Karaoke Forums

Dreamer...

I didn't say you were lying hon....I just wanted some clarification on what your above statement meant exactly..who it was directed to.
Tho I still may not agree on your assesment of some of these people...I do respect that we're all free to believe and think what we like.

I never tried to insinuate that you were lying to me...again..just wanted some clarification. Thanks for providing it.

Nicole

_________________

hehe...you snuck in there on me...so glad you understand even if we dont agree on some things...Thanks

_________________
[scroll][/scroll]

[font=andalus]We Are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
We are the Movers and Shakers of the World Forever it Seems...[/font]

The amount of energy spent on writing these small novels still amazes me. Endless debates over variations of the same theme.

This forum is called singers forum. Why don't we spend the energy discussing singing related (rather than relations related) issues??

Phill should institute a size limit on each post to avoid having to read all these novels (as well as Beattles' recording history).

And Dreamer1962,

I understand that you are so good that you don't need critique, but I am dissapointed you can't accept that bad singers like me get some advice so that we can improve??? Or perhaps you think I am beyond help, it will never get any better?? Quite frankly I found your generalization offensive: Want critique = Lousy singer = Immature something= all your other insinuations.

Now that I have gotten this of my chest, let's have some fun. Beattlestribute asked for critique and got one post and this waste of time got 42. Does that make sense??? Ducking for cover!!

Cheers,

Morten

well, it seems as if people still like stirring the pot...



Now the meaning behind the slang word "fluff" seems to be getting muddled and even confused.

If I want HONEST comments, that's not fluff.



It was why I took a vacation from the site for awhile, cause the fluffeese was clearly taking over the bboard. The worst part was these people were getting tens and high nines on their submissions, and yet, there would be very good songs that had been submitted that weren't even MAKING it to the top songs rankings... because of the fluff. Because people were being TOO kind and TOO considerate to their friends. They didn't want to hurt their friend's feelings. But what instead happened as a result of this behavior is that the initial design of the site was being swamped over by the "happy happy joy joy feel good"-ness of all the fluff.

And it was disappointing.

I actually loved the rating initially. I thought it would be fun to have a minor contest and see how I ranked against other singers.

But when you put your best effort out there, and you only get ranked a 7.8 (which is still real good), but there are TENS out there that just were sooo awful... it's enough to burn you... and burn you bad.

Maybe the site should have "rooms"... one for honest critiquing, one for people having fun, another for ongoing contests, etc.

Dreamer,

thanks for clarifying your comment. I am cool.

I am not sure I want to keep piling on, but anyway here are my points:

- COOL: critique is good when performed in a constructive manner with a goal to help not hurt.

- COOL: encouragement and kind words expressing appreciation of work and effort even if result is less than perfect is good.

- NOT COOL: Rude, hurtfull comments designed to bring people down are no good.

- NOT COOL: Completely ridicolous high ratings and comments that do not reflect the quality of the submission. Shows that the listener either is afraid to speak her mind or completely deaf.

So I think if we can just avoid these two extremes the rest is cool.

I think the latter can be as hurtfull as the former. I have experienced on this and another site examples where people start believing the comments they receive which in the end sets them up for a major dissapointment when the world outside this website bluntly pulls them back to reality.

So, let's keep it real!!!!!!!!!!!!

BTW. I hope you and everyone else will listen to my subs when I start subbing again and will provide me with good advice and encouragement. I want to audition for a local rock band one of these days (as lead singer) but I have a lot of work to do before then.

Cheers,

Morten

MortenN...I totally agree with you, and ill look forward to hearing your subs in the future...happy holidays

absolutely Jazzy..... Changes happen everywhere.... pretty soon this will all seem normal once it settles..... everything will be A-OK once we all get used to it.


I Totally agree. I'm (obviously) one of the ppl that likes to be critiqued, but I definately don't expect to become a GREAT singer because of it, but I do think.... actually i KNOW that it's helping me get better and that's I all I was lookin for. I've played around with my voice lately (which is something I never thought of doing untill it was pointed out to me) and it's a LOT of fun! who knew i could do a pretty good impression of Britney Spears? !! ! Or CHER!!! !! WOW she's easy to impersonate when your tounge is shoved back in your throat! babbling..... my point is, I didn't realize i could change the sound of my voice untill we all had these discussions about "timbre" and "tone" etc.....
whether it's made me a better singer, is yet to be determined, BUT I've LEARNED something... and isn't that positive in itself?


you betcha. if someone tells me they liked my sub or said I did a great job.... i don't call that fluff. Just cuz it's positive doesn't make it fluff.

