Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - StanleyTweedle

Pages: [1]
General / License Purchase Inquiry: One-Year VS Lifetime
« on: November 04, 2011, 23:16:28 »
Hello, Good Sir-- developer(s) of Similarity. (I apologize, I wish I could address you by a Proper name/ Surname, but I can not locate that).
What I wish to ask, ______, follows:

Indeed, I've expressed some frustration with our inability to /sample/ the "full features" of the software, without purchasing it first. However, I believe I will "bite the bullet", and I'm going to lay my money down-- sight unseen. That is, I'm trusting the product will deliver on its promises, even under these unusual circumstance of prohibitive trails.

Enough said about that. My query:
I most certainly will not purchase a "lifetime" license, under this prohibition; without first trying the software. I believe it is reasonable, however, to expect a one-year license should be applicable to a sort of /upgrade/ to a "lifetime" license, should I (or other users) decide-- after using the additional features granted to licensee's-- I (or we) should have the option to apply the "one-year" payment toward an upgrade to a "lifetime" license.

For example, let us suppose I buy now, a one-year license. I proceed in using the software, much to my delight. After some months of such satisfied use, I decide I wish for my license not to expire annually, but to upgrade to the "lifetime" license.

I believe it is fair that I should pay for the "lifetime" license, only the difference between the initial cost of the "lifetime" license ($34.95), and that of the "one year" ($19.95) license. The difference being $15.00.

So, after purchase of a $19.95, "one-year" license, I believe it is fair that I might modify that purchase, satisfactorily upgrading to a "lifetime" license, on payment of an additional $15.00, such that my total payment for Similarity license will have been then equal to the cost of a "lifetime" license, or $34.95.

I expect this will be an acceptable negotiation, as I intend to proceed with checkout at this time. I expect I will only be satisfied, and I look forward to the promised benefit of these extended features. I trust, from the continuing improvement I've recognized through the history of the software's performance, I will not be disappointed. I am eager to proceed.

Best regards. Please acknowledge your opinion, regarding my proposal toward a potential "upgrade", including any "grace-period" or imposed restrictions, for length of time that I should commit a decision to "upgrade", or any other stipulations which my proposal may affect.

Thank you, kindly and sincerely, sir  ____ ! (blank,  because I don't know your proper name!)

Guitar Instructor: www.ChordsAndScales.Info 
Ex-Rockstar:  (AMA Awards Nominee) &&  == (Sex², Drugs², Rock-n-Roll²)³
    (performance samples @ || and i ramble @ www.ChordsAndScales.Info/talk/    -- hoping to fix it much, including info about "Similarity", in fact!)

please, everyone: sample the URL's provided. I do hope you find something enjoyable there!
The Last.FM media should be "Free" downloads. Just go to the URL, and click "download". (or stream it like YootBoob do's)


P.S. look for some /review/ of Similiarty "Licensensd" version at www.ChordsAndScales.Info/talk/   soon as i am able to publish something adequate.
Brothers gotta look-out for brothers, right! Bro's helpin' bro's, eh-- however that goes...

Readers, I'm really quite pleased to see someone found my /method/ useful. I'm flattered, to be honest. (as an instructor[1], it's not often i'd go about instructing this way, so I find it interesting on different levels...)

Please Note: As the Admin states, above, Similarity [would and] has changed since I authored this little /tutorial/ in the Spring of 2009. (i have to chuckle at how well the first respondent summarized, in just a few lines of text, what took me like three pages to spit-out! haha!...)

But, indeed-- this whole technique I've explained (posted, first march 2009) is really out-of-date, in terms of relevancy to the current edition of Similarity. The application GUI underwent a massive change, maybe late 2009, or 2010, such that talk of "checking" for deleting, and much of the logistical details are no longer relevant.

Of course, the /basic/ concept does remain viable, however, look at it this way: I've not used the technique i've described here-- likely, since the GUI changed, which is many, many versions ago.

Best wishes to the Readers, and good luck in your trimming of the fat!

Seacrest, out!
[1] I, instructor: www.ChordsAndScales.Info

Wishlist / Disappointed: Can't join in on the Reindeer[1] Games
« on: July 08, 2011, 14:31:02 »
I realize the project has come a long way since I first discovered it, and likely much more so altogether, and this progress represents a lot of man-hours in development.

I disagree with the developer's decision to limit full functionality to only those users who purchase a license. At this stage in development, I am not convinced-- and therein lies the problem. I don't even have the opportunity to experiment with the /cloud/ features, the graphical spectrum comparison, etc.

It's disappointing, and frustrating.

