Karaoke Forums

Ok, so you are saying that the 'comment box' are the comments section in SS? Other than that I understand what you are saying about being critiqued in these threads here in Singers Forum where you can have dialog and give / take. However if we ever have a large volume of comments / critiques and songs submitted for critique it may very easily overwhelm doing them in these threads. Also, sometimes I may not wish to have a long discourse and breakdown (multi paragraphs long) about a song. I might like to just get a brief paragraph similar to space available in SS where someone tells you truthfully whether they liked what you did, and problems they heard, and possibly suggestions for any improvements. It's also nice to get a lot of small comments and critiques on a song from multiple sources in order to have a rounded view of how a work was enjoyed versus just 1 or 2 sources. There are times when a long, detailed analysis from an experienced singer / musician is helpful though IMO.

_________________
The Truth Is Out There

I only HOPE things get to that point.  Currently that's not a founded concern however.  No need to complicate a process that quite unlikely will become inundated by that amount interest.  Assuming that happens, I'm sure appropriate tweaking will be discussed at such a time, and site tech can handle it however it deems most doable. Assuming actual critique desire ever escalates to such level of interest, Critiques can still be left in the Showcase, and dialogue can take place here, or perhaps in a session in the live chat area.. There are plenty of options, first lets get SOME interest in critiques going at both giving and receiving ends (assuming there is enough interest that can last any significant duration).



If this is what you wish for, this is exactly what you should state within your description. State within your heading the following (which is essentially what you wish to get out've the experience).

The Critique is for you. Your benefit solely, It's catered to YOU !  You have EVERY right to have 100% say in what your desires/wishes are as a singer, where you wish to go with this, etc.. Nobody wants to tell you anything you state you don't wish to hear. It's not about hitting you with some unwanted impinging comment delivered from an unexpected angle.  The more concise the singer is in stating their individual needs,  the easier it is for ALL involved.  The nebulous Critique delivered when the singer just asks the general, "Well what do you think in general" is what gets longer-winded when responded to, it leaves a lot to cover, and similarly takes the listener more time to listen perhaps several times.  The process is FOR YOUR benefit.. Nobody elses (unless somebody happens to also benefit from reading the critique) however the singer SHOULD state what they want from the listener.  The more you tell the listener, the more the listener can help you and stay concise.  The singer SHOULD in fact set up the song, and explain something about limitations, even critique themselves offering their own feedback... It's not a "Grading" process..  Last thing I'd ever do is grab for unicorns critiquing up/down left/right assuming the singer just wants to know if their pitch matching was better than last song.  Grabbing for unicorns isn't helpful anyway

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

The problem I have run into with the ranking thing, is that many rankers will insist that a '10' to them means 'it made me feel good' or 'i liked the song' or 'they tried really hard' or (cough) 'they gave ME a 10' (cough).

I even liked the idea of ranks there for a while, but after much thought, it occurred to me that when you're asking for a CRITIQUE, the 'numbers' only get in the way. I've even had people come in, on a C sub, and say "That was a great job!!!"... and give me a 4 or 5.  :roll: Granted, this was generally the result of what we called 'sniping' in those days, meaning I had recently critiqued THEM (or one of their buddies), and given them less than stellar feedback.

There are always going to be those on here, with egos the size of Texas, who SAY they want a critique, but all they want is the rush of high ranks. I don't know if the 'highest ranked songs' list still exists in SS, but at any given time if I were to go listen to these songs, half of them (back then) were... um... well way less than perfect. It was (and no doubt still is), more of a 'popularity' contest, than about the singing.

So recently, when I was reading through the discussion on critiquing, I was thinking about how many of the ego mongers would want to sub songs for critique if there were NO RANKS. hmmm... probably not many. Puuuuurfect!!! At least that way, if someone wanted to 'snipe' your submission, the worst they could do is give a crappy review. It wouldn't be equivalent, emotionally, to having someone come along and rank you a 3 when all the rest of your ranks are 9s & 10s, just to significantly lower your score.

