Has anyone else used this Mood Logic software? What are you thoughts?

What software? How about a link or more info?

Ok, looked it up myself... www.moodlogic.com :
MoodLogic authors Music Query Language (MQL), a suite of software components and data services that enable consumers to navigate and organize the universe of digital music content.

Sounds interesting actually. Looks like a viable project taken off from work pioneered many years ago (at least it seems like it would provide a lot of the benefits of a system called Romeo that I used to use over 7 years ago - and a lot mroe obviously)

Bruno

It has a lot of potential. Currently, though, the database isn't large enough (or the recognition isn't good enough). I believe it correctly identified about half of Hugo's music collection.

Rob

It recognised about 75% of mine. Just wondering since it looks to be a SonicBlue company or partner if any of this might make it into emplode? The features of picking the style of music was extremely cool. Would be neat feature for building playlist in Emplode.

I fed it a random sample of some 550 tracks. It profiled about 100 and recognised around 200 more. Funny: it often recognises just several tracks from an album (perhaps they were profiled from a compilation).

Feels like it has potential, though...

It has a lot of potential.

I'm not trying to be a jackass, but potential for what? I mean, what are the chances that I don't know what a piece of music is that's on my computer? Or the chances that I downloaded something without having any idea what it was? I'll give you that if you could hook it up to the radio for those annoying stations that never tell you what the song is, it'd be great, but that's about it. Unless my tags or filenames magically corrupted without corrupting the music. Okay, now I'm being a jackass, but it's a real question, nonetheless.

Perhaps it can be used to root out pirated music?

Calvin

There are those times where you just want to tell the player I want to listen to happy or sad or romantic music. This then picks music out of your collection to play based on its database. I thought it was an insightful new approach. It does need to be in the 90% range on identifying songs though.

I was suggesting it as a useful feature to include into Emplode for help assisting the creation of playlists.

It's not for finding out about the track you're listening to - it's for selecting music in new and interesting ways! "I want Happy and uplifting music with mostly female vocals" is one such search criteria (of course it's not a criteria I would ever use - too muck risk of getting Britney or the Spice Girls!).

Rob

It's not for finding out about the track you're listening to

I agree, but I did hope it would help me, say, identify original album and release year of a song from a compilation. It doesn't look as if it will soon ba able to do that (lat alone accurately) - back to AMG...

only if you allow such tripe on your empeg in the first place.

It occurs to me that that particular product underwent more changes after it was out of beta...

I've used it quite a bit and have manually profiled over 1100 songs. The only reason I use it is becuase I have a large collection (120 gigs) of MP3's that have no tags that are completely useless on the empeg. MoodLogic has to ability to identify the song and retrieve the tag info for it. Unfortunatly, it only does Artist and Track name right now but the folks at MoodLogic have said that in future release, more info will be available.

The software is located at www.moodlogic.net

It occurs to me that that particular product underwent more changes after it was out of beta...

Which product? MoodLogic or Britney's rack?

Which product? MoodLogic or Britney's rack?

I was referring to Britney herself.

Okay this is going to go way OT, even for this forum... We usually talk about geeky things here but this is more of a societal and slightly moral issue...

Britney Spears is possibly the most successful female artist out there today. She's pulling in PILES of money so that fat old bastards in record companies can drive Rolls Royces, etc.

But does anyone else think she's pushing the sexpot image a little too much? The dances she's doing and the clothes she's not wearing would make even Madonna in her heyday blush. The only difference between Britney and a stripper is the stripper has a pole. This is an artist whose first album made her look like a wholesome and cute and cuddly teeny bopper, and within a year or two she's dancing with snakes coiled around her bountiful bosoms. I somehow doubt the 10 and 11 year olds who got into the first album have "matured" as fast as Britney has, and I think that she could be having a negative effect on these kids.

Hey, I was a big fan of Madonna (so were you, so shut the hell up. ) But the difference is that Madonna was already a woman when she began, and she started out with the sexy, daring image. She sharpened it and turned up the heat on it over the years, but she didn't come on the scene as a child like Britney did.

Look I think Britney is a great looking broad. I can think of many better looking celebrities, but nobody in their right mind would kick Britney out of bed (well maybe in the morning...) But is what she's doing irresponsible? I don't mind seeing her skin plastered all over TV provided the Mute button is active, but if I had a 10 year old daughter, I would not even consider letting her go to a Britney Spears show.

Thoughts?

I have to say that whatever makes Britney happy, Britney should do. If the new image helps her achieve her goals, more power to her.

My only real complaint about her career is that I dislike the style of music she makes. That's not to say the music is BAD per se, it's just not my cup of tea. So, between the changing image, the changing cup size, and the manufactured-pop-hit music, there's a lot to make fun of.

Your comparison to Madonna is an interesting one. You're right, she has the sexpot image, too, and was previously responsible for teeny-bopper hits.

