At 11/9/06 09:01 PM, WinTang wrote: TJA
CHRISTMAS MAGIK – 54.7

im surprised i got a review that good. Trance isnt my strong point AT ALL, since ive been doing drum and bass and trip-hop for so long. It was suppose represent christmas in dream sort of way the good feel you get from christmas but when it quite not there yet, thus why the track never built up. the ending was rubbish because i never finished in time/ finalised it unfortunately, due to collage work geting in the way. by the way did you notice that you cant hear a bass... i forgot to put it back in after editing it in audacity :P
thanks for spending the time to listen/review it.
i think ill go back to the music im good at :)

Congrats DavidOrr btw, I didn't mention that yet :)
I think my idea will remove some of the inconsistency, because it will make it easier for judges to have a general idea of what the overall quality of the submissions is. Plus, it will be an overall improvement in the accuracy of the ratings - in case of attemptedperfection for example, which seems to be a very controversial submission, it would be very beneficial to have him judged by people who appreciate an unconventional style to begin with, to eliminate both "sorry no X-mas dude, all zeroes!" and "whoa you must have an IQ of 600, all tens!"

To stealth-annihilator: in the MAC judging there is an extra category apart from the ones we're used to in the reviews: "Catchiness/appeal". I think that pretty much covers 'Emotional impact' or whatever impact the judge is looking for. It weighs 25% of the score total.

To anyone: let's try not to get anal about this, bottom line is that we have a well-deserved win for DavidOrr, I think most will agree on that. It's good to lay bare the weaknesses of the judging system, but as LJCoffee said, whining doesn't help, making suggestions might.

Yeah, I don't think anybody has any issues with the top spot, so it's not like the system is completely invalid; the best is typically going to be recognized as the best. Sure, the top 5 may be a bit iffy, myself included, but it's not like we're the ones getting the $250, or whatever it is... and it's not like we're necessarily getting more exposure either; I have seen neither an additional review nor a download since the results were announced. So really, it isn't that big of a deal; we all know the results are flawed, and now we're working on unflawing them a bit for future contests. no worries. turn those frowns upsidown! and remember: whether you're the pitcher or the catcher, always wear a glove.

Okay, I got the recording uploaded, and whipped off a flash front that'll stream it so you don't gotta wait for the 40mb file to download.

GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!

(penis)

this is about 96 mins long btw, so if you don't have time to listen to the whole show you'll prolly be best off downloading the mp3

Eventually I tweek out my player to have a pause button and shit

wow, apparently I'm practically guaranteed to be used in a flash!
:D
awesome.

but you attempted perfection, and just didn't get there ;).

At 11/10/06 01:12 PM, MaestroRage wrote: but you attempted perfection, and just didn't get there ;).

XD
jeez... my name sounds so pompus when I hear someone else say it

Excellent work David :D

And Rage, I'm sorry for misinterpreting your post...I was very tired and in a very bad mood last night, and I think that had a lot to do with my interpretation. Sorry to go after you like that.

At 11/10/06 12:42 PM, PsychoGoldfish wrote: Okay, I got the recording uploaded, and whipped off a flash front that'll stream it so you don't gotta wait for the 40mb file to download.

GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!

(penis)

Awsome PG, thanx alot for that!!!

This´ll be fun... ^^

(gender-word)

At 11/10/06 12:42 PM, PsychoGoldfish wrote: Okay, I got the recording uploaded, and whipped off a flash front that'll stream it so you don't gotta wait for the 40mb file to download.

GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!

(penis)

i love you

Thanks PsychoGoldfish I was waiting for this to be up. It won't let me download it though.

At 11/10/06 12:42 PM, PsychoGoldfish wrote: Okay, I got the recording uploaded, and whipped off a flash front that'll stream it so you don't gotta wait for the 40mb file to download.

GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!

(penis)

Haha, you should have recorded the after-show

Much funnier then the real show XD

At 11/10/06 06:30 AM, Rucklo wrote: Adjusted Overall - 24.8

The score you gave me in no way matches with the review :(

At 11/10/06 03:39 PM, BLACKNOISE wrote:

At 11/10/06 06:30 AM, Rucklo wrote: Adjusted Overall - 24.8

The score you gave me in no way matches with the review :(

Actually it does - you got 24.8

I would like to remind everyone that although the score goes from 0 - 100 the average score is NOT 50... An AVERAGE score actually works out to be 25. it is NOT a linear scoring system.

the first four attributes are averaged and then ast two are averaged - then the two averages are multiplied...

If you got all 5's it would work like this:

5+5+5+5 = 20 / 4 = 5
5+5 = 10 / 2 = 5
5*5 = 25

It was done this way so that the scores for "Overall" and "Catchiness/Appeal" are weighted more heavily than the rest - the higher up the scale you go, the more of a variation there should be.

