Good to see lots of debate on my commentary; it's nice to read. Just to clarify a few things that have come up:
Sheet music wouldn't benefit me in terms of evaluating any piece. I've been a critic for 4 years, but I'm not a musician and don't read music.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelloSinfonian
I feel very disoriented right now.
Larry's Comments: Weak sequencing, and some cheesy percussion. Some good ideas beneath the surface, but a rather ugly-sounding result due to some iffy sound choices.
I certainly welcome even the harshest of criticisms, but only if I'm criticized on my work and not the program I use. Larry seems to think that I was submitting for OC Remix.
Sequencing? I wrote an arrangement for band using Finale, putting no effort whatsoever into sound quality, as I consider arranging to be re-voicing an existing piece for a different ensemble, throwing in personal touches as one sees fit. I will gladly admit that my percussion is weak, and it's something that I'm working on. I wholeheartedly agree with that part, and I also appreciate that he thinks I have good ideas. As for an ugly-sounding result due to iffy choices, I assume that that also refers to the standard MIDI produced by Finale? If my voice-leading or my scoring is terrible, I'd love to know that. Tell me anything about my harmonic structure, etc. It's an arrangement for band, and Finale is a tool that I use to get a rough idea of how it would sound live. I thought the emphasis was on the arranging, which is why I feel a bit confused that I'm being criticized on my lack of sound program knowledge.
You do a hell of a lot of good at OC Remix, Larry, and I appreciate the fact that you agreed to judge the competition here. I simply thought that I was expected to produce my best writing, as opposed to the best sound. I was wrong.
|
Nah, there's no reason to judge anything like an OC ReMix submission. But your track, all other things the same, with better sounds/textures and articulations would land a stronger score than the Finale piece.
One of the things that hurt the piece was how the major dynamic changes in the piece primarily came from instruments entering and exiting, not really from individual parts altering their intensity as they played. Not that you didn't do any of the latter, but it wasn't effectively done. To me though, performance dynamics are part of the technical side and affect the strength of the part-writing. For this competition, I didn't consider those production techniques, but rather compositional techniques. The closest analogy I can make is preparing notation without directions for dynamics.
Also, no offense, but if the default sounds in Finale don't create serviceable orchestral textures for this rough draft, that does affect the musicality of the piece. For all I know, those were purposeful sound choices. To be fair to all the contestants, I can't just assume that one person was stuck with sounds they didn't want. Again, for this competition, I didn't consider those aspects as production techniques, but rather compositional choices. That's just rationalizing where I came from on those issues.
While I liked the supporting instrumentation evolving, which showed you weren't slouching, the core of the arrangement felt drawn out and melodically repetitive as well. That's more why the score was lower, not because of the production issues. My comments should have explicitly mentioned that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelloSinfonian
I do have a problem with Larry's notion that poor production tends to go hand-in-hand with poor writing. None of the classical composers had to deal with electronic production, and look at what they produced. I still don't believe that electronics are necessary for the production of music today.
|
I'm certainly not saying classical composers need electronic production techniques. I'm only saying that there's a correlation in the amateur music community with poor writing and poor production. Many people who can't get the sound quality clicking (good part balance, panning, EQing, no clipping, etc.) also struggle with figuring out what combination of sounds make for pleasing, full textures, writing strong harmonies, writing sophisticated percussion, or creating effective dynamics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegendaryCloud89
I see what you mean Siven, but with Larry's comment on my arrangement he said that I put some notes flat out wrong, and then said that lowered my musicality score. I know I didn't put any notation wrong. But I see where he might have gotten it from. In my arrangement of J-E-N-O-V-A and Company (where I had Jenova as the base and included themes of other characters), Vincent's Theme has a strange melody. But Jenova and Vincent's theme are both in F Major so it was easy to put in that melody for Vincent. So I don't know where he gets off saying that I was wrong.
|
Could depend on my program playing the MIDI back in a strange way, but the way J-E-N-O-V-A changed and then harmonized with that other melody 1:31-1:35 was really odd. Same with the finish from 2:08-2:14, where the harmonies sounded off again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahamut416
My entry into the competition was strangely unbashed. I mean, compared to some of the bashing that Larry /did/ do(I know he said up front he was crude, but DAMN some of that was harsh), I got off light. Chill out Larry, no need to get sarcastic with the reviews!
|
I'm very chilled. :-) I'm not there to bash songs or be sarcastic, and there's nothing "strange" about a track not getting negative comments. But if my reaction is "oof", there's no sense in being disingenuous by downplaying it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Horror(O.G)
I could use a drink....sorry
|
I wonder what piece he did. :-D
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex_lamonte
I personally think that the "personal tilt" should be a little more re-defined. Entering the competition, I had no idea that a recorded arrangement could score any higher than a MIDI. I am very sorry to those who feel that their arrangement could have scored higher due to their sound quality, because every arrangement I listened to was a complete work of art, no matter the format. I wish the personal tilt wouldn't have lowered the arrangements' overall ratings, but only raised them.
|
I didn't treat the MIDI format as automatically inferior to MP3. I can only speak for myself, but there's no reason to lower personal tilt because of the format, and we were specifically instructed not to score that way.
With that said, MIDI is a pretty powerful format that I felt most of the submissions didn't make the most of. For a good example of something that works very well within the format,
b1itz Lunar's Super Mario Kart arrangement "Pentagon Path". Good articulations so that, even though the sounds themselves aren't realistic, the "performance" of those sounds is. The track also had good panning, awesome sweeping noises and effects, creative drum writing, and good textures that filled up the space well. If a MIDI like that would have been in this contest, it could have easily made top 5, if not win the whole thing. MIDI is capable of
a lot, but I didn't hear the format harnessed to its potential. The same could be said for many of the MP3s we got, though, which is why the format (at least to me) was a moot issue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly can't wait to see how the judging rules are refined for future competitions now that we have a better idea of what ambiguities there are. I definitely enjoyed helping out and joining up with such an enthusiastic community. Like others have said, I'm looking forward to future contests and hope people take the time to participate and make the turnout as strong as this one.
03-03-2008, 07:48 PM
I promise you that Larry's comments will make a better composer; I'll buy you a drink.
.
Linear Mode
