hornet.scene.org

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ hornet.scene.org / hornet.scene.org FTP 11-25-2012.zip / hornet.scene.org FTP 11-25-2012 / music / contests / mc5 / files / mc5-news.002 < prev next >

Wrap

Text File | 2012-06-16 | 26KB | 557 lines

_______ _________ ____ ____ \ \ \_ ___ \ \ \ / / / \ / \/ \ \/ \ | / / | \ \____ \ / \____|____/\________/ \___/ Entry Applications : 288 Music Contest 5 Update 2 - 09 Jul 1997 Voter Applications : 154 >------------------------------------------------------------------ Contents -- Introduction Files Schedule Articles Judging Guidelines ............................ Kleitus Rating Scale .................................. Kleitus Giving Proper Song Comments ................... Kleitus Closing >-------------------------------------------------------------- Introduction -- Hi all. This week, Kleitus did all the work, while Snowman and I shared iced tea with the beautiful ladies on the beaches of San Diego. :) Ok, I'm a massive liar, but I had to get your attention. This issue has important stuff! Kleitus was kind enough to take on the chore of writing guidelines for the Music Contest 5 judging procedure. Be sure to read all of the articles completely if you are judging. Finally, thank you to all who have decided to take on the task of being an MC5 judge. Your contributions help fuel this contest. Do the best job you can to be fair and honest. Anyone who has a comment regarding the contest rules can email us to make suggestions for next year's rules. The entry deadline is less than a week away! Don't miss it! GD / Hornet - gd@hornet.org >--------------------------------------------------------------------- Files -- Description Location URL ------------- -------- ------------------------------------------------------ MC5 Web Page USA http://www.hornet.org/music/contests/mc5 MC5 Archive USA ftp://ftp.hornet.org/pub/demos/music/contests/mc5 administrator: r3cgm@hornet.org -- /music/contests/mc5 -----------------------------------------------------> /files/mc5rules.zip Music Contest 5 rules, entry registration form, entry/voting checklist /files/mc5-news.001 Music Contest 5 Updates Newsletter issue 1 >------------------------------------------------------------------ Schedule -- All times are given in GMT (Greenwich Mean Time). Date Time Event --------- --------- ------------------------------------------------------- 31 May 97 00:00 GMT Contest starts * <-- YOU ARE HERE 14 Jul 97 00:00 GMT Entry application deadline 15 Jul 97 00:00 GMT Entry deadline 18 Jul 97 00:00 GMT Voting round 1 begins 28 Jul 97 00:00 GMT Voting round 1 ends 01 Aug 97 00:00 GMT Voting round 2 begins 11 Aug 97 00:00 GMT Voting round 2 ends 17 Aug 97 00:00 GMT Contest ends, results released, organizers go home >------------------------------------------------------------------ Articles -- :: "Judging Guidelines" :: Kleitus / Inferno - katzms@rpi.edu _____Introduction In this article, I'll give you the information you need to be a good MC5 judge. All judges need to take their job seriously, and it's important for all judges to read this guide. Since MC5 will most likely be the largest music competition in the history of the scene, proper judging is more important than ever. Just as a composer does his or her best to complete a worthy song for the competition, a judge should rate entries with a similar dedication to quality. It's not fair for a judge to blow off their responsibility. In other words, don't sign up to judge MC5 unless you're willing to put some time into doing a serious job of rating and reviewing. To truly understand MC5 judging, and to destroy any misconceptions you may have about the procedure, please read this article in its entirety. _____The Judging Process Round 1 - Judges will be assigned a group of songs. There will be only one rating category: overall. Songs will be rated on a 100-point scale. Judges will also give song comments. Round 2 - The top 10 songs in rookie, the top 15 in intermediate, and the top 20 in veteran will advance. All judges will rank songs in five categories: samples, form, technical, originality, and overall. Core judges and public judges will vote, with core judges being weighted triple. _____The Rating Categories While everyone probably has a general idea of what each of the categories represents, I'll provide an in-depth description. Just as in MC3 and MC4, the categories will be: samples, form, technical, originality, and overall. The overall category counts triple in relation to the other four categories. _____Samples This category deals with the quality of the entry's sample set. If properly rated, this category should reflect: - The quality of the individual samples themselves. Are they clear, and of the right frequency? How much do they sound like the actual instruments they represent? Does that low-quality guitar sample sound too much like a muffled sitar? In the case of synth samples, are they unique and of high quality? - Does the sample set as a whole blend well together, or do the instruments clash? - The choice of samples. Do they seem to belong in this piece? Does that overdriven guitar seem out of place in that classical minuet? Does that bassdrum not seem to work as the melody in a demo-style piece? As weird as a sample choice might be, if the composer makes it work within the style of his or her song, that has to be respected. You might not have expected a shakuhachi in that fusion ditty, but if the author can fit it in nicely, well, more power to them. ;> - Two important issues: sample ripping and extended samples (i.e. drumloops, guitar riffs, etc.). Don't go overboard penalizing for ripped samples. A good judge will often spot an obvious sample rip (Purple Motion, Necros, Lizardking, etc. have distinctive samples). If the sample has