Don't get me wrong: I support capitalism, and commercial software-- I can't tell you how irritated I am by the /digital pan-handlers/ who beg for donations-- but I believe we have a grey-area here. I believe it's right that we, the Users, respect the author's decision to put a price tag on Similarity. I can think of several commercial software products, however, which are released as "beta" versions, which incrementally upgrade through "release candidates", and so on, until the a final edition is determined, polished through a successive series of incremental updates based on user feedback, and bug reporting, etc.. The process is fair, and engaging. Near the /end/,  as feedback and bug-reporting wanes to a minimum, and the "release candidate" editions expire, the Users know precisely what to expect, should they decide to purchase the software. Oftentimes, developers who employ this beta-testing model will further encourage quality, substantive feedback, by /awarding/ a license for the release edition to the "top 3", or 5 or so Users who were most active in providing meaningful feedback during the testing process. As a result, as I stated earlier, it is an engaging activity, as well as viable for both the User and the Developer.

I do purchase commercial software, but I don't have the luxury to purchase every software I find considerable.  In the case of Similarity, it's most reasonable for me to bow out, and watch from the sidelines, developing what opinion I am able from the limited functionality, contrasted against mere speculation of how I might fair with a licensed version. Meanwhile, I have little incentive to commit to purchasing a license.

Notwithstanding, even in its limited, non-licensed-User mode, Similarity facilitates some skimming of the fat from my collection. I suspect this shall be the extent of my experience with it, and therein lies the crux of my disappointment.

reference to the English seasonal classic "Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer"

General / Algorithm?
« on: January 21, 2010, 05:35:32 »
this is interesting. i never put a lot of thought into the "how", much more than this visual imagination of-- as a picture of a sound "wave", (e.g. Sound Forge, Digidesign, etc.,), and a sort of attempting to "match" them up-- as one would perhaps attempt to align /like/ layers of a multi-layer graphic using Pshop, or what not-- assuming those sections where matches are common, these have a higher percentage value in the Similarity rating mechanism.

however, this talk of DSP, and etc., it gets me to thinking of-- WOW-- it must be pretty involved-- more so than my imagining. for example, regarding DSP, FFT, etc., do you (soft dev'r) have also an extensive music theory knowledge? if so, or if not-- how do you feel that is involved in the perfection of such a machine (i.e. the software). For example, let's say we're using Antares auto-tune: now, one can fiddle about with that sort of thing-- but, to actually know what it means to produce a tone which is a perfect 5th above the original, or a "minor 3rd", so to speak-- such /skill/ is certainly advantageous to an engineer/ producer who might utilize such DSP equipment. so, i wonder-- how the notion comes into play here.

and i muse over this little bit of /trivia/ for you. i thought of my long-time friend, J.V., a senior software engineer w/ Sonic Foundry-turned-Sony-whatever-the-whatsis... pretty much runs the "Acid" project, development, and what not (indeed, i am "wow'd" by this myself, as i heard from a common friend-- not realizing he was that /into-it/-- that proficient-- that... how should i say... "/valuable/"?)... but he's just a dude, you know. played bass in this wild hardcore band in Morgantown, WV "Phat 'n Antsy"[1], along w/ other similarly gifted musicians, charismatic creators-- your basic bunch of genius kids pretending to be drug-addicts in a rock band-- you know. but-- i'm off the point-- point is-- i wonder if a guy like that being...  ahem... bored, careerwise (so i hear)... might i should put the two of you in contact. i suppose i could begin by showing him the your web site, and "Similarity" itself. doh!


best regards. (something else from moi, coming soon-- having bump'd up to v. 1.10 from like version 0.02 or some ... hehe... stupid distractions, interruptions-- life-- when, the important stuff-- its the /music/, man! right? riiiggght! ;-)
Phat N Antsy: cid-f50063bb986b7eb4 . skydrive . live . com / browse . aspx / PNA

General / The Most Exciting Thing This Week!
« on: June 21, 2009, 00:23:10 »
... NOTE:
regarding "getting mp3's ready"

Similarity does NOT require such activity. A Large part of the whole point of similarity is to let it arrange a library-- through removal of duplicates-- after all. I'm just excited (not to mention, probably All hopped-up on Goofballs, as some say...). pay me no mind. oh yes-- the grocery!   ...Vrrrrooomm!!!....

