| Voting Ideas |
Well...I'm not sure if someone has suggested this one already..but here's an idea that might help to make voting fair - and avoid people getting nasty 10% votes from their competitors trying to sabotage them.
Songs could be rated starting at 70% (so there's nothing below that) and going to 100%
If you don't think the song deserves 70% or more - THEN JUST DON'T VOTE.
Pretty simple I think.
Comments?
Songs could be rated starting at 70% (so there's nothing below that) and going to 100%
If you don't think the song deserves 70% or more - THEN JUST DON'T VOTE.
Pretty simple I think.
Comments?
I've been always against those who vote only the songs they like (or the songs they're trying to sabotage 
). I think we should also vote for the songs we don't think are good. So, why should a "bad" song have 70%? anyway, that would be exactly the same as it is now, becose: 70% = 10%. If I want to sabotage a song, I rate it 70%, or just don't rate it...
Plus, we need people to vote, not to stop voting...
). I think we should also vote for the songs we don't think are good. So, why should a "bad" song have 70%? anyway, that would be exactly the same as it is now, becose: 70% = 10%. If I want to sabotage a song, I rate it 70%, or just don't rate it...Plus, we need people to vote, not to stop voting...
| separate voting and rating |
I guess I don't understand why you would vote for a song you think is crap anyways...it's just not logical. Do you go to the polls and vote for the politician you think sucks? - no -
If the purpose of voting is to help the songs you think deserve it win - then why should people have to vote for songs they don't like?
If giving a rating is designed to be helpful to the artist - so they know what level they're at, then maybe giving someone a percentage score should be separate from the voting process.
Example: You hear a song you think is not very well done, sung whatever...but you want to be helpful to the artist. Do you think this song is worthy of being in the battle? No. So you give it a rating, and you don't vote.
If you thought it was a good song - then vote, and give it a rating as well.
If the purpose of voting is to help the songs you think deserve it win - then why should people have to vote for songs they don't like?
If giving a rating is designed to be helpful to the artist - so they know what level they're at, then maybe giving someone a percentage score should be separate from the voting process.
Example: You hear a song you think is not very well done, sung whatever...but you want to be helpful to the artist. Do you think this song is worthy of being in the battle? No. So you give it a rating, and you don't vote.
If you thought it was a good song - then vote, and give it a rating as well.
Well, I think every song "is worthy" to be in the battle, and I'm not the one to say wich one should be in te tha battle or not... but I can vote the song, as objective as I can, so the artist decide if his song should be in a battle. And no, I don't think "the purpose of voting is to help the songs you think deserve it win".
And you have to notice that we need more votes! people is not voting enough. That's a fact. If the elections were somehow similar to bandamp I would give the politician that sucks a bad rating and a good rating to the one I think is better.
Why separating the "percentage score" from the voting process?
And you have to notice that we need more votes! people is not voting enough. That's a fact. If the elections were somehow similar to bandamp I would give the politician that sucks a bad rating and a good rating to the one I think is better.
Why separating the "percentage score" from the voting process?
These are just my ideas...I started this thread so we could find out what everyone thinks...we're bound to all have different opinions about the whys and whats and hows of votings....
The reason I suggested separating the votes from the ratings...is so that each can have it's own purpose. Votes for battle, and ratings for helping the artist know what you think. And it's just an idea. I hear a lot that people think the voting/battle/rating process needs improvement...so I'm just throwing in my two cents, and hoping that we could all develope some good ideas if we brainstorm together
The reason I suggested separating the votes from the ratings...is so that each can have it's own purpose. Votes for battle, and ratings for helping the artist know what you think. And it's just an idea. I hear a lot that people think the voting/battle/rating process needs improvement...so I'm just throwing in my two cents, and hoping that we could all develope some good ideas if we brainstorm together
Iszil wrote…
The real purpose of the rating is to create an average of the quality of the song; how people think the song is, about composition and recording.
Just that.
> Iszil
Yes that is true but not EVERY person gives a rating to a song they listen to ,only the ones they feel are worthy of their battle vote.See for yourself how many views compared to votes there is for songs.How does that give anybody an idea of where they are at?I also see something like a click developing here.Same bunch posting/commenting on each others stuff.I agree with you 100% Spoon,I also think it should be mandatory to rate a certain percentage of songs a month.And if someone gives a sabotaged fueled vote(i.e 10%-40%)that person should explain why to the artist via email or to the moderator.Then people might not sabotage if they have to stand behind it.I dunno know just some thoughts.
perhaps seperate voting is necessary... BUT.. and I MEAN BUT....
