One-Synth-Challenge: General discussion thread

[zarf]

The interest is irrelevant, unless the new system is actually going to prevent people from voting, which I seriously doubt. People will still vote and we'll see every number from 10 right on down to 1 represented. Subsequently, we'll see a potential change in how tracks end up. More variance means results that are more accurate.

OK. I don't really know how decisions about stuff like this get made around here. I assumed there might be some kind of consensus or general feeling required... but you are saying, nah, just do it, doesn't matter if people want it or not

[rghvdberg]

I've given it some thought and I agree.

It would make it easier for voters to decide : these tracks should be in the top 5, that's the 10 points. So I guess I'd choose 5 tracks with 10 points and it would still give me the option to give enough credit to other tracks which imho are still very good but not winners.

Voting will be as quick and maybe quicker because you can give points with a clear conscience so to speak.

And you can always revert to giving 2,4,6,8 and 10 points (reserving 1 point for your own track) if you feel like it.
Someone mentioned this before and it was so brilliant.

[aciddose]

If it just works, what's to google?

That's somewhat true but in reality it just isn't practical at all. Especially with things like "where to buy a mac" or "switching from windows to osx". You'd need to start with the assumption that the majority of searches are "how do I change my screen resolution on osx?" for it to mean that the popularity of OSX is not decreasing.

I believe that even if "it just works, therefore what's to google?" does directly show a significant decline in the overall popularity and trend of OSX utilization increasing. Since the market for commercial audio software is approximately 50/50 (better or worse depending upon the product) it definitely makes sense for commercial software to be ported to OSX. For free software though the vast majority of the market is actually on Windows with a larger chunk on Linux with very little coming from OSX. Regarding my free software, I only work on it out of personal enjoyment and I can tell you very plainly I do not enjoy OSX or anything related to Macintosh computers. There are very good reasons a lot of free software is not written for OSX; most of the stuff you do see takes advantage of existing cross-platform libraries.

A little off-topic though in my opinion; while I admit it is interesting to consider the platforms OSC submissions are coming from it doesn't really influence my situation regarding lack of any desire to use OSX or own any Apple products for anything other than satisfying complaints that a Xhip port doesn't yet exist.


re: 1 to 10 voting; It sounds identical to me and so I don't see either any significant benefit or detriment in implementing it; if it encourages more people to participate then all the better.

Statistically you'll get near identical numbers of ties and it won't actually change anything about how people vote, but if it's as easy as changing "5" in the code to "10"; 'gedderdon.

[rghvdberg]

And xhip for Linux?
Works fine in wine anyway :p

Btw, in the Netherlands schoolgrades are given in points from 1 to 10. Ten being the best.
The following meaning is given to the grades
Hope my translation makes sense
10 excellent
9 very good
8 good
7 very satisfactory
6 satisfactory
5 doubtful
4 not satisfactory
3 very unsatisfactory
2 bad
1 very bad

[rghvdberg]

The interest is irrelevant, unless the new system is actually going to prevent people from voting, which I seriously doubt. People will still vote and we'll see every number from 10 right on down to 1 represented. Subsequently, we'll see a potential change in how tracks end up. More variance means results that are more accurate.

OK. I don't really know how decisions about stuff like this get made around here. I assumed there might be some kind of consensus or general feeling required... but you are saying, nah, just do it, doesn't matter if people want it or not

I guess if enough people ask politely
As mentioned before, with 1 to 10 you can vote the old way anyway.
You don't have to use the whole scoring range.

[Frostline]

Hope my translation makes sense

Yup.
Grew up with a similar system but using letters instead. A being best F for failure (system skipped E for some reason, probably egregious was too difficult for most little kids to grasp).

I think that is why Peter's system feels a bit alien to me. He seems to look at the voting process as ranking whereas I look at it more as grading. Probably because I look at this as more of an educational experience and he see it as a competition. He might well share the majority opinion on that, but we each can vote our own methods regardless.

I wouldn't mind trying a 10 point system. They fall right in with a C+ A- kind of schema so would just make the system more flexible for me.

[zarf]

I think that is why Peter's system feels a bit alien to me. He seems to look at the voting process as ranking whereas I look at it more as grading.