Hey, we got them to do it once.

Where the heck is Phil these days anyway?

... been there done that...

'Admin' laid it out several times after the subbing categories were changed to allow for a 'critique' venue. No one paid attention. Well ok, FEW paid attention.

Another reason I would like to see ranks removed from critiques... when I critique a song currently, I usually feel pressured to rank the song. I often DO NOT rank it (or at least stopped doing so toward the end of my being here), but nevertheless, I think the 'rank' puts pressure on the person doing the critiquing to make a final determination as to how 'good' the song is, as opposed to simply giving honest feedback on the good and 'needs improvement' areas.

But this is exactly what I'd want on my subs... If I improve dramatically, I SHOULD eventually be able to attain an honest rank of "4".  See,  THIS is what's realistic..  To a few of us, a 4 is improvement, and it's honest !!  That's all that matters IMHO..  What good is a "10" rank if it's baited with "Now you owe me", or...

"Here's your 10, catch, Great, now I got that singer out've the way (and didn't even have to listen to what I'm sure is just another abomination of a song he posted), now I can hit 50 more people in the next 15 minutes before work and praise them too so I too can keep my ten average and my following"

A 9 and 10 is nothing to strive for when it becomes entitlement.

" Enter SS, Submit song, receive 9 or 10 on way out"..

If that's all it takes to make people happy, that's great for the site.  If people are happy the sites  happy.. and that's how it should be I suppose.. I know I don't wish to enter a singing contest, and fear falling out've a political arean hence being bombed with an 8..  How could I live with myself ?

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

You are correct. Actually, most of the major 'fluffies' (we learned not to say 'fluffers' a while back... ) aka the Just For Fluff crowd, are people who put a lot of money into the site and spend a lot of time on the site, submitting songs and rushing about, patting each other on the back.

I got myself into some MAJOR wars with some of those long ago... most of whom no longer post here. I am personally a big reason that some people left this site and formed another (which I know about and have an account on secretly, but I just lay low and snicker at them.. well I used to). It's not that I'm a big meanie, but THEY considered me to be because I was a 'bubble burster'. Oh I'm sure the madness is still archived around here somewhere.

Anyway, I agree that this site would see a different kind of persistent crowd if it allowed for a more serious critiquing venue. Those of us who really CARE about our ability and improving ourselves, only find fulfillment when we get REAL feedback about our submissions, and I think that would appeal to a large group of people.

There are lots of 'fluff' sites out there. Not many with the real opportunity to grow as a singer (without paying for professional evaluation).

lmao

I've been here longer than yoooo kappy

Seriously though, doesn't it *tinkle* you, when you give a thoughtful critique to a performance, and then are supposed to boil it all down to a number?? Meh. I can't help but think that the ranks mostly appeal to those who are NOT so terribly interested in IMPROVING their performances, but of competing with others (or even just themselves - and yeah, that makes sense to ME, but it still doesn't pan out when people aren't giving you honest ranks)

There are also sites that have an explanation of what Critique means, what it doesn't mean, what is going to happen when you ask for a critique, and what you better be able to expect if you wish to remain a part of the site.. but these are moderated sites..  Some are VERY honest.  As a result there's less people submitting with such frequency because people now work harder and submit BETTER efforts.  THey go to improve, and they DO !


ADDED IN:   These aren't specifically music sites however,  Prose, Writing, Poetry, etc.. There aren't many either like this.. Most singing sites fluff.

