How Long Does Other DAWs Take To Save 20,000 Midi Items?

[Delta Sign]

If you made random noises for an infinite amount of time, the monkeys would eventually understand you, I guess

[IncarnateX]

Whatever you say

Ah, you are making progress. Does this mean that you begin to grasp that "reaching infinite" is not a premise of the proof or do you still insist on that rubbish?

No, I came to the conclusion, that, no matter how I talk, I cannot communicate with the monkeys...

Well, in a multiverse in which every imaginable event can happen in one or more parallel universes, your particularly ancestors might have been degenerated goats and not monkeys, so you would not be genetically disposed to understand monkeys. It may be in this in particular universe or it may not, though in the latter case, you could have fooled me

[fmr]

If you made random noises for an infinite amount of time, the monkeys would eventually understand you, I guess

They may eventually attribute a meaning to my noises, but that would not be understanding since I would have to attribute the same meaning to those noises myself in the first place.

Unless I knew from the start what is the noises meaning, and in that case, I would no longer be making random noises, but controlled, meaningful noises

Anyway, admitting that both me and the monkeys would be existing forever, and admitting that they are evolving as a species, and will keep evolving, they would eventually reach a status where they would start to understand better ways of communicating, and I, given the time I had spent with them, I would have learned that way of communicating too, so, at a certain point, we would have developed a way to understand each other

[dellboy]

I have not read this entire thread, but some of it...looks like Hink is near-by and ready to shut it down.

I would like to thank Hink for handling this thread so well and not shutting it down.

[Burillo]

wow, what a thread.

OP, if you still read this, consider this:

knowing average strength of Ringo's drum hits in MIDI is like knowing average color of a Picasso painting - it's meaningless, and it does nothing to get you any closer to Picasso (or painting, for that matter). music is dynamics and rhythm, not velocity.

also, since you're so numerically minded, you might want to know that in most cases, average alone, of anything, will give you bad result. you'll have much better results with a median in most cases. at least include standard deviation in your measurements - that would at least tell you something about what Ringo Starr as a drummer actually is like (namely, it'll give you an idea of how consistent he is with his dynamics - does he play like a robot, or is he all over the place with ghost strokes and hard hits - both of these will average out to the same number if you don't include other factors).

bring this painting analogy further, the above (median, standard deviations etc.) will tell you if Picasso prefers having high contrast on his paintings (i.e. lots of dark and bright colors), or is he more subdued (i.e. largely the same color everywhere). both will average out to the same color using your simplistic approach, but they are vastly different. just measuring average color tells you nothing about the painting, nor Picasso, nor following this average will get you any closer to being Picasso, or being a painter.

the point is, if you are to approach music numerically, at least do it in a way that actually makes sense. oh, wait... who would have thought that using numbers to get meaningful results is a skill too ? you probably don't have time to master that either.

[Grizzellda]

What might be pretty progressive is if we could ask those monkeys to help all of us on KVR to just be better, more reasonable people. Even higher quality people, to stretch it out like that.

So, we don't for example, make silly posts comparing other KVR members to monkeys. So we are gentle and polite in how we dismantle other posters and take apart their initiatives.

In other words, destroy your fellow poster, in a more gentle, loving way...

See, it is possible, on KVR, to be a snarky asshole, yet still be a decent forum member.

[harryupbabble]

All I can say is that I found the "noodling at the piano method" too limiting and now my current method has solved that problem up to a point. Although 20,000 (midi items) is nowhere near the complete number, it is sufficing at the moment.

IncarnateX provided a link about an AI that is trying to predict hits? Well that AI is depending on massive amount of data. Although I'm not trying to predict hits like the AI is, I'm just using massive amount of data, in my case midi data, but I'm nowhere near what the AI has now (I'm guessing) and I'm just making use of the computer age or trying to.

In order to be fair, you need to read this thread from the very beginning because that will keep me from explaining my side repeatedly. If you do that and still think my method is illogical and inefficient then that is fine.

But let me summarize my aim: If possible, I want access to to the whole thing and not just a small part of it.
And also know that my current method IS working for me. People may see it as illogical and inefficient but yes it is working for me.

[harryupbabble]

On topic: I had no idea REAPER had the ability to batch export 20,000 mid files, until I needed it to do that job, so I Googled it and found out how to do it. Sure it seem slow (I have nothing to compare it to, so I don't know if slow is really fast) but the capability is there.

So, I'm thinking "Why does REAPER have that capability?" And my guess is that a person or maybe more than one person who got fed up with their DAW switched to REAPER and after a while they noticed REAPER doesn't have that capability to batch export midi files. So they may have said something like "My previous DAW had that capability and It would be nice if REAPER has it too in the future." And they probably submitted in that feature request. And now REAPER has it too. So I'm thinking that if that's the case then at least one other DAW has that capability besides REAPER.

If DAW users don't know that their DAW is capable of batch exporting huge amounts of midi items then how about people that are employed by those other DAW companies, wouldn't they know? I'm hoping some of them would become aware of this thread and post something like "Our DAW could do that easily" and I could then ask them "Could you please give me the exact time it takes to export one midi item". I could then use that super-precise time data and just multiple it by 20,000?

