Karaoke Forums

Realisitically NONE of you who have sub'd SO many songs can be a 9.8 out 10..

Bingo! Steven, you are the smartest person I know of anywhere man! Everything you just said made a hell of alot of sense. So, we all have spelling errors...big deal. But mainly, knowing what the hell you're talking about is more important.

"All the worlds a stage"

Man! I loved that RUSH album as a kid!!  LOL  :wave:

That is very true. I AM a writer (though not an author), but I still make mistakes and I get lazy in my posting technique. I make grammatical errors, spelling errors, etc... although I do try to catch the most glaring stuff and unless I'm doing it for 'effect', try to appear somewhat intelligent in my posts. I am very aware of how people are judged who look 'ignorant' in their online chatting and posting. I do try not to judge people based on repeated errors in their posting, but it's hard not to do. I have to say though, that while I pay attention to such things, I don't 'critique' forum posts (for the most part). If I'm arguing with someone... I can't make any promises. heheh



Since you bring it up, Steven... I honestly don't think there can be a 'best singer' in the world anyway. There are SO many TRULY talented individuals out there in the music world, vocalists and musicians and vocalists who are musicians (lol) and they are talented and loved for so many different reasons. I suppose one could argue that the 'best' vocalists in the world are the classically trained operatic singers who strive for technical perfection, but how large is their audience compared to the 'pop stars'? Are the 'pop stars' even that great vocally? I personally think singers like Jewel are fantastic, and she's considered a 'pop star' (or is she still? I don't know).

One could argue that the 'best singer' on the planet would be the one who puts such feeling into his/her performance that the listener feels what the performer is feeling, or the one who has the most pleasant voice or whatever. There are many very fine vocalists in the world and as you said, the vast majority of them go undiscovered their entire lives. The internet is actually helping more people get exposure who never would have in the past, but even so, I think it would be impossible to classify any small handful of vocalists as 'the best' aside from one's own personal opinion.

And this isn't targeted toward any individual, just a sort of rambling thought process of my own I wanted to share, provoked by a statement in Steven's post.



Aint THAT the truth!!!



Oh I totally understand your ranking spectrum now, Steven. I would be excited to get a 5 from you.



absolutely... and I can't help but think this is the EXACT type of situation where people end up in front of Simon, getting told bluntly "that was absolutely one of the most painful things I've ever heard", at which point the person is devastated (or often refuses to believe him) and time after time they say "but my friends all tell me I'm a GREAT singer!". =p Makes me feel sorry for them. Not because of Simon's bluntness... but because THEY HAVE CRAPPY FRIENDS!!!

People.. PLEASE PLEASE, if you're the type of person who thinks 'friends' should pat you on the back and applaud your 'efforts' even if you're not a really good singer, or if your feelings will be hurt if you find out you COULD VASTLY IMPROVE your singing, PLEASE (again) do NOT sub your songs under the 'C' category!



Very true Steven.. and that's not fluff.

Agreed,  It's an area of aesthetics, so it's quite subjective. HOWEVER,  If a person tries to "cover" a song most know, and is noticeably dissonant throughout much of the song, can't follow the backing meter, and has been blessed with the timbre of a constipated Basset Hound, yet receives 9.4 ranks and praise, and complains because it's hurting what they perceive to be an honest entitled 9.8 rank based truly on their actual singing ability and nothing more, I'd really rather NOT participate in such an atmosphere... It's OK to not be a good singer... But for me to try to sing in the same league with vocalists that have the ability of Billy, Jazzybags, Operakitty, etc. and complain about my score not even being close to theirs is absolutely foolish... Let's assume they ARE 10's hypothetically (and I'm sure they would agree too, that 10 is just a hypothetical average that can't be attained and should not exist given 100 song average in the real world because realistically the more one submits the lower the score will likely become given many different and experimental genres and human limitation), If I attempt to sing cover songs, or renditions of common songs all know, I MUST NOT expect to be even half the singer they are realistically... So, it should be understood that for rank category to exist people are either ranked JUST in accordance to THEMSELVES, or within their own ability level.. Otherwise those that view Showcase as a competition are not playing on a level playing field... I stated a long time ago that it might not be a bad idea to break showcase down into two categories..