I didn't like Madonna until Ray of Light. That album grabbed me because I heard a sudden maturing of the music. I heard an album that sounded more like Peter Gabriel's "So" than "Material Girl". That's what impressed me.

Yah but Madonna was born in the 1950's... She was in her 20's when she hit the scene. Sure, she made songs that were hits with young kids, but it was definitely clear that she wasn't a little girl... So parents would know what to expect sending their kid to a Madonna concert. Britney's new image kinda just happened in between the albums. Was the innocent little girl image manufactured, or is it the new image that's manufactured? I agree, Britney is doing well to further her career, I guess I'm just confused as to who her target demographic is.

We all know that young people (preteens through college) carry the music industry on their back, and they always have... But I think Britney is putting a lot of parents in some tough positions.. I mean Elvis and The Beatles did the same thing but they weren't dancing half naked. I guess I'm just wondering how far the envelope of sexuality in music videos and the like can get pushed before it gets really really really old. It's not even sexy anymore because it's so overt and in your face. I feel like I should mail Britney some dollar bills or something. If I want that I'll go to a strip club where there's better music.

BTW I was saying "so were you" in the plural sense, in that a lot of people were Madonna fans but hesitate to admit it. The English language needs a distinct plural form of "you" like the romantic languages have. Here in Philadelphia it's "youse" as in "youse guys" but that hasn't exactly caught on.

Oh and I agree, Britney's music is putrid tripe.

Well, think of Madonna when she released "Material Girl." How would she be considered by someone being 30 years old in the 1950s? Much worse than what you consider Britney Spears today, I believe. I completely understand what yuou're saying, but I think that, simply, the perception of what is acceptable or non-acceptable changes over time. I would not worry for our supposed 10 year old children, since I don't think they would be negatively influenced by Britney. On the contrary, they will not see in her anything more shocking than what you (and I, ok, I admit ) used to see in Madonna 15 yrs ago, and will laugh at you and me the same way we may laugh at our parents and their "puritanism" of the 50s or 60s... :)
Overall, I think we're getting rid of superficial formalities, in a way, and that's not necessarily bad.

Yeah but what I'm saying is where is it going? The boundaries keep getting pushed. It seems like it's only a matter of time before we start seeing full frontal nudity in prime time on MTV as a matter of course. Hey, I think I'll rather enjoy that if it happens, but does it really do anything for the music or is it just eye candy? And what will people feel the need to do next just to make a splash? Once all the chicks are naked on TV, I think I'll actually be looking for the ones wearing something just to see something different.

I dunno here, I'm torn between my appreciation of female nudity and my feeling that it's all just getting played out.

BTW, trivia question, what's the only video in which female frontal nudity (boobies) HAS been shown on MTV in the US?

Marilyn Manson?

Now that's funny! there's some talent there.
Thanks

Hell no, not those man-teets. I'm talking about on a woman.

I believe it was shown three or four times. I saw it the very first time live and almost crapped my pants.

I saw it the very first time live and almost crapped my pants.

Based on that comment, it must have been an accident on the Video Music Awards. Perhaps someone in a skimpy outfit doing a dance number and they popped out during the show or something.

Nein... This is an actual music video. Not some accident in a live show...

About four years ago, the video was shown at about midnight or 1am... I believe it won some Video Music Awards as well...

I feel like I should mail Britney some dollar bills or something. If I want that I'll go to a strip club where there's better music.

ROFL!

I mean Elvis and The Beatles did the same thing but they weren't dancing half naked.

I am pretty sure you are too young to remember when Elvis first came onto the musical scene in the 1950's. (I bet Bonzi, Schofiel, Henno, and myself are the only ones on this bbs who do... and I'm not too sure about Schofiel :-)

It was positively scandalous! When he went on the Ed Sullivan show (his first appearance on television, I believe) the arbiters of public morality made certain that the cameras could only show him from the waist up. It was commonly understood among a sizable portion of the population that Elvis, along with all the rest of those Godless, heathenistic, communist-inspired rock and roll degenerates were absolutely and beyond question hell-bent on destroying the moral fiber of the citizenry of the country, and at the very least were harbingers of the coming apocalypse.

So, yes... things change. If there ever was a "moving target" to try and keep an eye on, it is the concept of what is currently morally acceptable.

I promise you that your granddaughter will someday find your concerns about Britney Spears' sexuality as ludicrous as your grandparents' concerns about Elvis seem to you today.

tanstaafl.

It was a joke & so is he.

I tried it after someone posted a link here earlier http://empeg.comms.net/php/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=empeg_general&Number=41877&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1. The thing makes you answer quite a few questions about how you feel the song makes you feel, when it can't find your music in it's own files. I can see a lot of errors in that, no two people are likely to be affected the same way by a song, CDDB has problems and that's just basic data entry not feelings. I removed the program after it crashed or slowed my system down at times & basically became tiring to deal with.