On Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:40 AM Chad P (Mixed In Key) wrote:

An Internet connection is needed to analyze new files because Mixed In Key uses very expensive technology that is not available in "offline" mode. The program would cost a lot more if we included the same algorithm in every copy. Instead, we created an online solution that works 24/7 and analyzes new files all the time. Both of my computers that I use for production are online all of the time. As long as you aren't doing anything you're not supposed to be doing (like downloading pirated copies of our software) you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

Cheers,
Chad P

Are you saying that your software sends the song to be analyzed by a remote server, which is why it requires internet? It's simple to see that the machine that you're working on is doing the analysis, and activity monitor on OS X shows maybe a few bytes of info being send when I begin analyzing.

This is clearly a way to combat piracy which i'd understand because mixed in key is one of the most pirated pieces of software i've seen. But it is still a critical design flaw for an industry that relies so much on travel.

Just this weekend I was on a plan heading accross the country to a gig. A friend of mine gave me some new music to listen to, and check out. I really enjoyed it and when I was on the 5 hour plane flight, which by the way, ended with me getting off the plane and within the hour doing a show, I couldn't analyze his stuff.

It was so infuriating knowing i payed for a piece of software, that doesn't analyze tracks offline.

Here's a solution, if your new analysis algorithm only works because over the internet, then include the old one that doesn't require a connection for OFFLINE mode only. That way, when the user gets a connection again it will update with the latest info, if indeed it didn't analyze it properly.

Don't tell me because both your computers are online all the time doesn't mean you can't see someone else's not being online, that's both ignorant and dumb. Second, don't tell me that as long as I am not doing anything i shouldn't be, that I don't have anything to worry about. I was doing everything SHOULD be doing and it gave me problems. I bought the software, and was using it in the field, and it didn't work because you guys are too butt hurt people found a way to steal ur old software.

With the finest regards,

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:08 PM Daxx wrote:

Are you saying that your software sends the song to be analyzed by a remote server, which is why it requires internet? It's simple to see that the machine that you're working on is doing the analysis, and activity monitor on OS X shows maybe a few bytes of info being send when I begin analyzing.

And those few bytes of data contain the harmonic information necessary to detect the key. We could make an offline version of MIK, but it would be prohibitively expensive for the end user.

Hi Chad, Unfortunately I have to add my vote to the disappointment of MIK not working offline. I hit this recently having converted to digital and wanting to analyse some tracks on the go.
Why would the price need to rise for offline, we've all paid good money for the product.

It's because of licensing. Instead of licensing the software the algorithm runs on once for our server we would have to license it for each individual copy sold. It would be several hundred dollars per copy instead of $58.

So sad I purchased this well promoted product. There should be a money back guarantee if only works online then. If I have to be connected you should be able to refund me then. At least you know I didn't steal your software not to mention if I need to be online it shouldn't take a month of Sundays to analyze 388 files. There was something wrong with this software since I bought it. Please consider refunding me since its such a great and expensive product in your eyes that just doesn't work in my eyes like expected. P.S. I am sure you can look up my computer and see that it has been on there for like forever and the files that say NONE for a key then. I am not lying I would take my money back and be glad to give you the software back.

We do have a money back guarantee, refund requests should be sent to contact@mixedinkey.com.

On Thursday, February 28, 2013 2:35 PM Chad P (Mixed In Key) wrote:

It's because of licensing. Instead of licensing the software the algorithm runs on once for our server we would have to license it for each individual copy sold. It would be several hundred dollars per copy instead of $58.

But you previously said:

The older version used licensed technology for its key detection while the newer versions uses our own patent pending process

So if the old version worked offline, and the new version uses your own patented process, what are the extra licensing costs that would require an internet connection?

Perhaps you could offer users the ability to 'upgrade' to an offline mode to cover these licensing costs?

I was about to purchase your software but will not with this restriction. One obvious reason - if I'm DJing somewhere with my laptop, someone gives me an MP3 they want me to play, I can't detect the pitch using your software as I don't have an internet connection because of what seems to be solely an anti-piracy policy.

