Dubstepforum.com

E fo sho!!!

320? pm me

Gusto wrote: I thought my computer was freezing during the breakdown.

I find computer glitches produce the best glitches, can never recreat that quality.

Gusto wrote:Intro is too long and doesn't really build to anything.

True

Gusto wrote:The snare is rhythmically stiff

What I was going for

Gusto wrote:I thought my computer was freezing during the breakdown

If you mean its repetitive, again, true

As insightful as these comments are, perhaps a comment about the fundamental idea behind the tune wouldve been more relevant.

Gusto wrote:

Temo wrote:MIne (forgot to submit)

Soundcloud

Intro is too long and doesn't really build to anything. The snare is rhythmically stiff and never really fits in. I thought my computer was freezing during the breakdown.

Loool, someone's unhappy with the critique

B and f are quality,i voted f because i think on a production level it stood out head and shoulders above the rest.B was a seriously quality tune too but i just felt it lacked a bit up against f.
Like to say some really good tunes entered i was very impressed with most of the ideas people had.

people please dont hate my for this but i dont get f i mean i stilll grant f the possible win but b is imho so much better haha this fucking nice bassline nice use of the stereo field i dunno

hutyluty wrote:

Gusto wrote:

Temo wrote:MIne (forgot to submit)

Soundcloud

Intro is too long and doesn't really build to anything. The snare is rhythmically stiff and never really fits in. I thought my computer was freezing during the breakdown.

Loool, someone's unhappy with the critique

Actually I have no dog in this fight. I was more mocking his initial criticisms for essentially being observations about the producer's personal choices with their songs.
As it turns out, I think most people who enter these comps are competent producers so its very hard to make constructive criticism about the production values of the tracks, so when we comment on the tracks it tends to be more about whether we're feeling it or not.

Good on Temo for coming through with his track after his initial post though.

Incidentally, I voted for B.

B

Gusto wrote:

hutyluty wrote:

Gusto wrote:

Temo wrote:MIne (forgot to submit)

Soundcloud

Intro is too long and doesn't really build to anything. The snare is rhythmically stiff and never really fits in. I thought my computer was freezing during the breakdown.

Loool, someone's unhappy with the critique

Actually I have no dog in this fight. I was more mocking his initial criticisms for essentially being observations about the producer's personal choices with their songs.
As it turns out, I think most people who enter these comps are competent producers so its very hard to make constructive criticism about the production values of the tracks, so when we comment on the tracks it tends to be more about whether we're feeling it or not.

Good on Temo for coming through with his track after his initial post though.

Incidentally, I voted for B.

no my observations were directed at the lack of choices made to begin with. the songs were not developed enough as ideas, i cant put it more simply.

constructivly criticsing production value, however helpful/correct, is probably the most destructive thing you can do, despite this there does seem to be a culture of it here.

Temo wrote:constructivly criticsing production value, however helpful/correct, is probably the most destructive thing you can do, despite this there does seem to be a culture of it here.

So people shouldn't give feedback on the tune if it's constructive criticism of the sounds contained within?

C

wub wrote:

Temo wrote:constructivly criticsing production value, however helpful/correct, is probably the most destructive thing you can do, despite this there does seem to be a culture of it here.

So people shouldn't give feedback on the tune if it's constructive criticism of the sounds contained within?

The more important question is what makes a good song good? is it more the musical ideas or more the production value

Temo wrote:

wub wrote:

Temo wrote:constructivly criticsing production value, however helpful/correct, is probably the most destructive thing you can do, despite this there does seem to be a culture of it here.

So people shouldn't give feedback on the tune if it's constructive criticism of the sounds contained within?

The more important question is what makes a good song good? is it more the musical ideas or more the production value

Great ideas + great production values = great
Great ideas + shitty production values = raw
Shitty ideas + great production values = sterile/dull
Shitty idea + shitty production values = shitty

wub wrote:

Temo wrote:

wub wrote:

Temo wrote:constructivly criticsing production value, however helpful/correct, is probably the most destructive thing you can do, despite this there does seem to be a culture of it here.

So people shouldn't give feedback on the tune if it's constructive criticism of the sounds contained within?

The more important question is what makes a good song good? is it more the musical ideas or more the production value

Great ideas + great production values = great
Great ideas + shitty production values = raw
Shitty ideas + great production values = sterile/dull
Shitty idea + shitty production values = shitty

Yes, very true, but the question was which of the two has priority, and by how much. The point I'm trying to make is when you have a forum giving feedback almost entirely on production value, it skews the view of the producer recieving the feedback from seeing the reality that what makes a good song good is 95% the idea.

You're speaking from a very totalitarian viewpoint - speaking only for myself, I give feedback in the Dubs board based on both criteria. If a tune is awesome but rough around the edges, I will still compliment it so.

If it's clinically produced disposable waffle, then I'll respond likewise.

wub wrote: If it's clinically produced disposable waffle, then I'll respond likewise.

Dedication,wub paving the way.

wub wrote:You're speaking from a very totalitarian viewpoint - speaking only for myself, I give feedback in the Dubs board based on both criteria. If a tune is awesome but rough around the edges, I will still compliment it so.

If it's clinically produced disposable waffle, then I'll respond likewise.

yeah again true but, its simply my impression of the general trend. In situations where both criteria are lacking, feedback seems to be more on production values, when at that stage of an artists development its actually completely irrelevant. shocking as it may be, I hadn't used a compressor 3-4 years into producing.

What makes a good song is purely subjective though...there is no guarantee that the person giving the feedback has the same taste as the person who has made the tune. As such, this would render subjective feedback (largely) redundant.

wub wrote:What makes a good song is purely subjective though...there is no guarantee that the person giving the feedback has the same taste as the person who has made the tune. As such, this would render subjective feedback (largely) redundant.

It's not purely subjective, the more types of music you listen to the more you see the way good music is formulated, which is by having a cohesive and strong emotion. Same goes for other forms of art, film, literature. Yet in those forms it's acceptable to differentiate between a good idea and a bad one.

Temo wrote:

wub wrote:What makes a good song is purely subjective though...there is no guarantee that the person giving the feedback has the same taste as the person who has made the tune. As such, this would render subjective feedback (largely) redundant.

It's not purely subjective, the more types of music you listen to the more you see the way good music is formulated, which is by having a cohesive and strong emotion. Same goes for other forms of art, film, literature. Yet in those forms it's acceptable to differentiate between a good idea and a bad one.

'Art' and 'Good' are themselves both entirely (re: purely) subjective. To argue otherwise is setting yourself up for failure. There's no magic formula for creating art--nor perceiving it. Your definition of 'good' is shaped by your culture/worldview/experience ..which is also subjective. Just because your opinion of good art may align with the majority's doesn't mean it's the only opinion. Also, arguing that 3-5 minute songs "having a cohesive and strong emotion" are comparable to novels or feature films that bring about a myriad of emotions over their course is again, a losing argument.

If you'd like to discuss it more in depth, feel free to pm me. IMO it's not worth degrading the whole competition thread to talk philosophy.