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

bwahahahah

Well... maybe not THESE days...  :dancin:

must've been after I left... but I can relate because there for a while.. *I* was the only one. =p

Not in the showcase, My time Critiquing in the showcase ended after seeing a few of the rip-roaring wars that ensued.  For me, and a few others, this isn't the first Critique thread attempt,  I recall VERY well what happened to a few of you that gave solid honest critiques that were requested (at least based on the category the person subbed in) and what happened was repulsive !  In the showcase I critiqued a few I was confident could handle it and for me it always went well..but I never critiqued just because a person subbed under "C" knowing that within itself meant absolutely nothing.  Critiquing in the showcase and getting away with it requires TREMENDOUS care to be taken, not to mention risk.. It's not worth it

Last thing I want to read in response to a well intended critique, before bed is,

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

Those aren't bad ideas, Bill. But a single thread for critiquing very quickly gets confusing and bogged down.

What I proposed before, was a 'critiquer's corner', a separate section where we coulds have separate threads for each song. It would be good to have a sticky suggesting people leave info such as you were suggesting.

Awww come on!! I'm sure you would be higher than a 4 or 5 even if I were being honest. Because to me, a '5' is 'average' and the 'average' person is pretty bad. I think the average decent Karaoke singer is up around 7, maybe 8 on a good day. People who (should) get paid to sing, around 9-10.

But this is why I also feel ranks are useless... they mean something different to everyone.

Yeah, tell me about it.

Yes, that is true, and one reason I originally wanted to do rank and so far still have because I'm back and forth on it and just haven't made up my mind. Initially I assumed there was no fluff and people gave you genuine opinions. I like the idea of being able to put up a song and seeing numerically if people like a song better than another I subbed, or seeing if it came out better (with a higher score) than a previous version. For me it's really not about competing with others unless the rank is showing how much I have improved over time as a singer. A fluff review is no better than a fluff rank either.

If the SS ranks were realistic compared to say the universe of singers and songs then perhaps I'd start as a 4 or 5 and over time pull myself up in which case getting an exceptional 8 or so would be gratifying.

I guess the problem I have of not having rank is the reverse of what you said the problem of having it is. Without it I just get a comment - which may be real but a critic could say great things about you and in your mind you may think they mean a 9 when in reality they may mean a 6.5 or a 7. Without rank, there really is no way to quantify the overall performance. Not sure why I am tied to numbers so much, but I will say my background is in programming, statistics, and database administration. Numerical representation is somewhat of a crutch I suppose. I guess I can live without it. Probably next time (my next 30 songs) I'll probably remove it. It seems like none of the better singers I listen to use it. I hear people on these threads against it. I've heard a lot against it, but what positives does it bring - particularly if it is used correctly?

Oh, and here's the kicker (I just remembered), if I'm not using rank, then how can I tell how much I have (or haven't) improved over time? I really sub a song because I want to know how well others like it; otherwise I'd just sing it and keep it here in my living room.

Personally I don't think the concept of rank is a problem, I think the problem is the fluff ranks similar to the fluff comments.

_________________
The Truth Is Out There

I may soon go with the full on critique concept in SS and even here. Perhaps I'll delete all my current songs first. Seems to me if we write in our SS profile we want solid, constructive info and feedback on our subs and no fluff it should help. We can then make reference notes to that in our individual submissions.

_________________
The Truth Is Out There

Sure, that sounds like a good idea.

_________________
The Truth Is Out There

This is why they need to be defined perhaps by each individual critic what they base their score on. Sounds like you have a pretty reasonable range, but on the top end you have to have room to distinguish between a lot of professional level (usually paid) singers.

_________________
The Truth Is Out There

Then you shouldn't.  You have that option.  Whatever works for you I suppose.  I don't have a problem with people that want to keep it light and friendly, to be honest I don't have a problem with people that fluff because they just CAN'T find it within them to be a different way BUT, I have a problem with such people who attack those that Critique those WANTING a critique apologising for, and feeling a need to discredit the person critiquing, because to them, the critique is cruel and wrong..  THIS is what bothers me.. Why can't...


and in this everchanging world in which we live in,  "live and let live"... OR  :hug:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:::::  breaks into song :::::

Fluff and Critique
live together in perfect harmony
side by each in singers showcase, why can't we ?


(OK,  I already said I'm not a composer, it worked at the time in my head tho)

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".