The main problem we have here is also people not rating songs based on true quality and content, and instead are basing voting on whether they like the style of the song...
The rating process is there to determine just that, how good is THIS SONG, not how much do I like progressive rock... or how little I like grunge.... There was already floated in another thread, and again in Swordfish's Bandamp Extra, the idea of splitting the rating into two parts, one for musical composition, and one for recording quality... this is also a good idea, because sometimes a great song gets a crappy rating because of crappy recording, because the person maybe can't afford anything but a $8 dynamic mic, and free software, and is too stupid to understand the dang full featured software like Cool Edit pro.(umm, hmm... that's not about me, it's about some hypothetical person, yeah, that's it)
Anyway, that said, I would like to see simplified BATTLE voting, and more indepth rating system... that would be good... all the way around... And there are certain songs that DONT belong in battles... that was the inspiration for my NOODLE KNIGHTS.. though, I feel bad, I am a bit behind in getting it updated... but soon.. I promise...
Jim "Da NOODLE KING" K
The main problem we have here is also people not rating songs based on true quality and content, and instead are basing voting on whether they like the style of the song...
The rating process is there to determine just that, how good is THIS SONG, not how much do I like progressive rock... or how little I like grunge.... There was already floated in another thread, and again in Swordfish's Bandamp Extra, the idea of splitting the rating into two parts, one for musical composition, and one for recording quality... this is also a good idea, because sometimes a great song gets a crappy rating because of crappy recording, because the person maybe can't afford anything but a $8 dynamic mic, and free software, and is too stupid to understand the dang full featured software like Cool Edit pro.(umm, hmm... that's not about me, it's about some hypothetical person, yeah, that's it)
Anyway, that said, I would like to see simplified BATTLE voting, and more indepth rating system... that would be good... all the way around... And there are certain songs that DONT belong in battles... that was the inspiration for my NOODLE KNIGHTS.. though, I feel bad, I am a bit behind in getting it updated... but soon.. I promise...
Jim "Da NOODLE KING" K
Perhaps the two things should be separate then: the battle, and the review.
Voting for a track in the battle would be easy enough so that even the laziest person would do it in a click.
For those that want to contribute more, they can review the song. There are people out their that contribute a lot to BA in reviews, there are also people that don't review well because they don't know how, are reluctant, or just plain dont want to.
The fact that the battle is a competition and that the reviews are supposed to be objective seems to be a bit of a conflict.
Voting for a track in the battle would be easy enough so that even the laziest person would do it in a click.
For those that want to contribute more, they can review the song. There are people out their that contribute a lot to BA in reviews, there are also people that don't review well because they don't know how, are reluctant, or just plain dont want to.
The fact that the battle is a competition and that the reviews are supposed to be objective seems to be a bit of a conflict.
Daeljan wrote…
The fact that the battle is a competition and that the reviews are supposed to be objective seems to be a bit of a conflict.
Well, the idea behind the battle is: create a really great song that will receive great objective reviews & ratings... It's not about getting your song plugged... I mean, that way, I would have dozens of "friends" create accounts and vote for me 100% and to everyone else in the battle 10%. Then it would turn into a popularity contest... That's not the way.
Rating a song is supposed to be objective. Being moderator, I do check out voting behaviour and fortunately the majority of the members who DO vote, know to do it reasonably objectively.
But I have seen malicious voting behaviour... And these (very few) people are now dealing with the consequences.... It's that simple...
Personally I would prefer every member casting votes to every song in the battle, that way all songs would get an equal amount of votes, and the averages would make the most sense.
to put in my thoughts...
I don't think a one-click system for battles would be any more accurate than the current system because if you only had to click on a song you liked, I think it would come down to popularity instead of song quality.
Also, in my opinion.. separating the voting system into review and battle categories would only make it more complicated. Right now, for me, it's easiest to vote on a song and then forget about it. Also... by separating the system, I think that would decrease further the amount of votes going towards song review.
Someone had mentioned in another thread making it mandatory to rate any song you commented on. I think that's a great idea.
I don't think a one-click system for battles would be any more accurate than the current system because if you only had to click on a song you liked, I think it would come down to popularity instead of song quality.
Also, in my opinion.. separating the voting system into review and battle categories would only make it more complicated. Right now, for me, it's easiest to vote on a song and then forget about it. Also... by separating the system, I think that would decrease further the amount of votes going towards song review.
Someone had mentioned in another thread making it mandatory to rate any song you commented on. I think that's a great idea.