This was so that we could avoid the problem of have 7 people tied for second place and 12 more tied for third...etc..etc...

You got an average review from Rucklo "...cute, the choise of instruments are a hit and miss though... ...but the beat... nah...Not so many things happen, it´s allmost a littel boring..."

based on that, his score was actually right where it should have been.

Once again - let's say that you got all 10's for your attributes:
10+10+10+10 = 40/4 = 10

but you get an "Overall" score of 9.5 and a "Catchiness/Appeal" rating of 7
9.5+7 = 16.5/2 = 8.25

then the two are multiplied.... 10*8.25 = an adjusted score of ..... 82.5

So you see, scores in the 60's and 70's really AREN'T bad at all... ANYTHING above a 25 is BETTER than average...

Besides - your other three scores were 48.5, 61.6 and 83.5 - even if Rucklo gave you a perfect 100, you still would not have taken first place.

I'm sorry if some of you didn't understand how the scores were computed.

Maybe next time we'll try doing it on a curve instead... Or maybe set it up like multiple single elimination tourneys... maybe we'll throw some fucking darts... Hell, I really don't know yet... and I'm waiting to hear everyones suggestions first.

Please either PM me or
email me with your ideas for a completely foolproof judging system that nobody can dispute in any way shape or form...

At 11/10/06 03:28 PM, SineRider wrote:
Haha, you should have recorded the after-show

Much funnier then the real show XD

seconded. XD

Just a small question:

Am I not on this list because my score was too low? Or did somebody think I was a non-contestant?

At 11/10/06 05:56 PM, VegetarianMeat wrote: Just a small question:
Am I not on this list because my score was too low? Or did somebody think I was a non-contestant?

Apparently, you were never listed as a contestant -

On the final list (page 8 of this topic) you are entered as a non-contestant under Ambient.

I'm sorry that you didn't get to compete but the final list was posted and made available for everyone to see so, although it sucks, you did have the opportunity to correct the error before judging began.

Your entry should still be included as part of the Christmas collection though.

oh, that reminds me:
submission for the Christmas collection
here
(yeah, I made it a year ago, so it kinda sucks, but... meh...)

At 11/10/06 04:29 PM, LJCoffee wrote: Stuffz about teh judigng

Good, I wasn't sure how top-secret the system was supposed to be (hosted at bigfatsecret.com, you know, I don't like to be the guy who doesn't like to take a hint), so I was hesitant to discuss it.

Something seems odd about weighing in the Overall score,

EXCESSIVE COMMA ALERT

because if the categories are worth their salt, which I think all of them, save for Effort/Skill maybe, but that's another story, are, then the Overall score will already have been weighted according to the other five scores, not by calculation, but by intuitively averaging them.
That means you basically give a (somewhat) lower score than you mean.

It might be a good idea to rearrange the remaining categories somewhat into 6, and have the judge pick two of them that he wants to weigh more heavily (at 25% instead of 12.5) throughout. I think this may lead to interesting results, it provides the judges with more individuality and this will hopefully spur them on to be very thorough in their listening, so the overall rating scales of the judges will be more balanced - and the fluctuations between scores for the same submission would be because judge A loved the diversity despite the MIDI sounds and judge B hated the MIDI sounds despite the diversity! Completely plausible!

Oh yeah about the Effort thing, I've always hated that in the NG review system, because the only way to measure that adequately is to either listen to at least 8 other tracks by the artist or possess the ability to analyze exactly how difficult it has been to make the tune. Skill is detected way more accurately, so I say change it to Skill only.

While on the subject, I want to spill my guts about when people give low Originality ratings because a song is a cover. THAT HAS SHIT TO DO WITH ORIGINALITY. A song is either a cover or it is an original, a yes or no situation that does not call for a 0 to 10 rating scale.
An original cover is a total re-interpretation of an existing song to the point where it has become authentic. A good example is attemptedperfection's submission (which I've just reviewed btw, check it out, it's full of crap), a cover of Greensleeves.

Giving a low Originality score to people who assigned Edirol Orchestral sounds to Zelda MIDI's, however, is still perfectly legitimate.

At 11/10/06 06:53 PM, LJCoffee wrote: Apparently, you were never listed as a contestant -

Dang...

On the final list (page 8 of this topic) you are entered as a non-contestant under Ambient.

Just noticed :(

I'm sorry that you didn't get to compete but the final list was posted and made available for everyone to see so, although it sucks, you did have the opportunity to correct the error before judging began.