On Friday, October 29, 2010 9:25 PM Chad P (Mixed In Key) wrote:

What happens if you go out of business are all of your customer SOL?

In the unfortunate event of us closing up shop an offline version would be created.

So there is nothing technically getting in the way of an offline version other than company policy? This is clearly for anti piracy then, a shame you deny it.

The offline version would work differently than the current version we have.

This is hilarious really, this entire thread.

People have the balls to come onto MIK's own forum, admit pirating their product and wanting the removal of the server-side requirement - doesn't take a genius to work out why!

I applaud the online requirement, I think it's a great way to ensure the products remain funded and well-maintained. For any digital DJ, you have a workflow you run all new tracks through including setting cue points, tagging etc, and MiK is a part of this - i'm pretty such no DJ worth their salt would take a new track, or dodgy MP3 at a gig and throw it into their show without it going through their usual workflow process.

In a thread of such ambivalent nature, here is a voice of approval for the way you operate as a company. Cheers.

Thank you Xde, it's mighty kind of you to take time out of your day and come here to share your approval. The vast majority of MIK users are perfectly happy with the software, we just don't hear from them as often because they don't have any need to come here for tech support.

I resent the implication that because I need to analyse songs without being connected to the internet, that I'm branded a 'pirate'. Anyone with half a brain who actually works in this industry knows that you should be able to run software which has been legitimately purchased, offline.

Xde, it seems you've never been in this situation? I suppose your bedroom always has an internet connection. Well, you won't have any problems then.

Here it goes. I agree 100% with XDE's reply and Back up all of Chad's post.

1) Anywhere you travel these days almost every Hotel has wireless access which I myself never had any issues or when I am really on the go and need a connection urgent I tether off my cell phone. Remember always legitimate site, no torrenting, you should be fine. 98% of my playlists are always ready to go before I travel anyways.

2) At my Home studio, I process all of my purchases, files, playlists, PN, MIK, etc... on my Desktop and send everything to a Portable Hard Drive and some times USB Stick. This way my Laptop NEVER touches the internet when I am home.

3) This software does a lot for me from PN to MIK. and being connected every time is not a problem for me at all. this is some thing great here, I have come to realize this when I made the purchase last week and do not regret any of it. All is clear to me about the Licensing and makes a lot of sense. Not sure if anyone is aware, but it takes a lot of funds to a Product Patend.

Just in case, NO I am not a Bedroom DJ. I've been around the local scene for a little over 25 years..Just my thought on this Thread.

Regards
Sergio D

On Monday, May 27, 2013 4:04 AM Meteoroz wrote:

I resent the implication that because I need to analyse songs without being connected to the internet, that I'm branded a 'pirate'. Anyone with half a brain who actually works in this industry knows that you should be able to run software which has been legitimately purchased, offline.

Xde, it seems you've never been in this situation? I suppose your bedroom always has an internet connection. Well, you won't have any problems then.

You clearly have a problem with reading comprehension, I branded people pirates that are coming here saying they pirated 2.5 or will pirate 2.5 as some kind of threat.

Your little poke at me is very funny though - I do all my workflow process before leaving for a gig, I don't accept any music from any third party at any gig so I never run into problems of not having an internet connection at gigs.

Ok, so it's - "I've never had a problem, so therefore no-one else on the planet could have had a problem with this requirement. I'll get online and bag them for even mentioning it."

How about sitting back and thinking "Hmm, perhaps other people have different requirements than me. I'll let them express their concerns to the company and see what the company has to say about it."

In any case, there are some of us who didn't realise when we bought the software, that we'd need to be connected to the internet for it to work. Yep, you're right, we didn't read the system requirements carefully enough, but I think it's reasonable to assume that installed software - as opposed to web-based software - should work offline. Otherwise why not just make MiK a cloud-based service, accessed via a web browser?

And having read between the lines with Chad's replies, I'm now not entirely convinced that the online requirement isn't just an anti-pirating mechanism. Of course I don't condone pirating software (being a software developer myself), so I've never even considered trying to get good stuff like this for free. I believe that when talented people have invested their time and money to come up with a brilliant product, they should be rewarded, but I struggle with the concept that this algorithm couldn't be installed locally for a reasonable price.