Frostline - that is a very clear way of expressing it - I was struggling to find the right concept but you have nailed it

It's like - the Olympics, vs a class assignment in school.

In the Olympics - where it is all about winning and glory - it would be ridiculous to do anything other than identify and celebrate the winners on the podium.

In a school class - imagine the teacher says - these are the top 3 students, who I have graded A, B, C. Everybody else - you get no grades because you weren't in the top 3. Sorry!

I don't think the kids or their parents would be very happy

So I guess it comes down to your interpretation of the spirit of the One Synth Challenge

[] Peter:H []

I think that is why Peter's system feels a bit alien to me. He seems to look at the voting process as ranking whereas I look at it more as grading.

Frostline - that is a very clear way of expressing it - I was struggling to find the right concept but you have nailed it

It's like - the Olympics, vs a class assignment in school.

In the Olympics - where it is all about winning and glory - it would be ridiculous to do anything other than identify and celebrate the winners on the podium.

In a school class - imagine the teacher says - these are the top 3 students, who I have graded A, B, C. Everybody else - you get no grades because you weren't in the top 3. Sorry!

I don't think the kids or their parents would be very happy

So I guess it comes down to your interpretation of the spirit of the One Synth Challenge

Just want to add something, to make very clear that frostlines explanation is a very good one, but has to be slightly extended and I give you the intuition why...
a.) We have n submissions which means that we would have n pupils in frostlines classroom example. On the other hand we have also at least n teachers. we have more than n teachers if someone who has not submitted a track but nevertheless casts a vote...Meaning that then the law of big numbers applies, i.e. the relevance of single votes, voting systems, or voting interpretation is less relevant...
b.) school has just one goal, it's to categorize pupiles following a - in most subjects - clear and objective curriculum, i.e. there's such a mathematical function like test --> [A,...,F], whereas OSC has like at most two goals...
b1.) Overall Goal: It's about to build the total order for all submissins in order to have winners (competition goal) which is the summation of all teachers votes and...
b2.) Probably a more subjective goal of somehow giving some sort of feedback to a track, which compared to objective curriculums for let's say maths is less objective and more on a subjective level. I have thought about that, and I come to the conclusion, that I realy don't know at all what I tell pleople when I give them an "5" (Are they good in mixing, did they surprise me? Is it just my style of music and not jazz?). For instance in OSC#99 I gave 5 to MoveisMovie because he did a marvelous track without FX and with restricted number of synth voices, to meat the spirit of the original Synth ASIC. I say "bravo have my 5 points", in my "normal" comparative quality criteria system his track would have been a 3 only...

Just explaining. One challenge here is to accept that the rules offer room for different voting styles and that is - drum role - a good thing. And it is a good thing when people use the rule and build their rational to use it. And I'm a big fan of diversity (calling people a troll out of reflex is just not diversity it's just dumb, that's why I am completely allergic), so please don't use my voting because I think you will use yours. I'm very positive you you use your voting anyway and since ages, because there's no such thing like a robust mathematical function that does track --> [1,...,5]. It's your taste and as such your voting system overall...do you like bass? do youlike jazz? I would even say it is not even stable over time...vote a old OSC again...what's the outcome?

And also I'm big fan of rule of big nubers, which says that every (many probabliity distribution will look like a normal-distribution if only enough input flies in...you can't just avoid that. So if enough people decide to not call each others trolls, but favour and encourage diversity all will be fine without much ado...

Sorry for the wall of text, but to realy analyze a situation it's allways good to write down all aspects...

[rghvdberg]

Just like life, the OSC will never be fair.
No matter what rules, restrictions, voting. It will never be fair.

So let's all get over that, keep on making cool tracks, learn from each other.
Let's not get hung up on voting and stuff, it's not fun.

As a side note, although the sponsors of the osc can't be thanked enough, for me personally the challenge of making a track is almost enough to do it. Almost, because the ranking is also a big part of motivation

Although, when I started my first osc, I got ok from my wife after I explained there were actual prizes to be won. So I basically bribed my wife.
We both has no idea the ridiculous amount of time and hardship it actually takes

[Mechanought]

I'm going to suggest my altered rule-set again, even if it's just a one-off.