Or some people who do bench-marking could find out what that super-precise "midi item file export" time data is for all the major DAWs.

Their findings could include something like this:

Midi Item export Speed

DAW 1 0.09 seconds
DAW 2 1.00 seconds
REAPER 0.50 seconds
DAW 4 5.00 seconds

[Burillo]

And also know that my current method IS working for me. People may see it as illogical and inefficient but yes it is working for me.

you see, somehow i doubt that, and here's why.

up to this point you've displayed numerous examples of not only complete musical ignorance, but willful ignorance (the whole "i don't know how to play drums and i don't want to know, life is too short" attitude of yours). that, combined with the fact that you think that average velocity is all you need to make drum part sound like Ringo Starr, tells us that your musical skill level is probably very low. i don't believe you're stupid (just misguided), so you probably understand that a person with very low skill level generally cannot distinguish a good result from a bad one. it's known as the Dunning-Kruger effect - your own incompetence prevents you from realizing how wrong you are.

so yes, i agree that your awkward way of doing things is probably working for you in the sense that you're getting some kind of result, but getting a result doesn't mean it's a good result. and generally, when people say something "works" they mean getting a "good" result, not "some" result.

and even if you do get a good result eventually (maybe you're musically ignorant but still are a genius with mammoth intuition, i dunno), you would get it despite your willful ignorance and woefully inefficient way of working, not because of it. so it's probably not working for you in any real sense of the word, you've just learnt to compensate for its deficiencies well enough. it "works" for you now - well, imagine how much more you could do if you did things the right and efficient way!

your attitude reminds me of a certain VST developer who, for the longest time, didn't want to create a user area on his website because manually generating and sending people links and keeping a giant Excel spreadsheet with customer data was "working for him".

[harryupbabble]

Hi Harry
Don't go. I come with peace and some thoughts to consider. You know the infinite monkey theorem?

"The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

Problem is not whether it is possible to hit a classic like Greensleeves by randomization alone, there is proof of this possibility say the wise mathematicians, however it is more the notion of "infinite", which is rather abstract within a human's lifetime and thus whether there would be an algorithm to speed up the proces. Thus, in the proof the monkey has to be immortal.

Also, take a look at these attempts:

https://qz.com/812231/sony-is-making-an ... ing-songs/

https://thenextweb.com/artificial-intel ... g-predict/

https://towardsdatascience.com/the-scie ... 42a522d652

https://www.wired.com/2011/12/hit-potential-equation/

And this is only a few hits appearing on the subject. I am not here to make any conclusions for or against, just to give you some hints and material to take into consideration. Though maybe you are already aware of these?

Personally I am the least to care whether a good tune is written by man or machine, for all I know, my brain would in more than just a couple of cases of popular music have preferred music written by machines at random.

Cheers, mate

Online, I always try to say bye at the end of the day or whatever, just like offline.

Thanks very much for the links.
With regards to the first link, yes I became aware of that many months back.
With regards to the second link, that's new to me.
With regards to the third link, it's like the second link but more informative.
With regards to the fourth link, it's also like the second link.

I don't know if I should pay attention to all that because everything depends on humans getting bored of everything.
Disco music came and it was there for a while but humans got bored of it.
Punk music was there for a while but humans got bored of it.
Grunge music came and it was gone. Well Nirvana is still going but not grunge music as a whole?

Would today's "hit predictors" predicted the rise of each of those musical genre (punk, disco, grunge, etc)?

Okay that's it for me this morning in terms of posting. Be back later. Okay bye.

[Burillo]

Disco music came and it was there for a while but humans got bored of it.
Punk music was there for a while but humans got bored of it.
Grunge music came and it was gone. Well Nirvana is still going but not grunge music as a whole?

on second thought...

Well Nirvana is still going but not grunge music as a whole?

ummmm... wut?

[Delta Sign]

Punk music was there for a while but humans got bored of it.

The thread was fine until this point, but that's just plain blasphemy

Punk's not dead

[IncarnateX]

You are welcome, Harry and plz note the proof is really about whether it is mathematically possible and the monkey is a methaphor for an ongoing hypothetical typing device that types at random, also note that “almost surely” requires the universe to exist several ages beyond its estimated lifetime. However, these estimates are still discussed among astronomists. And plz note the “almost” surely. Since we are speaking of probabilities it may not happen ever. At the end of the day I must say: Don`t hold your breath!

[dellboy]

Hi Harry,

Have you got any songs you can point us to that demo your random midi stuff ?

[IncarnateX]

Leave Harry to his file import, he does not have to prove anything. It is obviously an idea we are speaking about that cannot be fully implied before that @#&*%”+@ import takes place. How wierd the idea may sound, I know the frustration when some technical problem gets in the way from going further with your ideas.

I would rather say that a good final word (if this thread is not going epic) would be Robert Wilensky’s anecdotal but far more convincing counter proof to the infinite-monkey-theorem:

We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true.