What makes it fluff is when they over-exaggerate and tell me that I have the best voice they've ever heard.....etc...etc...

If there's a song that I didn't think was all that great and they're the sensitive type.... I'm not going to LIE nor am I going to tell them they're amazing. I'll just find what I DID enjoy or like and only point that out.

example.... someone sings one of my favorite songs.... didn't do very well but had emotion, really got "into" the song... I'll say
"This is one of my FAVORITE songs! Thanks so much for subbing it! I can tell you enjoy singing it, cuz you can REALLY hear your emotion! Good Job"

this is positive, but isn't fluff because it's all true.
now if I'd said

"AWESOME JOB!! wow you sure can hit those notes!! PERFECT SUB! How come you're not FAMOUS! YOU ROCK!!!"

that would be a flat out lie.....therefore.... "FLUFF"

ON THE OTHER HAND:
if this was a person who LIKES critique then I WOULD point out the fact that were pitchy or couldn't quite hit the notes, but I would NEVER be rude about it. AND I would plug in the non-fluff positives too! I would never leave a comment on someone's sub that was completely negative, I will always find something positive and point that out too. and If I ever forget to say something positive.... you all have permission to slap ma wrists! !!

ok... now I'm reeeeeeally babbling...anyways... that's just how I see it.

fantastic post Jazzy.

How's that for engergy put into a post, Morten?? !! Those quotes take more time than SMILIES!! ! !
ok.... I'm finished ma book

"and they all lived happily ever after."

THE END

_________________

Morten..... I probably shoulda just quoted your entire post, cuz you summed it up nicely!
Bravo!

_________________

well i take offence to the term stiring the pot....because that was not my intention, i speak as i feel, you do not have to agree but at the same time you do not have to accuse me of something that is just so far from the truth.

but sorry matt was you one of those that called me a liar, and dishonest...
and when i gave you a critical comment about your voice...YOU were the person that also took offence to it...no matter which way i chose to do it.
Which yes agreed i chose to say things on the forum and not your sub, wrong of me, but even so you took offence to the critique.

you also mention above about you getting a 7.8 and others who were awful getting a 9 or 10...everyones ear is different, what makes you believe they were worse??

i know where i stand with you...you do not want me to give you any critique about your voice, at the same time you don't want me to fluff you, i cannot think of an inbetween, because even my critique of your voice wasn't harsh.

personally since i arrived here i believe we have never saw eye to eye on anything....but we do agree on 1 thing above and i did mention it in the thread.


and that is to take the honest critique and keep it seperate from the rest!

wowwww eeeeee who would have thought it me and you agreeing.

must be the xmas spirit eh

apologies morton another long waffle above, you can ignore it if you wish

See, this is where I think it starts getting blurred.

So, If I thought that someone was amazing and said something like your comment above, I would be flat out lying?

I do think that some people here are great....maybe I would not use the word perfect, but I do think some people here could be famous off of some of the covers I have heard them do. Some are 100 times better than any "pro" I have heard in the music world.

I am not out to pick a fight with you, but now, you are making me believe that everyone who has said something to that effect in one of my subs is lying to me. Wow. I sure want to start subing now.

And perhaps anyone I have said that to....well, I guess I am lying.

Now, in your example, not the best one for me to use to get my point across, but people hear things different. Maybe on the sub that you heard....the one you wrote your example on, you felt the way you stated.....I thought he did a not bad job, could not hit a lot of the notes, and put lots of emotion.

Well, maybe I heard something totally different, and posted the second comment that you wrote because that is truly the way I felt!

Look at American and Canadian Idol. How can one judge say that someone had a perfect performance (and these are ALL TRAINED MUSICAL PROFESSIONALS), and the next one say they sucked?

The honest critique stuff, and the new button, and wanting to learn, that is all good.....the thing that I am really beginning to hate about this site is that everytime you see someone write a comment like, "wow, you should be famous, that was better than the original", well, they are all lies.

Seeing as music is all subjective anyway, I don't see why there is anything like fluff. It is different people hearing it different ways.