Funny, I vote on (nearly) every single song posted on this site. This is done for two reasons:
1) I think it gives the artist and idea of what others think of their song, which can be a means to self-improvement. This is obviously better if the person rating also leaves a comment.
2) It allows me to see what songs I've already listened to when I go to the "browse" page! This is not as daft as it may seem - I post a reasonable amount of comments, and I listen to just about everything; but sometimes a few can slip through the net (as it were!). Those that do slip through the net, are picked up by me when I do a quick check every now and then. In fact, that happened to one of Spoony's just the other day!!!
If I think that the playing, construction, and recording are rubbish, I'll give a 10% RATING (not a vote for what I think is the best - I rate the songs). If the song is truly excellent, then it gets a 90%. As yet, no song has received a 100% professional vote from me (but some have come extremely close!)
I like other people rating my songs - what other measure of progress is there for an individual on this site? Yes, people can comment and say that this one's better than the last, etc, etc, but that's not a true measure of improvement.
In every walk of life, there are people who don't do things in the spirit of fairness. Well, fine - if that's how they get their kicks so be it. It's a sad person that feels they have to try and rig a friendly bit of competition between what is, essentially, a group of "friends" that get together because of their common interest!
'Nuff said
1) I think it gives the artist and idea of what others think of their song, which can be a means to self-improvement. This is obviously better if the person rating also leaves a comment.
2) It allows me to see what songs I've already listened to when I go to the "browse" page! This is not as daft as it may seem - I post a reasonable amount of comments, and I listen to just about everything; but sometimes a few can slip through the net (as it were!). Those that do slip through the net, are picked up by me when I do a quick check every now and then. In fact, that happened to one of Spoony's just the other day!!!
If I think that the playing, construction, and recording are rubbish, I'll give a 10% RATING (not a vote for what I think is the best - I rate the songs). If the song is truly excellent, then it gets a 90%. As yet, no song has received a 100% professional vote from me (but some have come extremely close!)
I like other people rating my songs - what other measure of progress is there for an individual on this site? Yes, people can comment and say that this one's better than the last, etc, etc, but that's not a true measure of improvement.
In every walk of life, there are people who don't do things in the spirit of fairness. Well, fine - if that's how they get their kicks so be it. It's a sad person that feels they have to try and rig a friendly bit of competition between what is, essentially, a group of "friends" that get together because of their common interest!
'Nuff said
What I truly wished one could do was have a box in the music upload of one's profile, and untick "allow rating". I personally am not at all interested in having people "rate" my music, as that is meaningless to me. I just have my music here to promote it, not to find out what the majority of people rate my songs to be. Imagine a band like Einsturzende Neubauten posting their music on bandamp. Their song would probably be getting and average of 20-30%, but why would it matter, as it's the handful of people who care deeply about that "type" of music, whom you are trying to reach.
| this is a good thread |
I try to listen to and vote and post a review on every song that enters into battle as i feel that is part of what bandamp is about.( you get nothing for winning but it lets you know if people will like your music/sounds) .
Some will, some won't if you upload your songs here you should understand that it will recieve good and bad votes and good and bad reviews. some will be just because they don't like that syle of music( sucks but that's seems to be the way most people vote, not just here but even in movies and pop/radio music as well).
I don't vote the battle with any idea of whose going to win I try to vote just bout the song
Several songs have 90% or better from me and it's not about the artist to me it's bout the musicianship, quality of song writing, last but not least the recording quality. If there is an axceptionally good song but the recording is not great it still gets is high vote from me.
I feel like the biggest problem doesn't seem to come from unfair voting but lack of voting and posting reviews.
Some will, some won't if you upload your songs here you should understand that it will recieve good and bad votes and good and bad reviews. some will be just because they don't like that syle of music( sucks but that's seems to be the way most people vote, not just here but even in movies and pop/radio music as well).
I don't vote the battle with any idea of whose going to win I try to vote just bout the song
Several songs have 90% or better from me and it's not about the artist to me it's bout the musicianship, quality of song writing, last but not least the recording quality. If there is an axceptionally good song but the recording is not great it still gets is high vote from me.
I feel like the biggest problem doesn't seem to come from unfair voting but lack of voting and posting reviews.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
What I truly wished one could do was have a box in the music upload of one's profile, and untick "allow rating". I personally am not at all interested in having people "rate" my music, as that is meaningless to me. I just have my music here to promote it, not to find out what the majority of people rate my songs to be. Imagine a band like Einsturzende Neubauten posting their music on bandamp. Their song would probably be getting and average of 20-30%, but why would it matter, as it's the handful of people who care deeply about that "type" of music, whom you are trying to reach.