 (This is just me having anal-retentive neurosis problems, according to Siegmund Freud {spelling?}, right? [i.e. being fussy about the arrangement of things, in a particular manner to satisfy one's own {Freudian} Ego])

General / The Most Exciting Thing This Week!
« on: June 21, 2009, 00:15:59 »
It looks like i'm out-of-the loop! Wow! I can't believe I've missed learning of this NEWEST RELEASE [ 0.9 , build 310 , at time of writing ] of the Best Ever Mp3 Duplicate Detection Software, SIMILARITY. Oh well. Perhaps, it makes it all the more exciting, that i might expect even more refinement in the product. (There's an American saying: "Don't Count Your Chickens, Until They Hatch [before they've hatched]"), but I'm confident I'll be pleased with this release.

What am i waiting for! Heading off to the grocery (what?? what the hell does that have to do w/ music, right?) -- SO-- it's the best time to run Similarity-- while i'm not here. :-)

I've got all the Mp3's already as neatly organized in folders, so Similarity can slice it up really fine (i'm hoping) let's analogize: it's like taking a shower before going to see the physician-- i'm all nice and fresh, squeaky-clean down there! hehehe.... hey, i'm not all just dry B.S. i'm actually pretty insane, probably. hehe... but the Mp3's are ready for Similarity: that's the point.

Later! Will definitly come back to report my abuse, i mean use of this great mp3 library organization tool.

Rock on, peoples. Rock-on!

do not understand

Hi, Fuldessiosods. Ah, yes: I see that I have rambled-on more than usual! not good, albeit-- much better than some less productive escapades, like "drunk dialing" [telephones], for example! hee hee....

I realize my text is rather verbose, and as such-- I tend to lose my readers' focus. Likewise, I would not argue for its educational quality.

I'm confident you will achieve success with Similarity, regardless of my convoluted creation above, but if you wish to try as I explained above, I will try to accommodate you.


I would like to know the developer's (Admin's?) opinion of my method; whether there exists a more complicated way of doing things!

If others have found a way to utilize Similarity through a special process, I hope you share-- I look forward to reading someone else's story!

BTW: with the Admin's approval, I invite others to ask questions about my "how-to". If you are confused by my explanation, but wish to try, it is my pleasure to help if I am able.

Wishlist / Regular Expressions, plus Exclusions
« on: April 07, 2009, 23:30:25 »
Hi, Mr. Admin! I'm pleased to see your reply.

I do hope you continue to refine Similarity-- I'm eager to see what is yet to come. (It is quite effective, as-is, of course, don't misunderstand.)

I think the "geek" in me enjoys learning what is new when a software title has been updated, and it is "fun" to try such new "toys"-- but Similarity is such a very unique software, to learn how you will improve upon the utility is all the more enticing.

(PS. I hope you were able to view the image, as described above. if not, I can e-mail you a "real" URL, if you wish.)

Best regards,

Wishlist / Regular Expressions, plus Exclusions
« on: March 25, 2009, 13:58:23 »
I have an idea for how Similarity might integrate a Regular Expression feature, for advanced batch processing.
Check out the "album" at . com / novicenotes / Mp3SimilaritySoftware
[ to view, remove spaces from the broken URL string above ]

As for exclusions, I apologize for having no "original" suggestions, but only citations:
Of all the TRADITIONAL "binary duplicate" detection software-- which are of little use in mp3 detection, for Similarity prevails by far in that category-- there is an application which comes to mind, as I wonder of the option to "Exclude" items from a duplicates scan.

A screen capture of that "Exclude" dialogue is included in the same Similarity album, for reference, available at the link above.

Wishlist / Next line automatically
« on: March 25, 2009, 12:38:38 »
Geez, dalmas64, thanks for "highjacking" the thread. hehe... just kidding! ;-)

anyway-- i wish to update my previous comment.

I still believe that there is a potential advantage to having Similarity "auto-select" a "next item"-- but here's the important point which I didn't realize existed when I posted on Feb 10 (above):
This sort of "auto-select" or bringing to focus the "next-line", as the original poster suggests, is only applicable; relevant to those of us who are using Similarity to delete files in a "one-at-a-time" manner.

To better understand, the reader must be aware that Similarity offers a sort of "Batch Deletion", per the option to "Delete Marked". The very name of the command suggests that more than one item may be marked at any given time, but it wasn't until several days ago that I realized precisely how to "mark" more than one duplicate set-- such that, selecting "Delete Marked" will delete, not one duplicate, but several sets of duplicates marked by the user.

How are several sets marked, so clicking "Delete Marked" will process a batch of files? The action requires selecting a small "checkmark" icon, which is present on every line of every file, in both columns. Clicking the icon changes it from a "ghost" icon, to a solid icon, indicating the item is "marked" for deletion. Following a process of checking several known duplicate items, then finally clicking the "Delete Marked" option from the file menu will result in a batch-deletion.