And, as for everyone getting 10's who are better than you.....well, guess what, wheather there is an honest critique category or not, it is still going to happen. Just because this new button comes into place does not mean that all these bad singers everyone keeps mentioning that are getting 10's, are probably still going to get their 10s while you get your 7's.

It happens in life, and it will happen here.

About the ranks.... it never made sense to me.. too many numbers, too many categories, too many things to think about... what is the slight difference between good, and very good, etc? Justy and I already think of people as ONLY falling into the middle categories.. the rest, are simply ridiculous. I think only these THREE make any sense. why bother telling someone they are good, very good, perfect, near perfect etc.? Above average, average, and below average covers ALL of that... why say they are very good, or near perfect.. when, that is ABOVE average, ANYWAYS?! What is WITH these rankings!?. Anyways, just something that always confused me:)

I agree with everyone here to an extent.

Gilly - True very true to many choices currently.

I think maybe there should be more than three but definetly less than ten! Five would be good. I read somewhere that they were going to put that into place -but when???

The other options sound awesome - that should give everyone what they want.

Of course as we all know it is impossible to please everyone. This should be close though...

_________________
BTW - Yes, I am ugly & my mother does dress me funny...

Click WWW for Tech Support

I suppose, I just feel that the three average choices (above average, average, and below average) emcompass all OTHER choices ANYWAYS, I don't see the point of the rest... and , if not to have simply those three, then.. REMOVE them, because they don't make any sense! 5 is currently average, and 6 is above, and 4 is below. The reason i DON"T rate, is because I would only ever use those three. And i would get kicked for giving a 5... the way it is now. but, people ARE Average. and, i can't USE it. drives me nuts. Does ANYONE understand what I am babbling about here? ... someone, save me from myself!

What! All those times you gave me 10s.....it was all a lie ! Just kidding.....

I totoally agree with your ranking system....but then, everyone will be like, "well, what is average, that other guy got an above average, and I don't think he is average at all? Why did I get a below average, when all those other bad singers got an average "

I think when it comes to ranking, no matter what you use, there will ALWAYS be problems.

But, at least with yours, there is a lot more justification of what a sub could be....and I think would give a lot more leway, as opposed to a 9 or a 10 or 6 or 7 ranking.

I like it

Absolutely.. and I've handed out my share of '5's for 'average' (or below or above). I just can't see that as being 'mean'. Of course no one is going to force you to rank if you don't feel comfortable doing so... but if the person allows it, the person listening shouldn't have to feel guilty about ranking honestly either.

Some of the people who have given me a hard time about my critiques are very good singers, some of them are mediocre and some are... well let's just say I don't enjoy listening to them. I'm certainly not going to say which is which!! BUT, no matter what their vocal ability, I respect everyone's opinions and try to sincerely listen if they give me vocal feedback, and if someone ranks me a 5 for 'average'... well, I would just be happy that they didn't rank me as 'below average'.

But heck, I can't figure out (nor do I try to) who gives what rank anyway... I don't even know how people do that unless they sit down and say 'well, I KNOW these other people only give 10s, so this person must have given so-and-such to get the rank down to whatever'.

Ritisroo, Lol, you nut:) I have NEVER rated anyone here. Not once. FOR THIS reason. I can't decide what to give anyone... because, in MY head, there are only THOSE three categories.... and, i can't understand the rest.

Sure, there will ALWAYS be some confusion.. but come on... above average, average, and below, is pretty cut and dry.... how could you NOT understand it.... or, b*tch and moan about it? Anyways.... what bothers me NOW, is that average is a 5...to me, everyone starts OFF as average, in my head, until they start singing.. and then, i think to myself... ok, that is better than average, or that is below average.... or, occasionally I just nod, and go, yup, good job, average rating... but... that is A FIVE!!! AHH!! Save me Roo!! Save me!


Ok, i am done, and will shut my yap;)



And syber... yuppers, I see nothing wrong with giving an AVERAGE rating.. i just don't think that should be a FIVE, when there IS such things as a 10. Does that make sense? I don' get the numbers, or what divides the ranks.

Okay - Okay!

Besides the other changes - I need to work on the ranks - I know I have spoken about that before and Atomic (thanks btw) helped by providing me images for the Stars.

My thoughts:

A scale of 1 - 5

5 - Excellent (Perfect)
4 - Very Good (Above Average)
3 - Good (Average)
2 - Less thanaverage
1 - Poor

What do you think?

BTW - Don't expect this anytime soon