If that is what you are doing here, I have to tell you, this is the WRONG place for you...
Try MYspace... and MP3.com.. this is a site for MUSICIANS to HELP EACH OTHER.. NOT a place to promote yourself, and not a place to vote on your favorite bands.... not at all what it is ..... YOu have missed the point entirely.. Rating songs has NOTHING to do with what style of music your like, and if you say you caould not give a fair rating based on music talent because you don't like the genre, then you my friend are not a true Musician.. A TRUE musician is able to appreciate fully ALL STYLES of music, and the work and talent there... and although one is not a FAN of a genre, one can CERTAINLY give CONSTRUCTIVE CRITISIZM, and can APPRECIATE the work,effort, and talent... otherwise, you need to leave the music industry all together, because you will never be able to understand music....
Jim K
Wow, Jim K., that takes the prize as the most emotional and misguided reply I've read in while. I like people commenting on my music. That seems to me a constructive way of learning more. However, I don't feel that rating a song helps much in this process. Why not have a feature where you can upload music, and people can comment on them freely, without all the rating antics?
I agree one can give constructive criticism to a song, but I am not so sure about the rating aspect. I can of course attempt objectively to rate formal and technical aspects of a song, but why would I want to do that? Why not just make suggestions, without having to put a 40% or 80% on a song? Objectivity is, naturally, a rational and admirable goal, but I think it naive to pretend that we can reach that, espicially in situations where one doesn't react strongly to a genre. Kant and Hume, and virtually every other major thinker, have rightly pointed out that aesthetic judgments are burdened with subjectivity.
Your "A true musician" comment is pure rethoric, and somewhat offensive at that, given that you have no ability accurately to draw such a conclusion from such little data.
Promoting one's music is precisely what everyone is doing here, depending on how, linguistically, you wish to define the term. I didn't mean it in the narrow sense of "selling" (though, again, I would hardly see this as an immoral or improper objective), but rather in the sense that I wish to make my music available to as many people in the world to listen to, and, if people wish to comment on it, they are free to do so, and, if it is constructive, I will certainly take note of it. I'm quite certain that I am not missing the essentials of what this website is about: namely, sharing your music and ideas with each other. What I suggested was that one make it an option to exclude one's songs from the rating (not comment) aspect of this site, which seems to me contrary to a collective effort to help each other out, but rather, panders to the egoistical part of our soul, which is just all too happy to participate in the public rat race of writing music that pleases majority opinion.
Judging the value and aesthetic merit of art by majority vote? I don't see it. And I really wished one could participate in this community without having to share in that aspect.
All the best,
M.
I agree one can give constructive criticism to a song, but I am not so sure about the rating aspect. I can of course attempt objectively to rate formal and technical aspects of a song, but why would I want to do that? Why not just make suggestions, without having to put a 40% or 80% on a song? Objectivity is, naturally, a rational and admirable goal, but I think it naive to pretend that we can reach that, espicially in situations where one doesn't react strongly to a genre. Kant and Hume, and virtually every other major thinker, have rightly pointed out that aesthetic judgments are burdened with subjectivity.
Your "A true musician" comment is pure rethoric, and somewhat offensive at that, given that you have no ability accurately to draw such a conclusion from such little data.
Promoting one's music is precisely what everyone is doing here, depending on how, linguistically, you wish to define the term. I didn't mean it in the narrow sense of "selling" (though, again, I would hardly see this as an immoral or improper objective), but rather in the sense that I wish to make my music available to as many people in the world to listen to, and, if people wish to comment on it, they are free to do so, and, if it is constructive, I will certainly take note of it. I'm quite certain that I am not missing the essentials of what this website is about: namely, sharing your music and ideas with each other. What I suggested was that one make it an option to exclude one's songs from the rating (not comment) aspect of this site, which seems to me contrary to a collective effort to help each other out, but rather, panders to the egoistical part of our soul, which is just all too happy to participate in the public rat race of writing music that pleases majority opinion.
Judging the value and aesthetic merit of art by majority vote? I don't see it. And I really wished one could participate in this community without having to share in that aspect.
All the best,
M.
well, the battle is part of the website, and it requires songs to be rated.
I think it could be an idea to make the "song accepts rating" optional, just like the free download possibility. After all we want the artists themselves to be in final control of what happens to their music...
