Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] The Open Loop Library, a few questions
From: Brian Redfern (bredfern_AT_calarts.edu)
Date: Fri Dec 27 2002 - 07:13:09 EET
You'd want to use soundfonts
On Sat, 2002-12-21 at 08:42, Darren Landrum wrote:
> Okay, based upon some thinking, I am now ready to tackle a design of
> this system. There are some other things I would like to run by
> everyone, though.
> In the course of all of these conversations, loops were discussed most
> prominently, at the expense of what to do about patches and sample
> sets, which are the areas I personally would be more interested in. (I
> have used Acid, but only casually. So I understand most of how it's
> supposed to work.)
> Ogg appears to make it easy to track metadata for loop files, but what
> can be done about sample sets and patches? Do gzip and tar allow for
> embedded arbitrary metadata? If not, it seems that Matthew Yee-King's
> suggestion of using MD5 checksums to check against a server may be the
> best bet. and if we're doing this for patches and samples, why not for
> loops as well? The infrastructure would be in place.
> But wait, there's more! :) This now brings us to the "prevention of
> upload of copyrighted sample sets / loops / patches" part of the design.
> If we have a working checksum database to check against stored
> metadata, why not gather all of the checksums we can for every loop
> library for Acid, every sample set for Gigasampler / Unity Session /
> etc. that we can get our hands on (legally)? Remember, we're only
> running these through MD5 to get a checksum, then uploading the
> checksum to the server.
> Here's the good part, although I'm sure most of you are ahead of me.
> Whenever a user uploads a loop or sample set, the server will first
> decompress the file, then run an MD5 on it, which will then be compared
> to the checksum database. Any matches are flagged for removal by an
> And as an added bonus, if you call within the next five minutes (sorry,
> bad joke), this will also allow the server to catch duplicate uploads
> of otherwise legal files.
> Now, here are the concerns.
> First, this is going to take a lot of server processing power. So, I'm
> leaning toward setting up a separate server just for this function.
> Going this route would allow the system to be opened up for use by
> third party websites, other non-profit places that offer uploaded files
> for downloads. (In fact, it could be *any* such service, not even
> music-related, but that's a completely separate issue I don't want to
> think about right now.)
> As an upshot, it seems this system would be fairly easy to put together
> with little more than a good OSS database and a few perl scripts. The
> web server software could also be quite minimal.
> One more thing to mention, and that's the name. The Open Loop Library
> is a good name for focusing on just loops, but for something a little
> broader, I would like to propose the utilitarian (if boring) name of
> "The Open Music Resource Library". For one, it's more descriptive of
> the intended task, and two, omrl.org is available as a domain, when I
> last checked yesterday.
> Any thoughts and opinions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, and
> sorry for another long email.
> Darren Landrum
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 27 2002 - 07:53:01 EET