Temo, I tried to offer you an easy way out of this that was wasn’t in the public eye. Now, I don’t post too often--but some people just need a guiding hand--whether it be a gentle pull in the right direction or a push off the deep end.
You are one of those people and I’m going to offer you both. So take my gentleness graciously and my bluntness respectfully.
Firstly, this isn’t the feedback thread. Thank you for your opinions on everyone’s entries, however valid to you they may seem. However, you need to understand that seven of these people put varying amounts of work into this competition, all with hopes of winning. Otherwise, they would’ve merely submitted their work to the feedback thread. (Or Dubs, perhaps) While there’s nothing stopping you from offering your feedback on the tunes, I’d suggest that you do it a bit more eloquently--with a slightly different tone.
Secondly, as someone not entered in the competition, you have the fortunate ability to defend your musical choices when called into question. The people you critiqued cannot without giving away their songs/identity. You should consider this when offering advice to someone who (for a time) cannot respond. This is a competition on a time limit, many songs could, and probably were left unfinished--your song seems to be a prime example of that. Now, assuming you presented your work for a bit of feedback, I’ll give you my opinion:
As Gusto said, the intro is long, and rather without direction. There is no ‘climax’ in any of the song. Whether that is production error or musicality, only you know. IMO, the “fundamental idea behind the tune” is hardly an idea at all. If it were me, I would’ve scrapped it as a failed project and moved on to the next one, taking what I’ve learned. Judging solely by the tune in your sig, you can make and produce much better music--don’t sweat it--not every song is a gem and not every idea is a good one. As far as your hang up on good music eliciting emotion.. what emotion does this song make you feel? Honestly, if it made me feel anything, it was just a bit of a headache.
Thirdly, just.. don’t argue with wub lol.
I’ve lurked here long enough to realize the extent of his knowledge and his dedication to the site and its users. He is more than kind to people who don’t know when to quit--this thread is a pretty good example.
And finally, a bit of a school lesson for someone so “in tune with music”, yet so out of tune with life and, apparently, vocabulary. If you don’t understand the correct usage of big-boy words like subjective and subjectivity, don’t use them. It makes your valid points seem invalid. (The same can be said of a person’s spelling and grammar.)
Definition of SUBJECTIVE
1.
- of, relating to, or constituting a subject:
- obsolete : of, relating to, or characteristic of one that is a subject especially in lack of freedom of action or in submissiveness
- being or relating to a grammatical subject; especially : nominative
2. of or relating to the essential being of that which has substance, qualities, attributes, or relations
3.
- characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind : phenomenal — compare objective 1b
- relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states
4.
-
- peculiar to a particular individual : personal <subjective judgments>
- modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background <a subjective account of the incident>
- arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli <subjective sensations>
- arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes <a subjective symptom of disease> — compare objective 1c
5. lacking in reality or substance : illusory
In this thread we have been largely using definitions 3 and 4 to describe the personal views that arise when judging art. In this sense, you cannot “objectively judge” something that is subjective. If someone asked for feedback on their tech house track and you opened it up to find that it’s all broken beat, you can objectively say that it’s no longer tech house, as one of the main components of the genre is a four on the floor rhythm. However, you cannot objectively judge the musicality of the background pads, as they are entirely unrelated to the genre itself, and quite subjective. (A caveat to this is obviously a tune in a minor key with some happy-ass major thirds in the background. But we can fix that person with a little bit of theory.) Furthermore, you can objectively say that the percussion should be louder in said tech house track, as the genre is fundamentally percussion-based, but you cannot objectively say the percussion isn't "good". Objective and subjective is a murky area in the English language that causes a lot of confusion because of the overlap, while also having some strongly different usage. Many people confuse the two. If you'd like to read up more about the distinction between them, a quick google search led me to:
http://www.fingerprintidentification.ne ... rticle.pdf
What I want you to take away from this post (which I had hoped you’d garner from the first) is that there is a much bigger world out there with many different perceptions of music, art, and even emotion in general. I’ve only used a few examples in a small subset of western electronic music, and as such a connoisseur, you already know the vast differences in that subset alone. You are fortunate in that those who present their arguments are the ones who reach the truth more quickly. Of course, the other side of the sword is that those who argue the most often are also the ones blind to the truth if their version is challenged. All I can say is to keep reading, keep learning, and keep doing; your values and opinions will continue to change as you do--so maintain an open mind.
Once again, if you’d like to reach me--pm me. I won’t be checking the rest of these pages, as all I care about is the poll at the top of them.