Karaoke for fun Showcase

Singers Showcase

Reason being,  so many will say "But it's just Karaoke".   However, NOwhere in the definition of Karaoke is "Gifted professional-ability vocalist omitted".  To some, Karaoke means the ability to sing with a really good backing band without having to leave home..

In tennis players have a right to compete or work within their own ability level assuming they opt to do-so.  Similarly golfers have such a right,  Musicians should also have a right to exist within a Karaoke setting without getting chastised for wishing to be musicians... AND, for that reason perhaps a separate category wouldn't be a bad thing.. "Karaoke" does not exclude talent, but if some in the showcase resent seeing serious musicians THAT'S what the problem is..

(what's the term I'm looking for Seby, I'm too lazy to find the dictionary.. Heterogenius ?? categorization might be what isn't working within the showcase because of ability and expectation level ??)

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

Well,  Not sure I can say "Crappy friends", but we live in a system that is Politically correct, where "White lies" are instilled as etiquette, and few dare to be honest and open anymore... Media, values, and what many in Western Culture are exposed to is superficial, and at some point we need to decide what matters to us inidividually.. If 9 and 10 ranks matter, some DO belong in the showcase, and since these are adults we aren't going to change things.. However, those that take music seriously should not have to suffer because "honesty" has become tantamount to "Mean"... Critique doesn't stand a chance in such an atmosphere.. Two different worlds totally opposing one-another  fantasy vs realworld

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

But Steven... you see it's up to us to get in there and very SIMPLY and HONESTLY, give people a dose of reality when they do ask for it. I will say though, in general the ability level of folks who sub in C has improved over the last year and a half or so since I've been gone (coincidence?? heheh) and that does make me happy. Not that I have a problem, personally, seeing people who need a LOT of improvement posting in the C category, as long as they don't mind hearing where they need to improve.

Actually, it makes me uncomfortable to critique someone who needs a LOT of improvement, especially when they don't have the basics of simply staying in the right key, on pitch and correct timing down for the most part (even the better singers make mistakes sometimes). I'm supposed to always find something 'good' to say in the critiques... sometimes that is the hardest part.



I mostly agree with you on that point which you keep making... that not even the BEST SS singers should have an average 10 rank, but I can understand how it does happen... even given the possibility that people were to rank honestly, and here's how.

First, you cannot have 100 songs in the showcase at any given time. The most you can have, even with the most expensive package, is 60 and when you remove a song from your profile, you also remove it's rank. It's completely understandable that a person would want to remove their lowest ranking songs from their profile, as they might be 'embarrassed' at their less than stellar efforts. A performer doesn't (well SHOULDN'T anyway) leave songs on their albums which are not 'the best they can do'.

Also, I believe that the 'best' singers in the SS will not submit a performance they are not happy with. So, while they might have several recordings of a performance that get 'trashed' because they are not so great, they only put up the really good ones. The ones that I would generally consider a 9-10 ranked song.

The last reason, again assuming that people were to actually rank honestly, which of course they don't, is that it has become obvious to me that people literally have different levels of ability in critiquing skill. While something might sound obviously flat to you or I, (or various others) it would sound 'fine' to the ear of most listeners. Either we are in the minority, or people are simply lying to the point of ludicrousness. Well, I know that some people are, but to think that most people are is just... frightening and sad.

So, while it is very true to say that even a pro singer could not reasonably expect to sustain a 9-10 rank in front of a panel of GOOD judges and doing numerous live performances with no opportunity to 'polish' each performance... it really doesn't apply here to my thinking.



It's not a bad idea, but you KNOW there would STILL be those posting in the SS portion, being fluffed like mad and getting all riled up (along with their 'gang') when someone told them they were not a great singer.  :no: Sad huh?

