1 Topic by sgeos

(0 replies, posted in Constructive Criticism)

I created "Spectral Cloud" as a test to see if low budget game background music
can be created by writing a melody in Famitracker and then remixed in UJAM.

When I first uploaded the melody, UJAM not read it correctly at all.  After I
switched to vanilla triangle waves, everything worked fine.  I uploaded the
original melody complete with funky triangle waves to Chipmusic.

Link to UJAM remix using vanilla triangle waves:
http://soundcloud.com/sgeos/spectral-cloud

Link to UJAM "remix" with broken melody (I wanted to do something with it):
http://soundcloud.com/sgeos/evaporating-cloud

Obviously the music needs to be looped to use this approach.  Thoughts?

(The melody could be better, but this was a quick and dirty test.  On the off
chance anyone wants to sign up for UJAM, here is my invite link.
www.ujam.com?u=vdR4c3kQggHZ
I could use more song slots, but that is not the goal of this post.)

Go to forum: Constructive Criticism

2 Topic by sgeos

(0 replies, posted in Software & Plug-ins)

I ultimately want to deliver music for playback in iOS games.  I also want to generate printable sheet music.  I'm thinking core audio format makes the most sense for playback unless there is some sort of an open MML playback library for iOS.  In either case, getting MML out of the deal would be fantastic.  What toolchain should I be using?

I've played around with Famitracker, but I will happily switch to something else if it is the wrong tool for the job.  I want to try out MML at some point to see if I prefer it to a tracker.  So far as I can tell, the mml-tracker project is dead.  Also, I'm considering investing in a Korg microKEY.

Go to forum: Software & Plug-ins

3 Reply by sgeos

(7 replies, posted in General Discussion)

All this depends on where you located.  The location of the people using your work may also matter to a lesser extent.  In some places you can place your work in the public domain.  In other places you can mostly place it in the public domain, but things like moral rights stick.  In other places you simply can not proactively place a work in the public domain.

The "no rights reserved" CC0 is an attempt to address the above mess.  Basically, you place the work in the public domain to the best of your ability, and agree not to enforce copyright where this is not possible.

An important point is that CC0 is a one way street.  You are permanently relinquishing the right to restrict people from using your work.  If you rely on royalties / copyright for your livelihood, CC0 is a bad plan for you.  (If you rely solely on commissions, I think you can make CC0 work.)

The only way to kind of reclaim something you release via CC0 is to remix it and retain the copyright to this derivative work.  Of course, anyone else could also make a proprietary remix.  In either case, nobody has a legitimate claim to restrict access to the original work anymore.

Go to forum: General Discussion

4 Reply by sgeos

(7 replies, posted in General Discussion)

ant1 wrote:

i would never ENFORCE my copyrights on any of my music,

It is $70 to file a lawsuit.  Either you are good enough for the big shots to get in touch with, or they ignore your stuff if there is the possibility of you enforcing copyright.

ant1 wrote:

but maybe that is different to actively relinquishing it?

Very much so.  I think proactively relinquishing copyright is an important political statement.

<start rant> Back when the printing press was new, the church and state became uncomfortable with the notion easy access to information.  Copyright was the solution.  We no longer live in a pseudo-theocracy.  We live in a fascist society!  Your masters are big business and big government.  Copyright is one way they keep people in line.

As far as music goes, sign copyright over to a label and they literally own your work for the next ~100 years unless you have the bargaining power to get a decent contract.  Put your work in the public domain and nobody can take it from you.  Nobody can take it from anyone else.  Nobody can use your work to have people thrown in prison for illegal downloads. <end rant>

ant1 wrote:

am i lazy? at least i should let people know they can do what they want - well what most people want to do with my music is ignore it anyway wink

Lazy?  I would say you are lacking the radical public domain attitude. wink  The reality is that even if you do throw your stuff in the public domain, most of it will not go anywhere important anyway.

ant1 wrote:

how do i cc0 something? i just write cc0 next to it?

I realized I did not use a "proper" declaration for the work I uploaded yesterday.  This is how they recommend you use CC0 for software.  I don't see why this would not work for music.

CC0 FAQ wrote:

<TITLE> - <DESCRIPTION>

Written in <YEAR> by <AUTHOR NAME> <AUTHOR E-MAIL ADDRESS>
[other author/contributor lines as appropriate]

To the extent possible under law, the author(s) have dedicated all copyright and related and neighboring rights to this software to the public domain worldwide. This software is distributed without any warranty.

You should have received a copy of the CC0 Public Domain Dedication along with this software. If not, see <http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/>.

You can alternatively use this tool to generate HTML with embedded metadata to mark a work as being available under CC0.  <http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/>
Here is a link to the CC0 FAQ <http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_FAQ>

ant1 wrote:

it seems an AWFUL LOT OF EFFORT for something that should be the default anyway...

No matter what they say, the people who write the laws do so for their own benefit.

ant1 wrote:

death to copyright people everywhere heart

And there was much rejoicing.  smile

Go to forum: General Discussion

5 Reply by sgeos

(7 replies, posted in General Discussion)

Shiru wrote:

I prefer CC-BY for music. It only requires to credit the author, but allows anything else, similar to CC0.

CC-BY is also not selectable.  The closest option is CC-BY-NC, and NC is a completely different world from public domain.  Also, CC-BY has no provision for moral rights (although they can not be surrendered in some jurisdictions).

There are cases where attribution can become sticky.  For example, if a composition is remixed, then re-remixed and this happens a bunch of times, there is going to be a long attribution list (if I understand correctly.)  That is not a big deal in and of itself, but if even one person is left off of a long list and they get fussy then the situation could turn sour.  This is less of an issue for music than data in a database.

There are other (admittedly rare) cases where attribution is prohibitive or not possible.  It only costs $70 to file a lawsuit in the USA (other jurisdictions differ).  If there is any potential stickiness, a work will generally not be used.  I do not want access to my work restricted.

Go to forum: General Discussion

6 Topic by sgeos

(7 replies, posted in General Discussion)

I just downloaded Famitracker and played around with it for half a day.  I'm still trying to get the hang of it, but I've uploaded my simple loops.  Feedback is always appreciated.

Since there was no CC0 license option, I specified it in the comments.  Is there any chance a "CC0 / public domain" option could be added?  Also, is there anyone else out there chipmusicland who is comfortable with donating original work to the public domain.  (I suspect that over 99% of the population is infected with the notion that copyright is a good thing.  Let's agree to disagree ahead of time and not discuss the pros and cons of copyright per se.)

Go to forum: General Discussion