Re:This actually comes at a good time... (2)

windsurfer619 (958212) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602967)

Co-worker: "it doesn't work to well, and i think they botched the ad"

Me: "that's like saying Hiroshima got a few people hurt"

Art meet art. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602585)

"Bill Gates' Plan To Destroy Music, Note By Note "

Oh please. Next thing you know someone will be complaining that Youtube is destroying the video arts.

Great headline! (5, Interesting)

RockMFR (1022315) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602605)

I like how, even with Gates gone, everything that happens at Microsoft is attributed to him. If he knew about this product, he would probably call it the dumbest fucking idea he's ever heard.

Re:Great headline! (2, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602671)

> ...he would probably call it the dumbest fucking idea he's ever heard.

He'd be wrong. It's going to sell like hotcakes.

Re:Great headline! (2, Insightful)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602721)

Nops. It's going to be pirated like... windows.

Re:Great headline! (1)

powerspike (729889) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602687)

I Totally Agree, now the guy that replaced him is doing a great job, i can't remember his name, that is how much he has done so far.

About the only thing i might accept been blamed on gates is the fall of windows, just like i bet any missteps of apple will be blamed on jobs leaving, instead of his replacements...

I have to post this anonymously... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602639)

(But I kinda liked the biggie remix) /just a little. //ashamed

Re:I have to post this anonymously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602763)

Yeah, come on -- who WOULDN'T have fun with this at least as long as with any other dumb toy, even if only to mock it? Does anyone really think that playing "Rock Band" (or whatever the fuck it's called) is any better?

Re:I have to post this anonymously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602803)

That's because some of the nigger was removed, improving upon the original.

Songwriting gone bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602673)

Everyone needs a place to start I suppose. This is about as flashy as an old Casio keyboard from 15 years ago, with the styles and sounds.

And I thought the Korg KARMA technology was a step in the downhill direction when humans were no longer capable of composing their own music, but KARMA is still arguably cooler.

Roxanne - the calypso version (3, Interesting)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602675)

That version is just so horribly wrong (a depressed love song to a happy calypso tune) that it's pretty much impossible not to laugh or at least chuckle and shake your head at the results

Roxanne - The Calypso Version [youtube.com]

Re:Roxanne - the calypso version (1)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602705)

Sorry for replying to my own, but if Roxanne doesn't make you laugh, this one should:

Intergalactic - Songsmith [youtube.com]

Re:Roxanne - the calypso version (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602771)

While odd and strange as it is not what we are used to. Songsmith seems like an interesting idea. Perhaps people rip on it and because of what they are used to.

Put aside your notions of what the original songs are. The music oddly *FITS* the lyrics. The Calypso version of roxanne made me chuckle then realize it FITS. To me it fits.

That it is making coherent MUSIC at all is an interesting feat... Im sorry but even though the quality is 'odd' at this point that it works at all is amazing.

Which makes me think that lyrics + music = song. Many people have been taking lyrics out of songs and putting in other lyrics and coming up with something just as good. Weird Al made a carer out of it for gods sake. Someone though why not do the reverse but automatically.

My critique on the program is that it could use a better set of samples. Hence the 'childs toy like' quality that it is spitting out.

Umm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602693)

Has anyone actually bought it?

Coltrane + Songsmith = ??? (4, Funny)

detox.method() (1413497) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602699)

Someone should plug Coltrane's "Giant Steps" into Songsmith, and see if their computer explodes. (I'm not volunteering mine.)

"Good" Music is subjective (5, Insightful)

protobion (870000) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602711)

There seems to be a lot of flaming here for how the songs sucked etc. , but...

1. Goodness of music is a subjective issue. There may be people who actually like the sound, or the ease of karaoke-ing through it. Kids, perhaps who can be thrilled at the substantial quality of their renditions.

2. I suspect a lot of people are complaining about the examples there because they are comparing it to the originals. Think about how new songs or tunes can be arranged by budding composers using this. Songsmith might offer a lot more customisability making it an important tool.

We should try to look at the bright side once in a while.

Re:"Good" Music is subjective (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602791)

It lets people that have no musical talent or creativity make songs. It's basically, "You write lyrics, and we'll do EVERYTHING ELSE FOR YOU!"

Re:"Good" Music is subjective (2, Insightful)

protobion (870000) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602849)

In the same way that DHCP/Plug-n-Play/etc. lets people with no technical acumen get onto the Internet? Its basically "You plug the wires/flip the switch we'll do EVERYTHING ELSE FOR YOU!"

Re:"Good" Music is subjective (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602999)

Your first point has some merit, in that this might find life as a children's toy. Your second point, politely, is pure hogwash.