"Heterogeneous" (i.e. - trying to do very different things in the same place) yes, that term works and I see what you're trying to say... but I honestly don't know if it would help any more than having different categories to submit under does.  :dontknow:

I don't know if it would or wouldn't help to be honest.  There will be problems with any situation like this and for this reason.



There's a reason sensitivity becomes an issue.. When you open yourself up and present a very real part of yourself for others to see you feel more vulnerable.. You no longer have the anonymity that I have hiding behind fonts typing.. You have exposed a real part of yourself and you DO in fact expose more of yourself.. HOWEVER, Some that wish to improve ARE willing to expose themselves in an honest, non-competitive, friendly atmosphere where they don't feel that friends being honest with them is "negative" because their objective is NOT one of clinging to a rank, and fantasy status.. It's to REALLY want to be able to sing for real.. and just because this is the internet DOES NOT mean it can't be a prime source for artists to share in their craft which they take seriously... Singing is a learning process... Some in here have more ability than others and that's a GOOD thing.. Some of us can't sing but have spent most of our lives backing singers so we have a degree of familiarity as musicians... It takes ALL types... But while even the Critiquing parties must remain sensitive to the feeling of others (this doesn't mean lying to them) in the presentation of the Critique, you only critique a person as THEMSELVES, it's not a competitive process, and likely WOULD run into probs in the showcase.  Reason being,  people feel what they honestly feel.. and often it's not said until things "blow up"... Critique is an HONEST process, and involves sensitivity, NO desire to ONE-UP another person, but people wishing to help others ONLY.. This of course means those submitting for critique MUST NOT have expectations of only hearing how fabulous they are.[/quote]

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

It would require the atmosphere have moderation.  A few years back I went into Muses Muse just to see how things worked,  at that time (at least) the degree of honesty and how critique was accepted floored me.. I thought to myself, assuming I were a creative writer, THAT is where I'd wish to be... BUT.. Muses Muse has something I always felt Showcase SHOULD have, and does not.. A full description of do's and do nots, as well as what it means to be in a "Critique" atmosphere..  There's A LOT of psychology involved in the process, and it "Critique" limits must be defined and spelled-out.. You can't (sorry KS but this is CONSTRUCTIVE criticism ) just throw a heading such as "Critique" up and expect things will work harmoniously automatically.. Critique boundaries MUST be defined..

When there's a Critique category, there MUST be moderation, and a decription.  Other wise it becomes a source of russian-roulette for a few given time.. and the fallout affects others..  For this reason alone, few DARE to critique in such a setting (Singers Showcase), it's NOT conducive tp working, it never stood a chance..It becomes anarachy when not somewhat governed.



I gave up urinating against a strong wind long ago Seby.. You are not going to change the showcase unless a group of 15 of you go in there strong, enforcing the same attitude... People are HAPPY in the showcase as it is.  It doesn't NEED to be changed.. Those of us that wish for more instead MUST create our own area which is why I created this thread within THE SINGERS forum.. We have some control of it in here... Those of us here WISH to see Critique work, and we have mods that wish for it too behind us...

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

That's definitely true. Although I know I don't have 'golden pipes', I've submitted songs under the C category (every time but one, actually), and it really requires putting yourself out there when you KNOW people are going to be more critical of YOU, because you are more critical of THEM. Even when you know that people are lying just to be mean spirited, it still hurts because this is our ART. We CARE about it.

I have since changed all of my submissions to JFF.. but have specified in my 'bio' that all songs are still open to critique, just not ranking. Somehow, even if someone comes in and slams you hard on a performance verbally, not being able to give you a '1' on a song you know is at least halfway decent takes some of the sting out of it.



This is one reason I now STRONGLY feel that the whole 'ranking' issue should be REMOVED from the critique process. I know that some people just love to get that extra pat on the back when being fluffed, so they sub under the 'C' category, watching for the 10s to appear. I suggest instead, something that was proposed before but never implemented.

Critique be a NON-RANKING category. It's for serious singers (of whatever ability level) who want to improve their singing.