been overused, feel free to reflect that negatively, but you should penalize little, if any, if a sample is used in a fashion unlike the original composer's. As far as extended samples go, if a sample set is overly reliant on loops, the entry should be marked down in this category. However, an extended sample is being used in a situation where the composer could have achieved the same effect with a bit of tracking effort, that should be marked down in "Technical", not here. _____Form There are some important distinctions to make when judging a song's form. Keep in mind that form reflects how well a song flows. This category places more emphasis on musical structure, as opposed to tracking technique. - Does the song contain enough variety within its own style? Does it keep you interested or do you feel tempted to fast-forward? (As a judge, you owe it to the composer not to skip patterns, as tempted as you may be in certain situations. The four minute limit has been added this year to encourage judges to listen to the whole song.) - Are the transitions between introduction, verses, and ending sections smooth or abrupt? Does the song maintain its mood without switching randomly through various different styles? - Are there solid ideas (melodies, harmonies, basslines, rhythms, or an intentional lack thereof) presented in the piece? Is the chord progression solid or is it generic and overused? Does the song work as a musical whole? While keeping this in mind, try to judge form as it relates to a song's style. An ambient piece may rely on a bit of repetition to achieve its effect. If the composer makes it work, don't penalize. _____Technical This is the category where you get to evaluate a musician's tracking skill. How well do they use effects? Do they know the capabilities and limits of the tracking software? This category should encompass all of the details relating to creating a musical piece in a digitally tracked format. - The main focus should be on the use of effects. Are they used well? It's not a matter of how many effects are used, but does the composer manage to use effects to achieve their musical goals. Pay attention to whether a composer uses an effect in an original way. Have you ever seen arpeggio used to add spice to a lead? Have you seen tremor used in that particular way before? If that flute melody could have sounded better with some porta and echo, mark down on technique. The composer should show a command of effects needed to give their music that professional sound. - Does the composer make use of stereo panning features? Are panning envelopes used to make those chords sound smoother? Does the panning of that lead off-center make it stand out better? Mark down if the panning is straight mono (and makes the song sound jumbled) or if the panning is wild and distracting, ruining the mixing. You may wish to use headphones to get a better feel for the panning used. - Overall song layout and use of channels. Is the piece tracked efficiently or are channels wasted in unnecessary ways? If the song is an IT, does it use NNA's in excess (50+ virtual channels on a simple broken piano chord) or tastefully (using an extra virtual channel to give a fuller sound, not cutting off notes so quickly). If the song is an XM, has the composer maxed out at 32 channels when he/she could have easily compressed it into 16 without losing sound quality? - Be sure not to penalize an entry for not using effects that its tracked format does not support. As a judge, you should be aware of the capabilities and limitations of the IT, S3M, XM, and MOD formats. This is the category where you make judgements concerning a composer's tracking technique. Give high marks to pieces with good mixing and a professional sound achieved by use of effects. _____Originality This category is fairly straightforward. Judge a song on how original its style is and also how unique it is within its own genre. - Is the song's style original? Have songs like this been tracked many times before or has the composer achieved something unique? I'm sure you've heard plenty of techno-rave tunes, but maybe you've never heard a tribal-waltz in 3/4 time before. ;> - Also important and often overlooked, is the song unique within its own genre? The bottom line: does it sound like a blatant rip of somebody's well-known style? However, if the composer creates something you've never quite heard the likes of before, don't penalize too harshly simply because it isn't a typical style like demo-music, funk, techno, etc. - Feel free to give miscellaneous 'style points' for certain unique approaches to a tracked piece; such as good vocals, scatting, original use of sound effects, or anything that strikes you as fresh and full of life. This is an important category. Be sure to give composers due credit for presenting a fresh perspective, as long they manage to present it as an appealing piece. Perhaps you've never quite heard a dissonant accordion grindcore-ballad before, but don't rush to give it that 99/100 score in originality. _____Overall Overall is the most important category because it's the only category rated in round 1, and in round 2 it counts triple the weight of the other four categories. The overall score should not merely be an average of the four sub-categories (although it could be), but rather it should be a general score of what the piece encompasses. Use your common sense in this. Don't give an overall rating of 90 along with sub-ratings in the 60's. _____Conclusion When rating, it's very important to not rate the song in comparison to the other songs you are judging. Don't give an 85 to a tune just because it's the best of the mediocre bunch you were assigned. Use the rating scale (elsewhere in this newsletter) to aid you in your judging