Upon my realization of the GUI available options (previously unrecognized), a new perspective on the functionality of Similarity is revealed, thus revealing a greater insight-- at least for this user-- into the developer's intended use for Similarity.

I'm pleased to have discovered how to properly enable multiple-selections in Similarity. Properly utilizing the feature does indeed offer greater efficiency in a batch deletion job. However, due to the procedure I've developed, and settled into using for effective, confident deletion of my own media library duplicates, (a process explained in the thread  www . music-similarity . com / forum / index.php ? action = vthread &forum = 3&topic = 61 ), I have become accustomed to deleting files one-at-a-time (hence, my wishlist, as explained on Feb 10).

Thanks for reading!

[EDIT] as URL's are prohibited, for spam prevention, the "url" listed above is very separated, so the reader who tries visting that URL must re-join the string of characters (sorry for the confusion!)

I'd like to share with the Similarity User Community, my own technique for effective, efficient duplicate detection, and removal with confidence in every deletion.

Step 00:
    Obtain the latest copy of Similarity from www . music-similarity . com .
    Obtain the latest copy of freeware media player, "Foobar2000", available at  foobar2000 . org
    Install the software.
    Prepare your media-library folders:
        Placing ALL media files in a single, "Parent" folder is recommended, from this user's experience. Pulling results from a single location, subfolders or not, is more easy to manage than results from multiple Parent locations. Trust me-- put all mp3s, etc., into a single folder (subfolders are okay. And, when you're finished removing dupes, you can re-arrange your library to its previous state.)
       [for example, my path:
        Parent Folder - E:\myMusic\
            Folder structure example:
        ...totalling about 7,000 mp3's, in hundreds of sub-folders, under a single parent, "myMusic"]
Step 01:
    Launch Similarity. The default options are recommended. Enable the experimental algorithm if you wish to have a very accurate report.*(1)
    Click the folder icon. Select that single folder, under which you placed all of your other mp3 folders. Subfolders are automatically scanned, so DO NOT add anything but the "parent folder". (correct me, please, if i'm wrong)
        [according to the illustrated folder structure, above, i select ONLY "E:\myMusic"]
Step 02:
        How do I enable Scanning in Similarity?
   As soon as the folder is selected, and the dialogue window is closed ( clicking [OK] button ), Similarity begins the scanning process. In fact, this is the very method for enabling the scan. **NOTE** If you close Similarity, and re-open it, wondering why it's not doinging anything-- you must first "delete" any folders from the "add-folder" dialogue, then re-add those folders. (odd, perhaps-- but that's how it works! hey, be patient-- it's still very "beta" software! Give the man some time to tend to such quirks. ;-)
Step 03:
    so...Wait...and...wait... (tic, toc, tic, toc...)
        Consider This: Similiarity is actually "listening" to all of those files-- so it knows if there are duplicates (vs just looking at file-names, etc.). Imagine how long it would take for you to do the same!
    Scan Progress is indicated in the upper-right [Number of Files scanned], and lower-left [number of duplicates detected]
    NOTE: Similarity WILL gradually report each duplicate file, as the scan proceeds. Duplicates may be verified, and even deleted, as the scan progresses
Step 04:
        NOTE: This section begins a particular process-- unique to the author of this tutorial. The following procedure is not the recommended action per Similarity, but I find it to be my own preference. I recommend the reader try this method on only a few files, at first, so he or she might make the best personal judgment for further proceeding with this technique.
    When Similarity finds approx 100 duplicates (observe, lower-left corner), you may wish to save the playlist. Before saving, sort the playlist items by column, by "content", such that the items marked "100%" are mostly near the "top" of the column. Save the playlist in an easily accessible folder (the "Save" icon, looks like a floppy disk).
Step 05:
        Foobar2000 has a built-in function to perform actions on files, including "delete". By loading the playlist into Foobar2000, you create an environment quite friendly for comparing the duplicates reported by Similarity. Simply go through the playlist, determine which file is "better" (and likewise, which to "delete"). In this manner, a confidence level is raised from assurance that a deleted file is in fact the one which might be better discarded.

Indeed, Similarity offers the "speaker" icons, which launch the file-in-focus, for previewing its contents-- however, using the aforementioned method, it is much easier to perform an "A-B" comparison between files. Furthermore, the practice of comparison becomes less methodical, and more enjoyable-- as the playlist can continue in the background while the user need not give 100% of his or her attention. In other words, let the playlist play-- enjoy your tunes, and checking only as the duplicates load into playing.
NOTE: It is recommended, regardless of playlists in Foobar2000, to USE SIMILARITY FOR THE DELETION action. ALthough, Foobar2000 is capable of deleting files from the playlist, Similiarity will not function as beautifully if files are modified outside of its own process. Experiment. See what you prefer, but begin by deleting from Similarity, NOT from within Foobar, unless you opt to "Move" files, as suggested, after the next paragraph.