So how about leaving it to the owners/developers to answer our concerns without jumping in with half-baked opinions and assumptions?

It's good to see you guys debating this stuff, this really is supposed to be a community DISCUSSION forum, when so often it turns into a "let's ask tech support a question" forum. Not that people shouldn't be doing that, but it gets a little old and doesn't hold much value for other people visiting the forum so I'm happy to see people getting involved here, as long as it's kept civil. We like to keep our little corner of the internet a respectable place.

Since I see there is still some doubt out there I will once again answer the "Why does MIK need to go online?" question. There are two primary reasons for the online connection:

1. It makes the software cheaper. Instead of licensing the database software that MIK runs on for each end user we only have to license it for the server. Considering this license costs several hundred dollars I don't think you want to pay for it on your computer too.

2. It allows us to tweak the accuracy of the key detection algorithm without releasing an update to the desktop client. When MIK 5 was released MIK 4 users got the upgraded key detection without having to download anything.

Meteoroz, your main concern seems to be that you didn't know about this when you purchased the app, and it sounds like you are starting to regret your purchase. We would never think of keeping someone's money if they weren't happy with their purchase, so if you want to request a refund you are more than welcome to do so.

Cheers,
Chad P

PS: Don't try to read between the lines of what I write, there's nothing there ;)

I just wonder what workflow process people are using.

Mine runs as follows in a nutshell:

• Purchase music (usually online so let's use that method) from X,Y,Z site.
• Run through Musicbrainz to tag properly.
• Run through MiK.
• Run through Traktor and beatgrid, set cue points.

As three out of four of these processes require internet access, and I absolutely will not accept any music at a gig, I really don't see the problem with MiK requiring it.

Licensing server software is expensive, Chad is right, I don't think he is being disingenuous with his stance - the anti-piracy addition is simply a very nice bonus.

Meteoroz, your main concern seems to be that you didn't know about this when you purchased the app, and it sounds like you are starting to regret your purchase. We would never think of keeping someone's money if they weren't happy with their purchase, so if you want to request a refund you are more than welcome to do so.

Fair enough. Thanks for explaining it yet again :) I suppose this is one of those hybrid apps where you do need a local installation as well as a server component.

You're wrong about me regretting my purchase though. I've been more than happy with both MiK and PN, and now that I know about the requirements I don't expect to have any further issues.

Personally, I don't usually accept music at a gig, but wouldn't want to be artificially restricted from having the option if I purchase the software. It's hard to imagine that an offline version is not possible, especially as 2.5 was working offline. I was looking to purchase MixedInKey but don't like this restriction so have since found alternative software, which is working well.

I can understand that a design decision was made at version 3.0 to use some proprietary server software, but think this could be fixed in a future version if there was enough demand (e.g. using some open/free db software instead), so don't get annoyed at those users that are only stating that they'd like this feature - there is clearly some demand for it!

This is where I stand on the matter. I'm rather shocked that people have the audacity to come here and accuse Chad and his team of lying about using their own (patent pending) technology as a way to cover up that they're combating piracy. Sure, who likes a liar? But what company likes a pirate?

I think what some people seem to be missing here is the perspective of the company. It seems very clear to me that the choice to require an Internet connection is based on reducing the cost of the product for the consumer. As Chad expressed, this technology is not integrated into each "license", but rather only once at their end. I feel that fact it's a deterrent for pirating is a by-product. But even if it's not, so what? They have every right to design their model that way. What's the harm to the end user? A minor inconvenience? We're not always going to get our cake and eat it too.

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 4:34 AM Xde wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 4:04 AM Meteoroz wrote:

I do all my workflow process before leaving for a gig, I don't accept any music from any third party at any gig so I never run into problems of not having an internet connection at gigs.

I buy this mk5 but i would like to know if i cant get refund because ididnt know i need to have internet conection wich i dont like so please tell me how i gonna get my money back..

All of our software has a money back guarantee, please write contact@mixedinkey.com if you are not satisfied with your purchase.