I don't think the rating bit is necessarily egotistic. I personally find it very useful to the see percentage going up or down on my song threads, since this is telling me something about how people are receiving the tune. You can call your music piece "art", but in the end, art exists to inspire or provoke thought and/or emotion, to communicate it's own aesthetic. Getting a rating to it could be a signal of how well this is translating to the observer... or would you rather have your observers become dehumanized - - without the egotistical parts telling them to either like or not like what they are presented?
Personally, I rate songs to construction, performance, production quality and marketability... I try to leave my own taste out of it - though with "marketability" I do not necessarily mean "possible sales figures", I mean... "is there an audience for this song?" or, in extremes: "can it form the basis of a new subculture? will it give birth to a whole new genre of sounds?", and the vision of this, naturally, takes shape through my own experience and views of the (music) world. So yeah my own taste is seeping through in there yeah.
Anyway, it's just how you define the rating system... But luckily there are only very few members on this site who judge songs only to what mood they're in... And trust me, their accounts tend to have a very short life span...
I think it could be an idea to make the "song accepts rating" optional, just like the free download possibility. After all we want the artists themselves to be in final control of what happens to their music...
I don't think the rating bit is necessarily egotistic. I personally find it very useful to the see percentage going up or down on my song threads, since this is telling me something about how people are receiving the tune. You can call your music piece "art", but in the end, art exists to inspire or provoke thought and/or emotion, to communicate it's own aesthetic. Getting a rating to it could be a signal of how well this is translating to the observer... or would you rather have your observers become dehumanized - - without the egotistical parts telling them to either like or not like what they are presented?
Personally, I rate songs to construction, performance, production quality and marketability... I try to leave my own taste out of it - though with "marketability" I do not necessarily mean "possible sales figures", I mean... "is there an audience for this song?" or, in extremes: "can it form the basis of a new subculture? will it give birth to a whole new genre of sounds?", and the vision of this, naturally, takes shape through my own experience and views of the (music) world. So yeah my own taste is seeping through in there yeah.
Anyway, it's just how you define the rating system... But luckily there are only very few members on this site who judge songs only to what mood they're in... And trust me, their accounts tend to have a very short life span...
| well, |
Your "A true musician" comment is pure rethoric, and somewhat offensive at that, given that you have no ability accurately to draw such a conclusion from such little data.
This came from your post on the other thread, about Genres where you said :
I'm not interested in Singer-songwriter kind of material, so I don't really feel like I should be reviewing it, as I don't feel very objective, and am just not interested in commenting on music that is part of a genre I care very little about. Without genres I just have to browse and browse, wasting time, until I find something I like enough to review (as I don't see the point reviewing music that is part of an aesthetic one knows very little about) - i.e. what's the point of someone who loves DnB to review a classic rock song? Plus, it would just make it so much easier to find more music one actually identifies with.
This tells me you are not objective, and are not open to objectively and openly critiquing songs on here....
Wow, Jim K., that takes the prize as the most emotional and misguided reply I've read in while.
Prove me misguided... so far you have not.. You have only proven yourself to be closed minded..
Kant and Hume, and virtually every other major thinker, have rightly pointed out that aesthetic judgments are burdened with subjectivity.
This is simply true in theory only.. but artists are more open and able to see things so much more abstractly, that they will and should see things more openly.. which means they can view things without the burden of subjectivity.. They see between the lines..
you see having been in the music industry for over 20 years, I have studied musicians, I have seen country stars doing hip hop, and pop stars doing opera..
Many things will open up your ears, and you will see the true beauty in EVERY style of music.. If you are truly open to it... so, what I see is, you are someone who does not want to participate in the Bandamp system of rating, and critiquing, and you want to skip over all songs except the style you think is cool... that means you want a radio..
You see, putting genres on here will ruin what makes Bandamp the coolest indie music site on the web.. exposure to styles you never thought of... exposure to sounds you normally wouldn't hear... this would be a travesty.... Please understand, I am not trying to attack you, I am simply reading what you wrote, it is there if you read your own post over, you will see why I answeredthe way I did.. it was not misguided, unless you didn't mean it to sound that way... but from where I (and may others I have spoken to) sit, it looks as though you don't want to participate and be a part of the community...
Jim K
This came from your post on the other thread, about Genres where you said :
I'm not interested in Singer-songwriter kind of material, so I don't really feel like I should be reviewing it, as I don't feel very objective, and am just not interested in commenting on music that is part of a genre I care very little about. Without genres I just have to browse and browse, wasting time, until I find something I like enough to review (as I don't see the point reviewing music that is part of an aesthetic one knows very little about) - i.e. what's the point of someone who loves DnB to review a classic rock song? Plus, it would just make it so much easier to find more music one actually identifies with.
