KMA and MP3+G naming on database and better name importing options

[Big KJ]

Hi!

I hope not to cause any harm with my post but since early Hoster versions I did felt always the same problem: inconsistency!

Most of the manufacturers use diferente ways of entering Artist and Titles for the same song; besides that, I'm a non english user, so sometimes I do feel the need to order my list in a diferent way.

My goal is to have all the same instances of each song under the very same Title/Artist writing, avoiding things like "Prince" and "Prince & The Revolution" for the same song.

I did that by hand and it showed to be a huge task.

Reading this forum I saw a mention to an application developed by Latshaw Systems named KJ File Manager.

I bought it and had a great time using it on my MP3+G files obtaining the consistency I wanted for my karaoke files.

The only drawback for me is that they do not yet support KMA files.
When I say yet, is because they will support this format if there are enough people asking them for it (so they tell me).

They already support KMA files to do that, but only for their own application to produce booklists: Song List Generator. I tried and it worked like a charm.

I hope that I'm not doing nothing unpolite with this post as I'm refering another vendor, but being a loyal costumer of MTU, I do believe that I'm doing the right thing; if not, Admins, please do delete my post and do accept my apologies.

So, if someone else believes that KJ File Manager would be of a great help to keep our MTU's Video Hoster being even better, all I ask is to went to their website and write a message asking them to support KMA files.

It can be found at: http://www.latshawsystems.com/Produc...leManager.aspx

Please do let me know your thoughts on that.
Many thanks

If your post didn't offend the admins, this one might.

Most programs don't support KMA files because they're not an industry standard. Why the format was invented is beyond me. MP3+G was fine the way it was. Even the concept of zipping them was pretty stupid as it slows down any program that uses them. MTU SHOULD support MP3+G and any company who makes their own standard with no valid reason other than to say "hey we are the standard now" is quite arrogant in my opinion. KMA was invented for the sole reason to help force you to stay with MTU and that's it. I've talked to the folks at Latshaw about this and they've confirmed that "there is nothing about the KMA format that even validates its existance".

I'm going to stop writing as this post will surely be deleted...but it had to be said.

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by KaraokeHo

I'm going to stop writing as this post will surely be deleted...but it had to be said.

Hey Ho,
Your comments are welcome here, thanks for sharing.

The KMA file format the best karaoke format (and the newest) available BUT it can't take the settings of a different file format and change them. Whatever bit rate your MP3+G was ripped at, that's what it will stay in Hoster so I can see where you (using MP3+G files) don't hear any difference.

Here are three reasons KMA's are superior to any other format:

1. Everything is in one file

2. It is a smaller file

3. KMA's use a higher bit rate (when imported from a disc) so they provide a higher quality audio signal.

You must have alot of MP3+G files? How did you get them?

There is an issue with Karaoke Host's and MP3+G's that must be kept in mind. First off there is no such thing as a karaoke file being downloaded legally in the USA. Search the forum on this subject. (I feel this will change, but it hasn't yet.)

If you did not pay at least $1 for every song you have in your collection, they are illegal to make money with. If you don't make money with these MP3+G's, no harm is done. If you are working with this collection, you are showing deisrespect for the karaoke host who paid thousands of dollars the put their collections together.

I hope this clears some things up for you.


Jim

Originally Posted by madjim

Here are three reasons KMA's are superior to any other format:

1. Everything is in one file

2. It is a smaller file

3. KMA's use a higher bit rate (when imported from a disc) so they provide a higher quality audio signal.

I can rip an MP3+G (or WMA+G) at any quality rate I want, and I can zip it into one file that is compressed AND will work with over 90% of the karaoke apps out there, including hosters, file managers, and song book generators. So KMAs are superior how? You're going to have to do better than that. KMAs were invented for the same reason Microsoft invented WMAs: to keep you using their software.

Winter is coming. Can I have some of that wool covering your eyes?

[hwheeler43]

If you don't like the program go elsewhere. I find it kind of ironic that the folks with the most problems are the ones with illegal songs. Quite amusing huh.

[Big KJ]

Hey, this was NOT the subject of this post!

All I wanted is the possibility to use KJ File Manager in order to keep our MTU's Hoster files in a way that we have consistency over the Title/Artist naming.

I want to have my KMA files in the most possible consistent way.
I don't even care if they are a proprietary system file or not.

When I bought Hoster (I do currently have 2 licenses) about 5 or 6 years from now, I knew that it uses this KMA format, and that was/is okay to me.