odyssey. ;> =-----------------------------------------------------------------------------= :: "Rating Scale" :: Kleitus / Inferno - katzms@rpi.edu _____Introduction You may know that all songs will be rated on a 100-point scale, but you may be unclear about what score to give. Sure, 60-65 is barely passing in grade school, but in Music Contest, that's an above average ranking. ;> _____The Scale I'll describe these ratings as they would relate to the overall category; by far the most important. In the second round, simply parallel these ratings to the other categories, i.e. if you hear an amazing musical piece with mediocre samples, it might be 85 - Form, 50 - Samples. Rating Description 100 Perfection. This is the ultimate rating. Don't give it out. ;> examples: After being in the scene for a good five years, and listening to more than 3000 songs between collecting and reviewing, I haven't found any yet. 95-99 Nearly flawless. Unlike perfection, this rating can be given, although no song in Music Contest has managed it yet. A song of this quality is so rare that it won't necessarily be found in a music competition of this magnitude. examples: These are the jewels of the music scene; the best tunes of all time. I could probably only think of 5 or so, and that doesn't include any previous Music Contest songs. 85-94 Excellent to superb. In MC3 and MC4, this is the range in which the veteran winner placed. Give this rating with caution and a critical eye, as suggests a song of a peerless quality in tracked music. examples: In MC4, only Pools of Poison (WAVE) and Tangerine Fascination (Necros) were in this range. 75-84 Very good to excellent. This songs should have a clear quality of tracked professionalism. There should be no serious flaws. All components; samples, technique, etc., will be solid if not better. This is where you'll probably find the very best intermediate entries and some of the better veteran contenders. examples: Most of the higher placed MC4 veterans, including Universe Electric (Siren - 82), Disfuctional Tendencies (Yannis - 79), Zeus & Genevieve (Zapper - 77). Also, in rookie, Southern Aurora (Cosmic Eclipse - 77). Remember, in an accurately judged contest, the rookie ratings should correspond directly to the veterans. 65-74 Good to very good. This type of song contains many positive aspects, and few glaring faults. Not totally professional, but a nice effort. This is where you'll probably find the very best rookie entries and the borderline veteran entries. examples: Breath of Time (Chris Jarvis - 74), Brittlestitch (Smeg - 71, the last song that made the cut) in veteran. In rookie, Jaunt (Wolfsong - 74), and Flash Counter (Kleitus (me ;>) - 69), and Hatchet at Five (Rhythm Greene - 69). 55-64 Fair to good. This is an above average song which still has enough positive points to make it enjoyable or at least tolerable. Give this rating to songs which are better than the norm, but don't really stand out. examples: No veterans made the cut with a rating this low. Some of the rookies included Vengeance (Vastator - 63), and Dedicated (Darius - 56, the lowest rated tune to make the cut). 45-54 Pure mediocrity. There are some good points in the song; some bad points. Eventually it all just cancels out. examples: No songs made the cut in either division with this rating. 30-44 Poor. The song may be decent in one aspect, but everything else brings it down. Give this rating to all decidedly below average songs that show only occasional glimpses of quality. examples: I don't remember any, and neither should you. ;> 15-29 This is pure crap. Terribly tracked, absence of any decent musical ideas. Samples are most likely bad. Give this rating if the song has no redeeming qualities. examples: Ugh. I think these songs have been repressed deep in my subconscious. :P 01-14 Cacophony so terrible to listen to that it almost hurts. Give this rating if the song causes physical pain. examples: Although these scores weren't released, I'd wager a guess that GTE (DreamThief - rookie) and Sex on the Brain (McScooter - "veteran" ;>) finished about here. 00 Although one could say that there are no limits to music, some people challenge these limits sometimes. Don't give this rating out unless you are rating a song of total silence. ;> examples: Fortunately, none. You wouldn't hear a song like this and live to tell the tale. ;> _____Conclusion Use this rating guide to help you judge songs in MC5. =-----------------------------------------------------------------------------= :: "Giving Proper Song Comments" :: Kleitus / Inferno Productions - katzms@rpi.edu _____Introduction In my past Music Contest judging experiences (I was a public judge in MC3 and a core judge in MC4), I made sure that I gave detailed criticism in my song comments. After all, isn't this what entrants deserve and expect from the judges? Unfortunately, it didn't seem that all voters shared my dedication. A number of ambiguous or plain meaningless comments were given last year. In Music Contest 4, the majority of songs from both veteran and rookie did not make the cut. What do these composers have to show for their work, after not making round 2? They only have the judges' comments as a "rating" of their composition. It was a shame that many comments were merely one sentence, and did little if anything to inform the composer of their musical or technical strengths or weaknesses. Song commenting remains an integral part of the judging process. The original purpose of Music Contest was to allow experienced and novice composers to compete without having to attend an actual party, and to allow composers to get feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of their tunes. Inadequate comments defeat this purpose. In addition to giving accurate ratings, judges must justify their scores with substantial