I didn't mean that you should do a bouncing ball metaphor, although that would be cool. I meant to ask if it would be possible to specify the timestamps with more precision, say, down to the word, to make it, well, more precise.

the timestamps with more precision, say, down to the word, to make it, well, more precise

[2:13] So you wore out your welcome
[2:18] with random precision...

Peter

I didn't mean that you should do a bouncing ball metaphor, although that would be cool. I meant to ask if it would be possible to specify the timestamps with more precision, say, down to the word, to make it, well, more precise.

Any problems with the precision as currently implemented? I have about 10 test tracks tagged right now, and aside from some dodgy timestamps in the original LRC files, I always have the current word somewhere on the screen in horizontal mode (usually in the middle) and always have the right line selected in vertical mode. Within the one-second resolution, of course. I don't know if the LRC "specification" (if you can call it that) allows millisecond resolution on timestamps, but I'm fairly certain that it doesn't allow for timestamps for each syllable, in which case, we'd have to come up with our own way to share text representations of the tagged lyrics.

If you want to see this just to improve the precision of the scrolling, then I'd rather work on doing that without having to tag each syllable. For me, though I'm getting precise results. Then again, there is a known bug in the current release with things scrolling too fast on occasion, maybe that's what you're worried about?

[2:23.1234567] Come
[2:23.2985482] on
[2:23.7092442] you
[2:23.9949842] tar
[2:24.1010303] get

[2:24.4020421] for
[2:24.7427741] far
[2:24.9394932] a
[2:25.2093931] way
[2:25.5827131] laugh
[2:25.7928813] ter

...

To be honest, I haven't used it. [sad]

But my thought was more along the lines of not fast songs, but slow ones. Think of a languid, say, Nat King Cole tune. Only tagging one line at a time could conceivably make the scroll not match the singing. But I've done no testing.

Highly syncopated singing could throw a wrench in the works, too. I'm not sure I have a good example for this. Maybe some Ella Fitzgerald or Rosemary Clooney stuff?

You've got to try it out. That's the beauty of it -- if scrolls a line just fast enough to clear the screen for the next line. If Nat takes 15 secconds to get through a line, that line will scroll really slowly. See the whole discussion of making sure to tag drum solos.

That being said, a bouncing ball from word to work would be pretty damn cool.

Matthew

I see where you're going, Bitt. There is the potential for that, or, to be more blunt, I have no way of predicting exactly what word within a line should be on screen in horizontal mode. All I know is there's X amount of real estate for that line to cover in Y amount of time. That's why I added the above caveat about long periods with no lyrics, so people can work around it a little bit (although I do impose a minimum speed to keep things within reasonable limits.) I do also provide for a time offset to begin the next line a little early so it shows up towards the middle of the display instead of the rightmost edge. Then there's the obvious concept that using a smaller font increases the chance for the current syllable being on screen...

My point is that I can't imagine anyone will go through the labor of adding time tags to syllables, and I don't see a problem with the way it's scrolling right now. You're more than welcome to try it out with some more syncopated tunes, and if there's an issue, I'd be happy to try to find a solution.

f you're using vertical scrolling mode, this is moot, because the entirety of the current line (and several of the next lines) are on screen.


Edit: Editted variable names. Derrick : Math :: Bitt : Grammar

All I know is there's X amount of real estate for that line to cover in X amount of time.

Screen real estate is a 1:1 function of time?

Sigh. Now you know why I took every math course twice in college, and a particular one 3 times...

Gosh, this lyic "coding" is horrendous! A cooler idea would be to implement some sort of voice/word recognition that would analyze the mp3/ogg/etc. file and do the coding automatically.

I imagine that it would be pretty tough with all the music in the background, but once the package was created, it could be used on all the songs.

perhaps it would be easier to do with a regular lyric file available, then the program would know what word to look for and just "listen" for when it starts.

A cooler idea would be to implement some sort of voice/word recognition that would analyze the mp3/ogg/etc. file and do the coding automatically.

Sounds good to me. I think I could link up to one of these in the trunk to run it and pipe the decodes back to the Empeg.

Gosh, this lyic "coding" is horrendous!

Then don't do it, and don't download anyone else's timed lyrics either.

Jerk.

Sounds good to me. I think I could link up to one of these in the trunk to run it and pipe the decodes back to the Empeg.

Jim, as usual, one of your timely and witty posts has made my day.

Yeah, if we all had in-car voice recognition that could understand the lyrics to "Louie Louie" I'm sure that'd be the first thing we'd put it to use for.

Then don't do it, and don't download anyone else's timed lyrics either.

Jerk.




Damn dude. Why don't you calm yourself, the guy has an opinion for crying out loud, and he wasn't making a personal attack on you.

[attempt to calm possible flame war]
I hope that bowman was trying to say that the coding was difficult or at least that He would like to see certain changes in future versions. Terms like horrendous are almost always overstatment. The goulag was horrendous, Hitler was horrendous, etc, this software is incapable of being horrendous. This software is free and it works (already better than most M$ programs).

I am also hoping that yn0t has had a little too much coffee this morning and will return to his congenial self. (I was going to jump to your defense, but you beat me to it.)
[/attempt to calm possible flame war]

I think what he meant is that actually typing in the lyrics and timing them is excessively difficult and tedious. I don't think that he meant that emphatic was bad or poorly coded.

Okay guys, I didn't take any of what he said the way you guys think I did (as a personal attack), and I'm not attempting to start a big flame war. If bbowman had said "the current implementation is not ideal", or "it's more difficult than it could be", that'd be fine. But to say it's horrendous? And then his solution to this allegedly horrendous process is to develop a voice recognition system which is going to recognize your lyrics? You've got to be kidding me.