My bad. I should have checked around more before assuming I was on the list. At least I'm still in the Christmas Collection :D

At 11/9/06 06:18 PM, BLACKNOISE wrote: BlackNoise - The First Sled Ride 48.5 62 83.5 24.8 TOTAL 54.6

...what judge gave me a 24.8? Jeez, did they try to be dicks this time around?

Yeah, I know I at least tried :D

But I didn't give you the 24.8. HOWEVER, I gave out teh 2.3 on the board you saw there :D

At 11/10/06 08:26 PM, WinTang wrote:

...A good example is attemptedperfection's submission (which I've just reviewed btw, check it out, it's full of crap), a cover of Greensleeves.

thanks Tang! :D
I was wondering when you'd get around to looking at one of my new ones :P

Well, here's my take...

MaestroRage IS right. I'll say that I tended to be personally biased to a point. However, there were problems on both sides of the spectrum.

Here's some nice things for helping the situation...

-Look, I understand that you said "look for a Christmas"-type theme, sound, whatever. Now, as silly as it may sound, WHAT KIND OF CHRISTMAS FREAKIN' SOUND?!?!?!?!?!
-Is it not possible that maybe the judges had a different idea of what christmas would sound like? Okay, so DavidOrr's was the easiest to pick that out on, but what about the others? I seriously thought that RyeGuyHead's (I think that's the name) piece sounded VERY MUCH like christmas. Some the songs that were meant to be Christmas-like tended to have elements that didn't make me think that the song in question was really original, or from a solid emotional standpoint of the song. Why not some guidelines on what Christmas elements you would have wanted? Or for another themed contest, what do we do then? What are you basic guidelines for a Christmas song? Opinions CAN be different on that.
-The set of judges wasn't really that great. I mean, you've got a happy go lucky guy in one place, and then your worst nightmare somewhere else. Then again, aren't you going to have that to a certain extent? Yes, but this extent? It was HORRIBLE!!! We can't keep picking up any darn judge. Who exemplifies good review habits? Who really helps the person to understand how to get that better, richer quality of a sound. And who hurts that? Who DOESN'T leave good reviews. Who DOESN'T know how to extend their knowledge to help a contestant grow in their musical production? We need analyzation of people who want to judge, so that mature, unbiased people are being used for our contests.

-These are some of my ideas. I'm sorry if my ideas upset, but please, don't take it personally, but do take it seriously.

-SuperDrummer146-

-Where do we go from here?

At 11/10/06 11:22 PM, SuperDrummer146 wrote:
-Where do we go from here?

omg pillar song lolz

I used to listen to them

SuperDrummer brings up an excellent point.

As I had stated previously one way to gaurantee some relativey fair votes is to assign judges that are good at the judging department.

Again i'm going to make an observation, i'm not out to attack anybody

I love you Trisk ;)

I noticed that most if not all of the harsh judgers were people who were either well established here or were rather famaliar with the whole audio creation process, whilst most of the lenient judgers were artists who were either not as established, or in short, afraid to make enemies.

I may very well be wrong, I tend to think in a very negative light first, and then start throwing positive things to see if I can dig myself out of that negative viewpoint, however in this case this is what I am seeing.

SO

A proposed solution.

Get a rather stable base of panel judges. Of course we won't be able to really see who knows what they're doing or if they're reliable until a few more MAC's have gone by, but really we NEED to implement this eventually. It is no secret that regulars come and go, we have lost many colorful figures with time, and with new losses comes new blood, so of course there will never be a fully stable panel of judges, but a panel must be created.

I'm not going to post any more on this, as most of the ideas I am tossing around are too unstable at the moment, tossing them out here now may make them look inferior and play no role, which will damage it's credibility, so i'll post it when it's ready, or pm LJ or Rucklo with them.

Don't make the panel selection consensus.

Enough all of you, this overall was a good contest Enough fighting over the lil differences and whatever else. I am overall pleased with this it is a good show case of talent and it shows what the audio portal is capable of.

At 11/11/06 12:33 AM, Erkie wrote: Don't make the panel selection consensus.

They´ve always been random.

At 11/11/06 12:41 AM, Syntrus wrote: Enough all of you, this overall was a good contest Enough fighting over the lil differences and whatever else. I am overall pleased with this it is a good show case of talent and it shows what the audio portal is capable of.

Syntrus we debate now so we don't have to debate later, and what if the prizes gets bigger? What if the gap between harsh and lenient grows larger? There will be MUCH more trouble then this if something like that should happen, people will want heads, bonds will be broken, regulars may start to dissaprove of each other, i'm already quite sure a few of you guys think me as some kind of whining whore, but i'm not going to back down until the problem is either solved, or i'm shot in the face (which is probably looking like the way to go huh?)

You may have been happy, there were many who weren't.