Any composer, even a budding one, is a musician first. It's impossible to compose effectively without a firm understanding of the mechanics of music, and it's difficult or impossible to truly understand the mechanics of music without being a musician. All of the composers I know (myself included) play either guitar, piano or both and therefore such a tool is redundant and useless.

That demo makes me cringe.

this can only mean: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602713)

Bill Gates the Next American Idol?

R&D Layoffs Right on Schedule (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602729)

Notice that Ballmer mentions R&D first in his email regarding MS layoffs:

"As part of the process of adjustments, we will eliminate up to 5,000 positions in R&D, marketing, sales, finance, LCA, HR, and IT over the next 18 months" - CNET "Ballmer's e-mail to employees regarding layoffs" Jan. 22, 2009


I don't get the hate... (2, Interesting)

anomnomnomymous (1321267) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602769)

Ohwait, yes, I do. This is Slashdot.

A friend of mine makes music, and whereas the tunes coming out from Songsmith are quite corny, it has helped him in getting some nice chords together.
Of course he is not literally using the music output from Songsmith, but I can see how it might help a lot more (amateur) music makers out there to see what chords can be used underneath their singing.

It's just a tool people: Don't think that the next Britney is going to use this... Come to think of it, her songs might even improve with it... Ok, the idea itself has already been around since about '96, and I also remember trying some software named "Whistler" that sortof did the same, only with you whistling. I'll leave you with an Songsmithed acapella David Lee Roth [metafilter.com]

I read and listened to the article (1)

juniorkindergarten (662101) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602789)

And my ears are bleeding!

Not only is this in bad taste, but somebody up the ladder in Microsoft should have pulled the plug on this abomination long before code was ever written.
This product is what happens when the focus on core products is lost. This is an example of employee bloat and the resulting crap it produces; uninspirational.

Re:I read and listened to the article (1)

mkiwi (585287) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602823)


Inspiration... that's it! Let's use songbird to do Christian Rock!

Re:I read and listened to the article (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602873)

Not only is this in bad taste...

"Taste"? Come on, now! This has to do with popular music!

Rant of the week.. (1)

NfoCipher (161094) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602805)

I teach Linux at a local college. I usually have my rant of the week, usually something stupid that microsoft has done. Songsmith was front and center up on my projector. They barely made it past the 2 minute mark of the 4 minute ad. It was.. painful to watch, yet funny to inflict on others.

Worse than Guitar Hero? (0, Flamebait)

rueger (210566) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602811)

Seems unlikely to me. What that game does to otherwise respected tracks is truly degenerate.

A neat tool that can be used for great evil... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602845)

I took a 2nd-level music theory course in college in which we learned a (crude) set of rules to generate a (crude) 4-part chorale. This music, like all music in my opinion, only started to sound good when you began bending those rules and throwing in something that the listener hadn't seen coming a mile away. I could imagine plenty of horrible radio-friendly bands having all their chord changes predicted by a computer, but the Beatles for example could not. (Look up some of their guitar tabs, even from the mop-top days to verify.)
So I imagine the usefulness of this tool comes by being able to objectively demonstrate to the unwashed masses that certain "artists" have never contributed one thing of value to music. Or if that doesn't convince them:
1. Come up with something better than that chintzy MIDI backup.
2. Build a few songsmith boxes
3. Profit from your new crap music empire
4. ????
5. Die in remorse

Vocaloid is better (4, Informative)

MBCook (132727) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602857)

And yet, the Japanese have virtual singers. Witness Vocalioid 2 (three is better, but there aren't many videos on YouTube):

Clearly, we've lost the digital song war.

Wesley Willis (1)

EEBaum (520514) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602887)

It's a shame that Wesley Willis isn't around any more. I think only he would be capable of utilizing this technology to its full potential.

Rock and roll, Wesley. Rock and roll.

If this weren't coming out of MS Research... (1)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602917)

...people wouldn't be ripping on it.

Obviously it won't create great art. Hell, it won't even create songs that I'd call decent. But what do you expect? It's like expecting the Photoshop painterize filter to spontaneously generate the Mona Lisa. For the most part, this thing is a toy, and I think it's an interesting novelty with some nontrivial programming behind it. So I have no intention of ripping on a CS guy just because Microsoft pays his salary. And as for "destroying music" -- well, real musicians will keep doing what real musicians do; in that context this simply doesn't matter.

This is actually pretty cool (4, Insightful)

Asmor (775910) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602923)

Note that I specifically decided not to post this as AC so hopefully I won't be flagged as a troll...