This tells me you are not objective, and are not open to objectively and openly critiquing songs on here....
Wow, Jim K., that takes the prize as the most emotional and misguided reply I've read in while.
Prove me misguided... so far you have not.. You have only proven yourself to be closed minded..
Kant and Hume, and virtually every other major thinker, have rightly pointed out that aesthetic judgments are burdened with subjectivity.
This is simply true in theory only.. but artists are more open and able to see things so much more abstractly, that they will and should see things more openly.. which means they can view things without the burden of subjectivity.. They see between the lines..
you see having been in the music industry for over 20 years, I have studied musicians, I have seen country stars doing hip hop, and pop stars doing opera..
Many things will open up your ears, and you will see the true beauty in EVERY style of music.. If you are truly open to it... so, what I see is, you are someone who does not want to participate in the Bandamp system of rating, and critiquing, and you want to skip over all songs except the style you think is cool... that means you want a radio..
You see, putting genres on here will ruin what makes Bandamp the coolest indie music site on the web.. exposure to styles you never thought of... exposure to sounds you normally wouldn't hear... this would be a travesty.... Please understand, I am not trying to attack you, I am simply reading what you wrote, it is there if you read your own post over, you will see why I answeredthe way I did.. it was not misguided, unless you didn't mean it to sound that way... but from where I (and may others I have spoken to) sit, it looks as though you don't want to participate and be a part of the community...
Jim K
This tells me you are not objective, and are not open to objectively and openly critiquing songs on here....
Precisely what I am saying. I don't think I can be objective, and, for that matter, neither do I think anyone else can be. Thus, I would rather comment on music I have a high familiarity with (not that I wouldn't comment on other things, when I feel like I could contribute something), in order to minimize subjectivity as much as possible.
This is simply true in theory only.. but artists are more open and able to see things so much more abstractly, that they will and should see things more openly.. which means they can view things without the burden of subjectivity.. They see between the lines.
You are seriously claiming that artists are less subjective because they see things more abstractley? I disagree, both with the claim that artists necessarily perceive the world more abstractley than non-artists, and certainly disagree with your inference that that fact would lead to more objectivity. You disagree with me. Cool. Let's leave it at that, for now.
you see having been in the music industry for over 20 years, I have studied musicians, I have seen country stars doing hip hop, and pop stars doing opera..
Sorry, but that appeal to authority means little to me. People with stronger backgrounds have erred, too. And besides, many of us here, myself included, have equally strong, if not stronger backgrounds in various aspects relating to music.
Many things will open up your ears, and you will see the true beauty in EVERY style of music.. If you are truly open to it...
What a cliche. And yet, I wasn't even disputing this (though, that doesn't mean that I agree with that).
what I see is, you are someone who does not want to participate in the Bandamp system of rating, and critiquing, and you want to skip over all songs except the style you think is cool...
Well, I am letting you know that you would be wrong about not wanting to participate. As I stated many times over, I am very keen to comment and receive comments, just not throw numbers at people's work. In terms of styles, obviously I have, and will continue to listen and enjoy works, regardless of genre. However, I still think it would be useful as a quick way to find some musicians who share a certain aesthetic background to have this feature made available to artists. Having genres and listening to a variety of music outside of one's usual influences, are not mutually exclusive.
You see, putting genres on here will ruin what makes Bandamp (...)
I don't think this would have to be the inevitable outcome, which is why proposed it.
Just let me briefly summarize for the sake of clarity, what was most important to me:
a) genres could help (especially new members) find musicians that have similar asethetics, without in any way implying that this would lead to avoiding listening to other styles of music.
b) i love the idea of exchanging ideas about songs (my own and those of others), but am not fond of rating/grading a creative effort by another person. This seems to me fundamentally wrong to grade art like that, and cannot possibly help people create better art. If you want to let the artist you that you love their work, a "well done, i really loved that piece" goes a lot further than tagging on some percentage.
a) genres could help (especially new members) find musicians that have similar asethetics, without in any way implying that this would lead to avoiding listening to other styles of music.
b) i love the idea of exchanging ideas about songs (my own and those of others), but am not fond of rating/grading a creative effort by another person. This seems to me fundamentally wrong to grade art like that, and cannot possibly help people create better art. If you want to let the artist you that you love their work, a "well done, i really loved that piece" goes a lot further than tagging on some percentage.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
I don't think I can be objective, and, for that matter, neither do I think anyone else can be.
