KVR Audio

pylon · Post by **pylon** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 11:54 am

bjporter wrote:
pylon wrote:Well earlier in this thread I asked about the use of freeware filters and the response appeared to imply that this was generally NOT okay unless the use is as an EQ although it seems a grey area, so I'm not quite sure where to go here.
I don't really want to get all anal about "the rules" but then again seems there should be a level playing field.
You can freely use filters/eq.

sorry, been away for a few days hence delayed response.
..okay that makes it perfectly clear
many thanks

RichardSemper · Post by **RichardSemper** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 3:54 pm

Voted!

So many excellent entries

A big Well Done to everyone

and good luck

sfiks · Post by **sfiks** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:02 pm

Voted.

Yeager · Post by **Yeager** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 11:39 pm

VOTED

ontrackp · Post by **ontrackp** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:25 pm

Voted. Lots of great tracks as usual. Distinguishing between 4 and 5's is getting harder and harder for me.

Jazzaria · Post by **Jazzaria** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:11 pm

Voted. Some nice innovative stuff.

Mike777 · Post by **Mike777** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:38 pm

I made one vote change, please recount my votes if possible, thanks!

doctorbob · Post by **doctorbob** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:37 pm

ontrackp wrote: ... Distinguishing between 4 and 5's is getting harder and harder for me.

I agree, everyone is just getting better and better

- hard to crack the top half these days, let alone get near the top.

I find I have to start using the whole range (well 2-5). Could we have 1-5 REALLY available and simply let our own track get a big fat ZERO? Then we can rate across an ever so slightly wider range. Just so long as people understand that voting is per OSC and a 1 vote only means it's not rated as highly as a 5 that month, nothing more nothing less.

dB

actioncat · Post by **actioncat** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 4:25 am

Voted.

Tough one, so many awesome tracks.

zendorf · Post by **zendorf** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:47 am

Voted!

Some great entries this time around. Really impressed with some of the bass and drum sounds people were getting out of Oxe. Certainly will be a keeper in my free vst collection

Full Bucket · Post by **Full Bucket** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 7:02 am

doctorbob wrote: [...] I find I have to start using the whole range (well 2-5). Could we have 1-5 REALLY available and simply let our own track get a big fat ZERO? Then we can rate across an ever so slightly wider range. Just so long as people understand that voting is per OSC and a 1 vote only means it's not rated as highly as a 5 that month, nothing more nothing less.

In 100% agreement with you.

Cheers, Björn

Daru925 · Post by **Daru925** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 7:32 am

i vote 3 for the most part, 4 for the tracks that really stand out, and only five for the winner.
Tough choice!
Thank you all for the feedback (and sorry my track was rushed and abrupt)

mehum · Post by **mehum** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:55 am

doctorbob wrote: I find I have to start using the whole range (well 2-5). Could we have 1-5 REALLY available and simply let our own track get a big fat ZERO? Then we can rate across an ever so slightly wider range. Just so long as people understand that voting is per OSC and a 1 vote only means it's not rated as highly as a 5 that month, nothing more nothing less.

Yeah, this is what I do, except I actually use the 1 as well. Mathematically it doesn't really matter, especially since the once I'd give 1:s are quite unlikely to end up in the top 5 (so in case my track end up close to top 5 that one point in difference does probably not matter). Since everybody votes on all tracks the ONLY thing that matters is the difference in scores compared to your own mean (and your own track). And what really only matters in the end is which tracks end up in the top 5.
This is, to me, why relative voting makes so much more sense in this system. Remember that giving out only 5:s is no different than giving out only 1:s, unless your own track is within 4 points from the top 5.

I seriously think, in a contest with this approximate number of entries and where everybody votes, the ESC (Eurovision Song Contest *shrug*) way of scoring would be preferable. There each voter has a fixed number of points to give out. Don't remember exactly but something like: 12, 10, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. That way each voter has the same impact on the scores and you basically only score your top 10 so no need to feel bad about giving out a lot of 1:s and 2:s.
This would also be a relief those times when we see 50-60 entries and need to consider a score for all of them.

Touch The Universe · Post by **Touch The Universe** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 1:03 pm

Voted. Excellent showing this round. Good job everyone!

Taron · Post by **Taron** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 8:28 pm

mehum wrote: I seriously think, in a contest with this approximate number of entries and where everybody votes, the ESC (Eurovision Song Contest *shrug*) way of scoring would be preferable. There each voter has a fixed number of points to give out. Don't remember exactly but something like: 12, 10, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. That way each voter has the same impact on the scores and you basically only score your top 10 so no need to feel bad about giving out a lot of 1:s and 2:s.
This would also be a relief those times when we see 50-60 entries and need to consider a score for all of them.

That's what I suggested at some point, too. I think, this would be much nicer for the voters, too. As a voter you kinda have to feel at least a little bad to drop a track to 2 or even 1, just because you had to be reasonable. However, I think, even my winning track some time ago had some 2s, I think, or even a 1, haha. So, the Eurovision solution would keep things much more pleasant for everyone involved!

One Synth Challenge #81: Oxe FM (z.prime wins!)