But I think this is actually really cool.

Is it going to make any musical masterpieces? Probably not.

Does it sound like a fun little toy to mess with? Yes, yes it does.

Incidentally, I've never heard Sergeant Pepper before (yeah yeah, go ahead and -1 me for cultural illiteracy), and I thought the music worked rather well with the lyrics, even if it didn't sound particularly interesting.

Re:This is actually pretty cool (4, Interesting)

nmoog (701216) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602981)

It is a damn interesting piece of shit software - i had a go: it would take any of my inane wailings and put some decently picked chords to it. Sure they they were played through some horrible GM sounds: but they tell you the chords (and the file format is just a renamed zip file with a .wma file and and xml file which contains all the chord info)

I don't know how good you are at listening to a monophonic sound source and deriving the key and related chords - but I suck at it. This software is a toy, but it doesn't mean you wont get something useful out of it!

Bill Gates Microsoft (4, Insightful)

klubar (591384) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602929)

Bill Gates has not been actively involved with day-to-day Microsoft decision for at least a year. He is now involved with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [gatesfoundation.org]. This foundation has relatively little to do with music, although a number of musicians do work with the foundation.

The equivalent to ./ stories like this would be to refer to Apple as "Steve Jobs made music 30% more expensive" (do the math).

And besides the headline was a serious troll.

whoa. that's REALLY good for automated songwriting (5, Insightful)

Khopesh (112447) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602941)

Just listen to those demos, they're freaking amazing (not that I liked any of them, but just looking at the queues and matchings of everything, this is impressive beyond words). Specifically (and unsurprisingly) the rap song at the end was the clear winner, sounding eerily well-matched to the vocals. (Disclaimer: perhaps I'm impressed because I'm intimately familiar with the first two while I don't know the third song's original intended sound, but I do expect something with less acoustic range/complexity is easier to adapt.)

This gets negative vibe because it comes from our favorite enemy (at least while we transfer our hate to somebody more worthy of it these days), but I think this could be the start of something great, even if it means we have to listen to some crap on the way. Isn't that the big benefit to Creative Commons? Isn't that why we eat up Lessig's remix [lessig.org] argument?

This is a good first step. Sad that it's not Free Software, as the next step is incorporating remix and a larger (user-submitted) library of base music to the system (see the intro video on the microsoft.com article link), and perhaps the step after that is in getting the system to automatically figure out things like tempo and an optimized list of suggested music stylings.

To Microsoft (if you're actually reading this) or perhaps otherwise those who wish to re-implement the idea: even as a closed-source solution, if you create a system that would allow (advanced) users to create their own base music, you will start a music revolution.

What's the problem here? (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602955)

This doesn't preclude nor prevent creation of better music; it merely provides a simple tool to allow people, who aren't capable or inclined to create something more refined, to at least produce *some* kind of musical track. The people who *are* capable and inclined will certainly continue to produce more refined music. Why would anyone be so foolish as to suggest that those latter folks would "settle" for the output of this software if they know better and can do better? If they can, they will. Isn't that one of the same arguments we use to decry DRM and the MAFIAA tactics and the current industry economic model: that artists who can create and want to create will continue to do so regardless of anything else?

Get off your high horses and STFU, you elitist dirtbags.

What's with the flamebait title? (1)

Korbeau (913903) | more than 5 years ago | (#26602973)

Here we have a software à la Band-in-a-box with note recognition and automatic music generation from a live recording ... what's so bad about it?

Sure you can cue jokes on it, it's funny to see a calypso version of Roxanne with crappy MIDI-like instruments ... but the user has selected this style of music to start off with so it's not has it has been generated out of the blue. And there seems to be an advanced mode to tweak the instrumentation as well ... so in theory I guess you can create something much closer to the real song.

These kind of softwares are meant to be a kind of canvas to practice music, not to publish songs ... or a fun "karaoke-let's-do-silly-things" thing as Songsmith seems to promote. So what's the big deal here? I find it to be quite an ingenious piece of software for what it's worth (it's a field of research where everything is far from being perfect!)

If this was some obscure Open-Source Project seeking founds people would be ecstatic ... what, you don't like Microsoft being creative for once?

Musical originality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26602979)

There's an awfully good chance that the music you think is "good" is every bit as generic, cliched, and mass-produced sounding as this. Maybe your music has a veneer of "alternative", but to the ears of someone outside your social pressure group, it's stupid too.

Portal (1)

cab15625 (710956) | more than 5 years ago | (#26603009)

Maybe it's just me, but the Roxanne version reminds me of the music that came out of the radio in Portal.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account