Wow, ofcourse it's impossible to become TRULY objective... but if you abandon the pursuit completely, then you're on a very wrong track here, mr. Enrighthouse! Maybe you should study Vedic logic... It has some very interesting concepts of objectivity/subjectivity.
People, we need to grow closer together. Not just on this site (I think it's doing a swell job at that btw) but we, the people of the earth, in it's entirety. The only way to do this is to Always Stay Open Minded. Do not look for only the familiar things... You will find yourself alienating from the stream of life, losing contact with people from other social groups... Losing sight of different cultures... You will become a stranger for yourself.
Allow yourself to be inspired and influenced by new experiences... After all when you were just a baby, everything was new and unfamiliar... And it formed the basis of who you are today... So why not keep growing?
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
Thus, I would rather comment on music I have a high familiarity with (not that I wouldn't comment on other things, when I feel like I could contribute something), in order to minimize subjectivity as much as possible.
But how can you tell a piece of music is of a familiar genre - how can you tell the artist involved shares your views of aesthetic, your philosophy? All you can do is listen to the tune and try to compare what you hear to the experiences of what works/not works with you... If you refuse to study the aesthetics of other artist, how can you EVER be objective AT ALL?
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
You are seriously claiming that artists are less subjective because they see things more abstractley? I disagree, both with the claim that artists necessarily perceive the world more abstractley than non-artists, and certainly disagree with your inference that that fact would lead to more objectivity. You disagree with me. Cool. Let's leave it at that, for now.
I certainly agree that artists are required to see things more abstractly... Perhaps mathematicians see things more abstractly aswell... I'm not so sure about this.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
you see having been in the music industry for over 20 years, I have studied musicians, I have seen country stars doing hip hop, and pop stars doing opera..
Sorry, but that appeal to authority means little to me. People with stronger backgrounds have erred, too. And besides, many of us here, myself included, have equally strong, if not stronger backgrounds in various aspects relating to music.
It comes with age and experience. The older you get, the more you will understand. This has to do something with the brain, absorbing more and more information as time progresses.
Anyway, I am for a large part with Jimk on this one, mr TheEnrightHouse... I really think you're being naieve in your statements... Please try to be a little more open minded... It'll do good for you.
But I am very much for genre searchability, I do not think this will ruin BandAMP at all. Just let the Audio Review arena be what it is, where everything is piled up together, regardless....
cheers...
PX (mod)
Ok. I'm abandoning this thread. Just in terms of the naivity comment, I highly suggest you study up on philosophy of art and aesthetics, and in a few years get back to me about "naive". Disagreement is fine, but you are talking to a person who has spent years of his life studying aesthetics and music, and although my opinions might strike you as narrow minded, I think you are judging matters too quickly. I think if you carefully re-read my posts in a day or two, you might find that I am being much less narrow minded than you are accusing me of.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
Ok. I'm abandoning this thread. Just in terms of the naivity comment, I highly suggest you study up on philosophy of art and aesthetics, and in a few years get back to me about "naive". Disagreement is fine, but you are talking to a person who has spent years of his life studying aesthetics and music, and although my opinions might strike you as narrow minded, I think you are judging matters too quickly. I think if you carefully re-read my posts in a day or two, you might find that I am being much less narrow minded than you are accusing me of.
you are most certainly underestimating the level of personal developement of some of the members here, dude.
"but you are talking to a person who has spent years of his life studying aesthetics and music"
And what am I? And what is JimK? Think before YOU judge matters too quickly... Or is your reasoning infallible??? If so, praise to you oh almighty one
I didn't use the word naive, you guys did.
I didn't question your musicianship, you did.
I'm not underestimating your level of personal development, you guys are, by calling my views narrow-minded.
I am not judging matters too quickly, but have thought long and hard on these issues and have arrived at conclusions other than yours.
Back off with your hostility and accusatory tone - it's unwarranted. Just accept the fact that I have other opinions than you do, which I have not arrived rashly at, without resorting to "not a true musician" and "narrow-minded", etc.
You are so much more judgmental in this thread than I am. So give me a break and let's focus on some of the actual suggestions made here, rather than the proposed character or alleged motivations of those who make them.
I didn't question your musicianship, you did.
I'm not underestimating your level of personal development, you guys are, by calling my views narrow-minded.
I am not judging matters too quickly, but have thought long and hard on these issues and have arrived at conclusions other than yours.
Back off with your hostility and accusatory tone - it's unwarranted. Just accept the fact that I have other opinions than you do, which I have not arrived rashly at, without resorting to "not a true musician" and "narrow-minded", etc.
