Microsoft Songsmith

by Ben Posted in Thoughts, YouTube Finds


Okay, so I heard about this a while back. Microsoft released this piece of software where you basically sing into a microphone and the program guesses what key you’re singing in and what chords would match your vocals, and then auto-composes an accompaniment. What first struck me about it was how horrible the advertisement was. Just atrocious.

I mean, I understand how it works. Basically, when you sing a melody, you’re already singing in a key. Now, how does the program figure out what key you’re singing in? Well, inherently every melody implies a key based on the notes you hit. If you are singing in the key of C major, then it’s highly unlikely that you’ll be singing an F#. So if you sing the following notes in succession: C, D, G, E, microsoft songsmith will probably predict that you’re singing around a C major chord (C major is comprised of C, E, and G).

This is nothing new. Bach composed many solo works for Violin where it’s very obvious what the chord changes are. That’s kinda his style and granted, he does it a little more obviously than your typical pop tune… but here, you can listen to one here performed by Vanessa Mae to see what I’m talking about. You ear automatically puts together the implied chords from the melody that’s being played.

So people have been playing with Songsmith and have been taking the vocal tracks of songs, putting them through songsmith, and then seeing what comes out. Often times it doesn’t really work. What I find interesting is that songsmith won’t match the same chords for different verses. The one I’ve chosen to share is “Just What I Needed” by the Cars. I like it because it actually kinda could pass for a song, albeit a really, really bad one.. well, at least the first verse (’cause it ends on the I chord!). What’s interesting is that it doesn’t line up the same chords during the 2nd verse. Take a listen:

Much more to hear here.

1 Comment »

Interesting to Think About

by Ben Posted in Thoughts


While subbing I read this pretty long article with a lot of scientific mumbo-jumbo I didn’t necessarily understand. I found it through Digg, and the article is basically saying how Scientists can justify “cosmic coincidences” without resorting to a benevolent creator theory or belief… aka, religion. But, it is interesting to think about it. From the end of the article:

If these cosmic traits were just slightly altered, life as we know it would be impossible. A few examples:

• Stars like the sun produce energy by fusing two hydrogen atoms into a single helium atom. During that reaction, 0.007 percent of the mass of the hydrogen atoms is converted into energy, via Einstein’s famous e = mc2 equation. But if that percentage were, say, 0.006 or 0.008, the universe would be far more hostile to life. The lower number would result in a universe filled only with hydrogen; the higher number would leave a universe with no hydrogen (and therefore no water) and no stars like the sun.

• The early universe was delicately poised between runaway expansion and terminal collapse. Had the universe contained much more matter, additional gravity would have made it implode. If it contained less, the universe would have expanded too quickly for galaxies to form.

• Had matter in the universe been more evenly distributed, it would not have clumped together to form galaxies. Had matter been clumpier, it would have condensed into black holes.

• Atomic nuclei are bound together by the so-called strong force. If that force were slightly more powerful, all the protons in the early universe would have paired off and there would be no hydrogen, which fuels long-lived stars. Water would not exist, nor would any known form of life.

Read the whole article

No Comments »