JFF have a 'star' ranking, of a maximum THREE stars. Yes, most of these are going to get 3 stars all the time and it will be ridiculous! But so what, they're JUST out for FUN, right? Let them have their fun. It will less distasteful to those of us who take the art seriously to see the 'stars' floating around, I think, than to see 9-10 rankings on songs which wouldn't make it past the 'American Idol' TRYOUTS, unless it was for 'entertainment value'.

Anyone in agreement? We could always petition Phill.

Singers Showcase consists of adults that have decided THAT works for them.  It's not up for US to change things.. We can point out "The Simon" real world issue.. (and it's funny in a way,  Simon is just saying what many of us say behind peoples backs when they royally bomb, there's NO difference.. MOST of us think like Simon, we just don't SAY what we think blatantly.)  If people in the showcase don't care or wish to see that, they aren't requesting we educate them.. and as long as they stay within a fantasy setting, many will live a happy life... BUT... those of us that wish for reality shouldn't be discriminated against because we're blowing the dream of a few... For THAT reason alone, I felt two separate categories... Reason being.. Karake for Fun showcase wouldn't need to have a Critique category, it would be set up differently, Critique ONLY belongs where both sides wish for it to work, and the process NEVER is simple..

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

I believe this does exist... at least it used to, somewhere in the guidelines for the SS. Problem is, no one bothers to read it or pay attention to it.







In addition to the (relatively small) category changes I would like to see made, I definitely think there is a place for a 'critiquers corner' forum. A place specifically for people to start a thread saying "Please critique - (insert song title here)", and be able to expect a reasonably good effort from those of us who care about such things. I don't think there would be TONS of activity in that forum... but it would be a welcome addition for those of us who want the opportunity on BOTH the giving, and receiving end.

Seby,  How many do we have in here DEDICATED to be at the Critiquing side of the process ?   Assuming we have enough that stay in the showcase for extended periods, it can work.. I know personally, the way I critique takes some time and energy, and I can not do even one Critique a day... I can do several a week..  Do we have at least 5 that are dedicated to Critiquing that are active KS members ?  If the demand for critique greatly outweighs the number willing to Critique there's a problem created too, last category I started I was doing the critiquing, people felt initimidated because my process was somewhat theoretical, but I NEVER intended for others to feel bound to a specific means.. ALL can critique their OWN way, it's how it should be. Point being, There must be balance in the giving and receiving end.  For that reason, I left here for awhile, I wasn't going to carry a process that I can't carry, others must want it, or it's just idle chatter..... Last year when the thread came up, It was pretty much ME that ended up doing the critiquing, and given my own limitations regarding knowledge (meaning it's true that when I say "I can not Critique" a person it DOES NOT mean I do not want to), I am LIMITED by my own lack of ability in certain genres, by my own moods and issues and life (yes there is one, don't laugh)  It takes OTHERS too, it's not easy to critique, it does take time and consideration, and focus... For THAT reason it's an honor when a person receives a critique, and shouldn't be taken ANY other way.. Somebody who is critiquing is taking time to SPECIFICALLY help another person, not denegrate them.. (did I spell denegrate/grade correctly.., I don't use spellcheck, I don't have the time)

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

I'm not sure. I didn't realize that it took so long for you to do a critique. I think that ANY of us who are willing to sit here and THOUGHTFULLY analyze a performance are truly GIVING something to the singing community. It makes me feel good to be able to do that for people and I would have no interest in being here if I could not participate in that. I'm sure you feel the same in that respect.

On the other hand, I can critique much much more quickly and across a broader spectrum than you (not that I'm 'bragging' - I don't see this as a 'better than you' thing, it's simply for comparison), but my critiques are usually more generalized and I bring a lot less to the table than you do as far as being musically educated. While I have SOME education from a life-time of experience and learning, I don't stack up to some of the folks here in that respect (though I might seem well educated in comparison to the general population), musically speaking. So, while I CAN critique oh... 10, 20 songs a day... I get burnt out after a while.