All I'm trying to say is:

1) Adding time tags is not "horrendous." About a half a dozen people on the BBS have already tagged several albums each, in not much more than the time it takes to *listen* to those albums. With many more people doing so once a proper GUI tool is developed, we could all have a nice library to build off of. The WinAMP plugins (which I assume you've used if you're saying it's horrendous) let you just hit a key or click the mouse to insert the current time tag. Is that so hard?

Also, justinlarsen is working on a site where we'll be able to post them, so not everyone will have to tag every album they own. Oh, by the way, are you all aware that lyrics to virtually every song written are already on the Internet? So the idea that you have to hand-type them out first (Bitt) is utter nonsense. All you need to do is find them on the Internet, double-check them for accuracy, and then add time tags to them, which takes about the same amount of time it takes to listen to them. That's horrendous?

2) A solution involving performing voice recognition of the lyrics and lining untimed lyrics up with the lyrics in the audio file is so far out of the realm of what can be done on the empeg car audio player (OR even an Altix 3000), it's absurd to even suggest it. It's one thing to criticize something, but to try to buttress your point by suggesting an alternative, you should probably make sure that alternative has a basis in reality.

I could have probably stated my case without the "Jerk" comment, but I was late for lunch, so that was the one word that summed up what I was feeling at that particular moment. Yes, calling bbowman a jerk was uncalled for, but for someone to nay-say when there are plenty of people who are contributing to this effort is also uncalled for. bbowman, I apologize for degenerating into name-calling, but I hope you recognize that it's not as difficult as you've made it sound, and there are no other legitimate options. It's either what we have, or it's nothing.

Next time I'll just follow mlord's advice and ignore the nay-sayers.

In reply to:

---

I seem to recall from other threads that heavy ain't the most popular

---

The older I get the less I listen to the heavy stuff.... but you can't forget your roots... Pantera, Megadeth and the like was what I grew up on (or shall I say what got me through high school).....

You guys are really tripping out over nothing...

I was googling around trying to find some lyrics that had time-stamps already and found this site. http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Hub/6086/ they only had 18 lyrics for songs I have but all 18 matched the words close to perfect so I thought I would share. Anyone else have some sites with .lrc time-stamped lyrics? I can't wait untill our database is up

On a some what seperate note, I was thinking it would be cool to have a program that searches the db and shows a result of matching lyrics. Then you can chose and it will tag your mp3 with the lyrics. Afterwards any adjustments could be made. I would help with making such a program but my coding skills are somewhat lacking right now. I'm learning java but im only in the basics so far.. and I havn't used c++ or vb in such a while that I might take a while to remember everything.

-Greg

I was thinking it would be cool to have a program that searches the db and shows a result of matching lyrics. Then you can chose and it will tag your mp3 with the lyrics.

Yes, yes. Great minds think alike. I've been thinking of adding this as well; eventually. Probably some sort of XML backend, not sure yet. First though, I need to quit being lazy and get the site up and running, then worry about implementing features later.

It seems as though people are really itching to have this working. The first version is going to be fairly simplistic, and somewhat lacking in features. Not to worry though, we have a ton of ideas that will get implemented in the future, and are always open to suggestions (especially if someone else codes their “suggestion” before hand ).

Stay tuned.

hey only had 18 lyrics for songs I have but all 18 matched the words close to perfect so I thought I would share.

Hey, not bad! I managed 28.

Cool. And Geocities didn't even disconnect me from using up all his bandwidth...

Um just FYI, I already downloaded all of these and put them on my site... I mentioned this awhile back in Programming but I guess some people missed it. For those (like me) who don't want to deal with Geocities or having to find your song in a dumb HTML interface.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/a/m/amc156/lyrics

Ricin, I guess you're working with Justin to make this happen? I forget if you guys said you were teaming up on this or not.

For what it's worth, I soon hope to release another version of emphatic that has a few major annoyances taken care of. It will use a new ID3 tag library which reduces the binary size from > 2 MB to under 400k, and it also dramatically reduces the time it takes to load the lyrics. It will also have the reading of the lyrics in a background thread, so that the UI and buttons won't freeze up while we're loading lyrics. These were two of my personal gripes with it, and they'll both be fixed.

There will also be other bug fixes, and, depending on how far I get, maybe few surprises.

If you guys want help testing out the LRC db before it goes live, drop me a line.

ya ricin is teaming up with me, we are currently knee deep in the process. as ricin said its going to start off basic to get it up and running which means its going to only be able to input one lyric at a time, but once we get the inital site launched we plan on adding zip support to add large collection such as your on your temp website ynot. I will drop you a PM with the website the devlopment is taking place so you can check it out.

I matched up 86. What do I win?

I found a site that had a very large listing of song lyrics here: http://www.musiclinks.nl/songteksten/

Granted, it's all HTML-ified, but if you look for what's within the H5 tag (there's only one, kinda nice), and remove all of the P and BR tags, it'll give you the lyrics.

Oh yea, no timestamps, but if anyone is looking to add lyrics to their MP3's, it seems to be a pretty complete lyric archive.

Ok, so it's not the greatest archive for me.. only 7 Pink Floyd songs tagged.. geesh.. I've got all the albums, no way I want to tag them myself..

Yeah there is a lot of sites with lyrics.. even programs that will search for the lyrics from your mp3 tags. Problem is that they don't have time-stamps and thats the part that takes the longest.

p.s. I just put buttons lights on my empeg.. Will take some pics soon.

-Greg

The attatched file is a playlist with most of the songs i have timestamped the lyrics too. Just let me kow where to drop the lrc files.

u

da

man