For the discussion sake, please open another thread about MP3+G against KMA! That's NOT the point of this thread.

But, PLEASE, let's find a way that works for all of us in order to keep our songs folder, and booklists, the way they should be: with no mistakes, without mispellings and without diferent names for the same song or artist.

KJ File Manager, as far as I'd tried it with MP3+G, can do that!

Their other program Song List Generator already do recognizes KMA and it can do a really great job.

So why not have the best of both worlds and use KJ File Manager to help us cleaning our KMA songs?

The only thing needed is that they do have enough people asking them to support KMA files.

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by KaraokeHo

I can rip an MP3+G (or WMA+G) at any quality rate I want, and I can zip it into one file that is compressed AND will work with over 90% of the karaoke apps out there, including hosters, file managers, and song book generators. So KMAs are superior how? You're going to have to do better than that. KMAs were invented for the same reason Microsoft invented WMAs: to keep you using their software.

Winter is coming. Can I have some of that wool covering your eyes?

KaraokeHo,
Please take the time to educate yourself on MTU/Hoster and zip files. This issue has been discused in length in this forum. If you have the time, search this forum for zip file and read Admims posts.

One day down the road Hoster won't run zip files, it will convert them to CDMP3G files (a type of KMA) when they are loaded into the program.

Also pay atention to the bit rate choices when you import a CD+G. in Hoster, up to 192k.

I'm just a karaoke host/entertainer and all of my testing a research has shown me the KMA's are better than any other format I've tried. MTU has all of the answers, not me

I'm trying to help, not confuse.


Jim

[gd123]

KMA is not the only proprietary format. Tricerasoft uses KMF as ONE of their formats.

KMA is WMA+G and is, supposedly, a superior format, 1-1 compression wise, over MP3+G.

MTU has SONGVERTOR which can convert any KMA back to the MP3+G format. This allows anyone to switch to any other vendor.

MTU uses a unique "NUMBERED" BookID assigned to each KMA that makes finding a SONG easier than entering an ALPHA/CHARACTER/NUMERIC conglomeration. (i.e. cbep570-1-10...who the hexx wants to type that longaxx DiscID?)

I use LATSHAW's KJ File Manager and inquired, over 2 years ago, for them to support the KMA Format. At that time, they didn't want to try to "READ" the KMA Header as the information is contained within the FILE verses OUTSIDE the file as with MP3+G.

You are correct...MTU has absolutely no consistency from one release to another. Where one problem gets fixed, another problem, that was fixed X number of releases earlier, is back. But, hey, they claim to have the best programmer.

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by gd123

You are correct...MTU has absolutly no consistency from one release to another. Where one problem gets fixed, another problem, that was fixed X number of releases earlier, is back. But, hey, they claim to have the best programmer.

Hey GD,
This is called Program Development.

Demo's are available of every program so a client is not forced to be a part of this. When the demo does what you want, but the porgram.

If you don't like MTU's programs or think they have poor programers, why do you buy them?

With all respect.

Jim

[gd123]

Uhhh, I bought Hoster when it was $450 a copy...at what price did you buy it? If you didn't spend $450, don't ask me a thing.

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by gd123

Uhhh, I bought Hoster when it was $450 a copy...at what price did you buy it? If you didn't spend $450, don't ask me a thing.

The upgrade is only $69 but I'm sure you know that.

I bought a rack mount computer from MTU for over two thousand dollars and Hoster was included.

Sorry I wan't any help.


Jim

[Beavis]

Originally Posted by KaraokeHo

If your post didn't offend the admins, this one might.

Most programs don't support KMA files because they're not an industry standard. Why the format was invented is beyond me. MP3+G was fine the way it was. Even the concept of zipping them was pretty stupid as it slows down any program that uses them. MTU SHOULD support MP3+G and any company who makes their own standard with no valid reason other than to say "hey we are the standard now" is quite arrogant in my opinion. KMA was invented for the sole reason to help force you to stay with MTU and that's it. I've talked to the folks at Latshaw about this and they've confirmed that "there is nothing about the KMA format that even validates its existance".

I'm going to stop writing as this post will surely be deleted...but it had to be said.

you are a joker, and have no clue what your talking about what so ever !!


i also spent $450

[billyo]

mtu didnt forced anyone to use or buy theire product, and in my opinion hoster is the best or one of the best ( i cant think of any)karaoke products out there..like the saying goes " if you dont like it, don't buy it, and if you bought it and didn't like it , do yourself a favor return it" instead of whinning about it..