That's why at this point, I will come in 'when I feel like it' and go through, critiquing those I feel the urge to critique, sometimes skipping a day or two in between. Even so, I think there are enough of us to make a separate forum for critiquing worthwhile.



Wow.. I had no idea! And I'm still confused about the whole 'banned' thing. Ah well.



Understandable. I hope that now, I can help to make this a 'profitable' experience for all involved.



Nearly... 'denigrate'.

If you ever choose to install the Firefox browser, it has a nifty spellchecker built right into it that checks as you type. Heh, what... you thought I could spell that well??

Ack, I don't have any word processing software...  Just the KS stuff, I have nothing on my regular system that I know of except notepad and wordpad,  I only started typing a lot when I joined here..  It's true .  I'm not a writer..

Now back on topic

I take music seriously, so when a person asks for a "Critique" I believe I have an obligation to put something into it, or not do it at all.. (But that's just me)..It's ONLY how I feel, and it's NOT how others should feel, or need to be.. As long as enough are honest, the process need not be intricate or detailed.. I came in here for ONE reason only, and that was to be with Singers (musicians)... I didn't come here for the Karaoke,  The Karaoke is just "backing" and it doesn't read or interact... I'm here because singers ARE musicians... So sure, I take musicianship seriously, and to me as an extouring multiinstrumentalist, it's SINGERS that are the most gifted of the musicians.. I just backed them.. So it's just my individual feeling, since singing to me is HARD...

I've wondered this... I don't know how many interactive singing sites there are that are the size, and have the visibility Karaoke Scene has, I know of a few, but a few at best.. ASSUMING this is a very large singing site.. Isn't it possible the BEST singers in the world that have interactive singing access and an interest in internet interacting singing would gravitate to Karaoke Scene ?  Meaning that it should really be of no surprise assuming this is among the most interactive of singing sites that the MOST and highest percentage of Singing talent WOULD in fact gravitate to this site assuming people aren't either actively working in such a setting (so they don't have time and interest to sing and do music, but how about people that wish to settle down, and have a life that ARE pro-ability singers ?  Maybe stay at  home moms currently, or people that've relocated to more rural areas because of other lucrative means of making a living ?  (Jobs singing at nightclubs  aren't a dime a dozen around here, in fact such jobs don't exist that will pay anymore) So even pro-ability singers will find themselves needing to find other sources of work given the number of fabulous singers there are out in the woodwork hiding in many locations that just haven't yet been discovered, and assuming they were ?  Talent doesn't afford work in the performing arts anylonger given such a competitive nature of positions and time needed.... The MOST talented musicians need jobs with bene's, some are also blown out from working in a performing arts setting and have retired..  My thoughts are the highest percentage of singing talent in the world with the time and the internet access, or folks that are interested in sharing WOULD in fact be here.

Karaoke Scene, MIGHT wish to consider an area for pro-ability singers/musicians to do their thing too.. Seems reasonable that stay at home moms who even WERE pro singers, those that can't handle the life that WERE pro singers, and retired PRO singers are here too...  Karaoke DOES include the best singers out there !!


Just a thought !!

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

These sites are really only as much or as little as members enable them to be.. If people wish for them to have more, people have to put more into them.. It's really that simple..

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

There must be something wrong then.  Now I'm thinking I must have a tumor Like John Travolta had in Phenomenon.. I'm not the smartest person.. Which is WHY I can't understand more don't see this about the showcase, it's not realistic, and the ONLY way singers that LOVE singing can create a conducive atmosphere attracting those with like interests will be for us to ban together to raise the bar of talent gravitating towards Karaoke Scene.  My thoughts are that those of us that are realists CAN exist alongside those that love the showcase as is, but it likely will require us doing it WITHIN "Singers Forum" because by definition this is for SINGERS... and that isn't disputable.. Nobody has the right to castigate any in here for caring about "Singing" aspects.. which might make this a good place to TRY to implement our OWN critique type setting... That's all I've been trying to do.