I find this is much more "bearable" than working only in Similarity. This is NOT to take any value from Similarity itself, but only to suggest a possible practice which may be more enjoyable for the user who has a large library containing many duplicates.
        NOTE: Foobar2000, in addition to offering a "File-Operation -> Delete" command, has also a "move" operation. If the user is really paranoid about which files should be deleted, I recommend creating a "Safe_Delete" folder (i.e. E:\SafeDeleteMp3s\ ). Using a safety-net folder, instead of deleting every duplicate, the user might use "File-Operations -> move -> SafeDelete", so the duplicate mp3's are removed from a primary library of files, separated into a sort of "pre-delete" folder (not unlike recycle bin, but safe from system cleaner utilities which might otherwise automatically dump recycle bin contents). If the user is confident about deleting duplicates, then such a "safeDelete" folder is only superfluous, and probably a waste of effort. Use your own best judgment for how to handle your own files.
Step 06:
    Return to step 03, repeating from Step 03 - Step 05, until all duplicate files are eliminated.
    Good luck!
*(1)Enabling the "experimental algorithm" does not affect the "regular" scan duration, but only adds time to the end of the job, as the statistics it offers are "in addition-to" those which are revealed, for example, if a scan is performed without it. In other words-- Similarity performs the "Experimental" check only AFTER the "regular" scan is finished (in my observation). you'll get the same "regular" results either way, in the same amount of time. If you decide not to wait for the "experimental", then there is no harm-- the "regular" results are unaffected by a premature cancellation of an "experimental" scan.

Wishlist / Next line automatically
« on: February 10, 2009, 06:11:19 »
I do not understand precisely what dalmas64 intends in the second sentence, but I think I get the other bit (if not... sorry about that!).

Similarity already has a smartly designed GUI, targeted toward enhancing human productivity by eliminating unnecessary calls to context menus-- for it is quite convenient to use only a single click on the "Red X" Delete button (or the "Speaker" to play an item) -- however, currently (in my version, 0.71 build 99) the user must click on the duplicates list after each deletion, to ready another duplicate set for evaluation.

Respectfully, I do hope the admirable developer(s) of Similarity will consider this issue worthy of closer inspection. Please continue reading, as I shall try to explain my experience of interacting with the software, in hopes to better illustrate why it is important that Similarity could be configured to (as an option) automatically "select one duplicate set" for focus at all times.

If Similarity could take care of an extra click for the user, a duplicates deletion job could nearly be slashed in half: ideally, so the user would need only focus on what is the current Left file, and Right file-- the goal being to elimanate the need to delete, then select, then delete again, then select, etc., constantly requiring users to perform a different activity.

If the user could keep his or her eyes trained on one particular screen area, as a managed task, the deletion rate could only increase, ultimately to result in an even more remarkable gain in efficiency when using Similarity Mp3 Duplicate detection.

I am confident, if Similarity would (as an option, or as default) focus "one duplicate-set beyond" the "currently queued deleting set", I would realize a sizable difference in the actual effort required to complete the job.

For users who prefer keyboard interaction, instead of clicking things with the mouse, perhaps this sort of auto-advance might allow for Similarity to be manipulated easily without a mouse. I admit, the initiative to write in the forum is not entirely without the encouragement from an aching mouse-hand, clicking away at all of my duplicates!  ;-)

Thanks again for the great software. I'm excited to follow Similarity as it matures to resonate an inevitable, positive impact on digital media enthusiasts.

Hi. Thank you very much for sharing your expertise in the software title, Similarity. As many here have praised, I too wish to commend you on your success in creating a productivity enhancing tool such as this most useful, content based , ID3 meta data-sensitive , mp3 duplicate detection utility.

I'm very impressed that, after so many years, someone has finally taken an intuitive approach to detection of files-- data which we know can exist, in our perception as a duplicate, but in binary or checksum validation will always be overlooked.

I'm so glad I found Similarity Mp3 Duplicate detection software, the world's first media library organizer utility to break the barrier between conditional logic, and human intuition!

I hope you get the credit you deserve for all the good you have done for so many music fans who suffer the frustration of a media library which seems impossible to manage for so many similar files. Thank you, sincerely.


Pages: [1]