You are so much more judgmental in this thread than I am. So give me a break and let's focus on some of the actual suggestions made here, rather than the proposed character or alleged motivations of those who make them.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
a) genres could help (especially new members) find musicians that have similar asethetics, without in any way implying that this would lead to avoiding listening to other styles of music.
Agreed.
TheEnrightHouse wrote…
b) i love the idea of exchanging ideas about songs (my own and those of others), but am not fond of rating/grading a creative effort by another person. This seems to me fundamentally wrong to grade art like that, and cannot possibly help people create better art. If you want to let the artist you that you love their work, a "well done, i really loved that piece" goes a lot further than tagging on some percentage.
Again, we have a rating system because of the battle... One could say that it doesn't make sense to have art compete against eachother, but it can be fun to do. You don't want your songs to be rated? Fine, don't put them in the battle, and ignore any votes you do get, or ask people not to rate the song in the description since "untagging" the voting option is a feat not implemented atm.
Some people (like me) like to get their stuff rated. I do consider my music to be "art" but in the end, it is aimed at an audience and I can derive useful information from the avg. percentage I'm receiving, and not in the least, the number of votes. These votes come from people who have listened to the song and gave it some thought... or not, when they vote it down. In which case, I could opt to either ignore the dummy who just doesn't understand or think about why this may have happened and adjust my style to get my point across more effectively next time. True; I prefer elaborate critiques, but the vote system still works for me.
Again, we have a rating system because of the battle... One could say that it doesn't make sense to have art compete against eachother, but it can be fun to do. You don't want your songs to be rated? Fine, don't put them in the battle, and ignore any votes you do get, or ask people not to rate the song in the description since "untagging" the voting option is a feat not implemented atm.
Fair enough. I suppose that's more or less what I am doing now, but precisley for people like me, who feel uncomfortable with having their music graded, and who don't participate in battles, the "untagging" option could be handy. Also don't forget, this isn't just about me, but I assume a fair amount of artists - especially young and unexperienced - my be reluctant to join an otherwise excellent community precisely because having others grade their music might be a seriously discomforting thought. Just a suggestion, nothing more
.Some people (like me) like to get their stuff rated. I do consider my music to be "art" but in the end, it is aimed at an audience and I can derive useful information from the avg. percentage I'm receiving, and not in the least, the number of votes. These votes come from people who have listened to the song and gave it some thought... or not, when they vote it down. In which case, I could opt to either ignore the dummy who just doesn't understand or think about why this may have happened and adjust my style to get my point across more effectively next time. True; I prefer elaborate critiques, but the vote system still works for me.
Again, I totally see where you are coming from, but I don't think all musicians write music for the same reason, and hence "ratings" might not be as useful to all equally (in some cases, even discomforting). I personally don't take anything away from pure numbers, as I don't write music to please a majority, but write music which I know will not find many followers. I am Ok with that fact and am happy to know that there is a niche market out there who gets a great deal out of it. In a sense then, as a musician, lower ratings don't tell me anything new. Comments, however, do. When I get a 70% rating that teaches me nothing aside from "yeah, lot's of people won't react to this music, what's new", but comments, on the other hand, can do so much more. For one, comments give you an answer to a far more important question than "do people xyz like my music", namely "WHY do or do not people like this" and "what can be done to improve it?".
Now, I understand that many people actually find it valuable to learn how many people like their music and what overall response they are getting, as this can be very useful in figuring out all sorts of things, such as how marketable is one's music, what songs are people reacting to strongest (ie. making decisions for releasing singles, etc.). But, of course, many don't write music for the purpose of widespread commerical success - ie. myself. What's most valuable to me are specific criticisms, such as "hard to hear the vibraphone", or "too much reverb on vocal", or "lyrics come off too corny", etc. etc.
So all I am saying is that there is of course widespread use for ratings, just that this is not true for all of us (I am assuming I am not entirely alone here), and that some - again, myself included - are positively distracted by rating music with numbers, and, potentially, feel more reluctant because of it to engage in an otherwise exciting communal experience.
In conclusion then, I still think the choice of having one's music rated would actually bring more people into the bandamp community, without in any way taking away from or diminishing the rating system for those who learn from it. It's just a way to make more people happy, without lessening the experience for those happy with the way things are. It's nothing but a suggestion to include more people - not a suggestion that threatens to change the way things work for those who enjoy ratings.
Sorry, you do not have access to post...
Wanna post? Join Today!