Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scthom]

Thought I would share that I had been in some discussions with AMG about using their API to write a plugin, but ultimately they weren't interested in the "small fish".  So, no AllMusic information plugin in the near future (again/still).

[darichman]

Aww that's a shame. I'd pay for this.

[scthom]

Yeah, @l@n's illicit plugin got some pretty wide use and is still around, but I was looking to contribute something legal using their API instead of scraping the web site.

I could only offer up around 2,000 installs (about what any of my other plugins have), but it wasn't enough for them to bite.  I believe the cost would have been in the $1,000 to $5,000 range for the license, so I would have either had to sell the plugin for around $1 or $2 or hope to recover the cost in donations.

Actually, I'm sort of glad I don't have to try to sell it; I guess the freeware concept works in my favor as well.

[Deivit]

I would "donate" far more than 1 or 2 bucks for the plug-in... let's say not less than $15 (that's the average cost of a mere CD).

Also, I think that your other plug-ins are mainly related to flac files, which not everybody uses. I pressume that the AMG plug-in would have more visibility among the MC users, since it could be used by everybody regardless of the file types. You need 200 donations of $15 or 300 of $10 to get $3,000. Is that feasible?

Just my two cents.

[KingSparta]

I believe the cost would have been in the $1,000 to $5,000 range for the license

I beleave that is per month, and it was closer to $3,000 - $5,000, thats what they told me a few years ago.

[Deivit]

I beleave that is per month, and it was closer to $3,000 - $5,000, thats what they told me a few years ago.

 

[GHammer]

dBpoweramp R12 Reference has an AMG module in it. It is paid on a yearly basis.
Might want to ask them how they cut their deal.

I certainly be interested in subscribing. But then, you have that issue to contend with.

[LonWar]

How bout using the info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC/DC

[sherbs]

I was just going to say, the more I use AMG, the less impressed with it I am.

I never agree with a review, I've found a few track listings that are wrong, poor cover art and if they kept track of my most visited pages, top of the list would be 'Error 2 timeout"

I'm using Wikipedia more and more these days.

Just my 2p.

[datdude]

Why would you want to read a review just to agree with it?  Or you are saying that what they think is good isn't?

[runemail]

Using tha data from AMG is not about agreeing with their reviews or not. They have a good db about a lot of releases in a organized way, having access to all that data in your MC database is great. I loved it when I used the @l@n plug to grab AMG data. Searching all that wonderful metadata could bring up some very educating hits.

Wikipedia is good, but it is what it is. I also think discogs is good, Last.Fm is improving. And i sometimes use Rateyourmusic.com.

Since dBpoweramp have implemented AMG access, it looks like it is possible, maybe dBpoweramp could provide a comercial plugin for MC?

I would pay 20$ a year for full access.

[KingSparta]

Since dBpoweramp have implemented AMG access, it looks like it is possible, maybe dBpoweramp could provide a comercial plugin for MC?

that would be nice

[sherbs]

The point about AMG reviews is you read the review with interest, listen to the music and then realize the review is a load of rubbish. I'm not talking tastes, everyone's is different, I just want an honest review.
In the old days of music mags I bought the mag with the reviews I could trust. If the mag slagged a new band off because they were AC/DC wannabees, I'd go and seek them out as I like all things AC/DC and I'd know this band would sound like them. In AMG I've read reviews that also accuse bands of sounding too much like someone else but on listening you think, what the hell are they talking about?

So, in a nutshell it's not reviewer's taste I want to agree with but the accuracy.

[KingSparta]

the review is a load of rubbish

They all have there own agenda

Yesterday it was britney spears, today someone else who can hum a few bars with digital enhancement.

[GHammer]

I don't want a review plugin, I want complete info for tags, and AMG has been the best source.

[sherbs]

Reviews was one gripe, there are plenty more. As a basic tagging source, maybe, but with most of my music not what you'd call 'mainstream', I often find myself resorting to Wiki or other sources and it's got to the point where I look at a band, think AMG? - no chance and go direct to those other sources.

[aussie1]

I also would donate money for such a plug-in. As runemail said, they have a good db about a lot of releases in an organized way. I find the data in their styles field to be particularly useful for creating sub-genres. For each album, I place AllMusic's list of styles in a custom list field in MC.

[GHammer]

What about this data source?
Get Digital Data
http://tinyurl.com/yq37z5

Seems to have good data and 400*400 cover art.

MusicIP has what looks like free usage.
No idea how accurate they are, but the price is right!
Info:
http://tinyurl.com/yo235p
Pricing:
http://tinyurl.com/29pd38

Wonder how Gracenote would feel about a free plugin for a commercial app?
Reading the non-commercial license they could go either way:
http://tinyurl.com/2h6ma3

[datdude]

I wouldn't mind seeing some integration with MusicIP, more for the track mixing features than the tag fixing, which they have an API for their headless player: http://www.musicip.com/mixer/httpprotocol.jsp.