and relevant comments. This article will consist of two sections: one which details the elements of a quality comment, and the other providing examples of what I consider to be good and bad comments from MC4 judges. _____The Art of Commenting There are many ways to effectively voice your opinions on a song but, as some MC4 judges proved, just as many ineffective ways. In fact, I'll begin with a comment on my very own MC4 tune. "A cool tune." Hopefully, all of you can understand what's wrong with this comment. If not, maybe you should reconsider your decision to judge. ;> Now, I like positive feedback as do other composers, but I was hoping for a bit more detail. Now I'll give some examples of how not to comment. All of these were taken from the MC4 comment file, and all of them are inadequate in some way. If any of these happen to be yours, use it as a learning experience. ;> _____One-liners One of the worst offenses you can commit while commenting is writing something like this: "Nice style.", "A good song.", "Exotic.", "Unpleasant." The "cool tune" comment above also fits in this category. It's impossible to adequately critique a tune using 1-3 words. ;> This leads to the first rule of commenting: - Make sure your comments are of sufficient length to accurately describe a song. _____Descriptions Another mistake often made is to simply describe a song's style or compare it to another song which the composer may or may not have heard. "Sounds pretty close to a 'big band' style." "Very reminiscent of Big Jim's MC3 entry." "This is one cool cat. :)" "Frightening beginning." The problem is that it doesn't give any critique on the musical or tracked aspect of the song. Unless the composer is senile, or just daft, the composer probably already knows what kind of tune they tracked. What they don't know is what the judge thought of the song, musically and technically, which is why they entered their song. Rule #2: - Critique, don't describe. _____Single-minded Comments See if you can tell what's wrong with all of these comments: "The samples are very muddy." "Rain and thunder. Not original." "Nice melodies." "The long samples were unnecessary." "I don't think this song brings any originality to this style of music." These four comments were typical of many other poor comments in MC4. Only commenting on one aspect of a song was a mistake made by many judges. These comments give a critique, but it's very limited. The composer would have no idea what the judge thought about all other aspects of the song. So, in short: - Fully review the song as a whole, rather than just one part. _____Ambiguity Here are a few comments which are rather unclear: "Overwhelming." "Just a bunch of samples." "A bit mid-ranged in frequency." "Decent track. Needs more of something." None of these comments address anything important about the song. They use descriptive words which give no indication of whether the entry was good, bad, or indifferent. If a song is lacking something, try to tell the composer what exactly it is. In summary: - Make sure your comments are clear, concise, and relevant. _____Quick Summary Here's a review of the four guidelines of commenting: 1. Make sure your comments are of sufficient length. 2. Critique, don't describe. 3. Fully review the song as a whole, rather than just one part. 4. Make sure your comments are clear, concise, and relevant. _____One Decent Comment Now that you have an idea of the elements that make up a quality comment, let's look at a solid judging comment: This is a fairly decent entry overall. The piano chords are somewhat catchy. What drags this tune down, however, is the repetition. The chord progression remains the same throughout the whole piece, and it gets boring quickly. Technical tracking skill is average, not exceptional. The leads are passable, better in some parts than others. The bells and the flute lead got annoying very quickly. Not only was the actual melody simplistic and sort of boring, but it was repeated too much. The transitions were decent, though an occasional change in the chord progression would have been nice. Still, the song managed to flow fairly well, despite a bit of monotony. Overuse of voice samples, as they really did little for the song except clutter it up. You have some potential, just be sure to work a bit more on keeping the listener's interest with some more variety. Remember, your comments don't need to be an essay like this one, though there's nothing wrong with that. ;> However, note how this judge takes the time to mention various details about the song. Tracking technique, chord progressions, transitions, samples, etc. are all mentioned, along with references to specific parts of the song. This comment not only gives the composer a good idea of how the judge rated his song, but also gives him some advice as to how to improve his music in the future. That's what commenting is all about. ;> _____Conclusion This concludes the MC5 song comments article. If you didn't have a chance to read the other judging guideline articles, you should check them out. Good luck in rating and commenting, and enjoy Music Contest! >------------------------------------------------------------------- Closing -- _____Contact Information Send general questions and comments to GD (Brett Neely), gd@hornet.org Questions and comments regarding the webpages, online registration, or entry verification should be sent to Snowman (Christopher G. Mann), r3cgm@hornet.org The MC5 homepage is at http://www.hornet.org/music/contests/mc5 _____How to Subscribe to "MC5 Updates" Mail to : listserver@unseen.aztec.co.za Body : subscribe mc5-updates first_name last_name Be sure to substitute your real name for first_name last_name. The listserver will send the MC5 Newsletter to your e-mail's return address. EOMC5UPD