What I am is a person who's been in the performing arts, and around artists most of his life, and brought up in a strict artistic environment; So I've become a realist. I have experience in this particular area, and understand some of the philosophy, as well as psychology that's involved..  It's a BRUTAL area to succeed in.  Anyone who's been in the performing arts and can make it can't be totally foolish.. For this reason I see contrast between what happens in the showcase, and how REAL audiences are.. and THAT scares the $#(# out've me !  and here's why... People DO know that the showcase is fantasy (most do), but it's the dream of many to be good singers.. and even myself, as a frustrated wannabe singers (yet KNOWS where I stand) I COULD be bluffed into having my fantasy fulfilled if people even fluffed me up to where my actual goal is, being a 6 rank singer one day.. How would I KNOW I am not.. and once I got a taste of that, I'd cling to it too.. I REALLY want to be able to sing, BUT... I'd rather earn my six.. and not have it handed to me like a nursery school student that gets a gold star for effort... effort isn't singing to me.. I WANT to really be able to sing, and THAT is hard work, and it REQUIRES honesty !!!

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

heheh no, this is a 'browser' I'm talking about. Like the thing you use to interact with KS (probably Internet Explorer). Firefox replaces it, and actually 'spellchecks' as you type in places like comment boxes. It underlines words with red that it thinks are misspelled. You then have the option of right-clicking said word, and you can choose from options, or decline. You can search it on google if you're curious.



Oh, I take it seriously as well and I try to be as detailed as I can, putting full focus on the piece I am critiquing at the moment and sometimes listening more than once through. If something distracts me, I stop and come back to it later (though obviously, that slows me down quite a bit). I think the reasons it takes you considerably longer than it does me are that 1) you have a much richer musical training than I do, so have more to contribute to your critique and 2) sometimes I feel that you lack confidence in your critique, so you want to be VERY CAREFUL to be accurate, so you might listen over and over to a particular section to see if you're really hearing what you think you're hearing, perhaps even going back to an original version (or several from different performers) for comparison, etc. But those are just my guesses. Whatever your process, I think that what you do is very valuable and I certainly admire your critiquing skills.

I often learn things by seeing what other critiquers say, and find myself going AH! Yes, that's what I was trying to pin down! Then I'll use that information in later critiques.



That's cool and I understand. Aside from smoky bars which require money spending and liver damage, it's hard to have this much interaction with the musical community. I enjoy it as well. I even think it's cool when people put up purely instrumental pieces, though that is somewhat 'outside' the supposed scope of a 'karaoke' or even 'singing' site, but so are original pieces (a combination of the two skills, plus that of songwriting). In fact, I think that is ESPECIALLY cool.



I think it's very likely and I've often wondered why we don't see some of the truly famous folks here on occasion (such as Bowie (gasp) or you know... really famous folks). There is a place called 'Indie911', you may have heard of it. where bands and singers and such can go to promote their music. Despite the 'indie' name, people are often on there who already have a label. I think that SS could launch into a whole new sphere of people if, for example, they offered the service of being able to SELL your own tracks from your profile (originals only of course.. it would be illegal to sell karaoke covers). In fact, I had been thinking of this very thing for a few days now. Interesting you brought it up.

hey count me in if anyone subs under C I will give my 2cents even if I do get the vitreol in PM that I got last week for saying someone was pitchy and inclined to be wooden
thing is I wont be able to be around much in the next couple of weeks...heading away overnite shortly as I have a gig out of town tomorrow, then another on wed, another frid, same following week but add sat as well...so added to my already 40+ hours at day job and I havent got a lot of time for listening at present...and until I do some listening, out of fairness I wont sub either
but soon as I can I will be back if I can be of any help

oh and for the record Suzanne, like Seby if I critique I dont use the rank.

_________________
"Be who you are and say what you feel... Because those that matter... Don't mind...And those that mind... Don't matter."

You will be missed!!! Good luck on your performances

if you miss me you need to aim better  :whistle:  LMAO
ok back now and trying hard to catch up on some listens

_________________
"Be who you are and say what you feel... Because those that matter... Don't mind...And those that mind... Don't matter."