OSC Special Rules.

-No automation
-so effects on anything except master channel, and that is restricted to dynamics only
-Reverb could be allowed if used sparingly and not at more than 50% wetness if used on a channel rather than a send. This one can be removed or modified depending on how others feel. Reverb can really help to make things sound right, but I would just want it used for that reason alone.

I really want to see what myself and everyone else can do with just the synth alone. I think we would need a pretty robust synth in order to get good results, maybe even something with built-in effects to spice things up.

Here are some accompanying synths I think would get good results, feel free to make suggestions.

-Tyrell
-Synth1
-dexed
-Kairatune
-Helm
-Tunefish 4 (if the staibility issues and major bugs have been ironed out)
- Crystal (No experience myself, but it seems pretty capable).
- Nightlife (requires sign-up so i think it's disqualified).

I think this would make a really really interesting OSC. What do you guys think?

[rghvdberg]

Er osc is automation practice for me.
It would take the fun out

[aciddose]

No automation seems odd, would MIDI count? No notes?

I almost always listen to my mixes with all the effects disabled.

https://soundcloud.com/xhip/hn-5-fx
https://soundcloud.com/xhip/hn-6-no-fx

These are from 2006

It does make a difference but not that much in most cases. At least with a good ear you can pick out most effects. The ones that make it difficult are the ones not allowed in OSC right?

[zarf]

I'm going to suggest my altered rule-set again, even if it's just a one-off.

OSC Special Rules.

-No automation
-so effects on anything except master channel, and that is restricted to dynamics only
-Reverb could be allowed if used sparingly and not at more than 50% wetness if used on a channel rather than a send. This one can be removed or modified depending on how others feel. Reverb can really help to make things sound right, but I would just want it used for that reason alone.

I really want to see what myself and everyone else can do with just the synth alone. I think we would need a pretty robust synth in order to get good results, maybe even something with built-in effects to spice things up.

...

I think this would make a really really interesting OSC. What do you guys think?

I like the idea of one off challenges with varied rules from time to time very much

This particular rule set seems interesting to me. I'm curious about what people would achieve with greater limitations too. The tracks would be much less like 'finished, good tracks' though, and I understand that lots of people aren't very interested in that. Me, personally, would enjoy participating and learning from what everybody did within those rules!

Do you really mean no eq or compression on tracks? - so basically you have to mix by getting the sounds right in the first place through the synth and the arrangement? That would be a fun learning experience

The 'no automation' rule (assuming that midi notes are allowed!) rule - would that include pitch bend?

Interesting proposal worth exploring (along with many other variations) ihmo

[Mechanought]

I think this would make a really really interesting OSC. What do you guys think?

I like the idea of one off challenges with varied rules from time to time very much

This particular rule set seems interesting to me. I'm curious about what people would achieve with greater limitations too. The tracks would be much less like 'finished, good tracks' though, and I understand that lots of people aren't very interested in that. Me, personally, would enjoy participating and learning from what everybody did within those rules!

Do you really mean no eq or compression on tracks? - so basically you have to mix by getting the sounds right in the first place through the synth and the arrangement? That would be a fun learning experience

The 'no automation' rule (assuming that midi notes are allowed!) rule - would that include pitch bend?

Interesting proposal worth exploring (along with many other variations) ihmo [/quote]

The whole idea is to basically truly work within the limitations of the synthesizer, and rely on programming to achieve your sound. As such pitch-bend automation would be fine, because it's well within the scope of a synth. Compression and EQ are fine, but an EQ can completely change the characteristics of a sound. Often times it's necessary to cut out unwanted low-end or high and such. I think with the right synth a channel EQ wouldn't really be necessary. As for compression, I'm fine with it so long as it's not used to take a normally inaudible aspect of the sound and make it easily audible.

It just gets difficult to enforce and explain once you start saying things like "it's fine but not too much", as such my preference would be no channel effects. Again you can clean things up on the master as you like, because you're not modifying the sound of the synth, but of the track itself.

Automation is the important aspect to me though. In OSC automation is used to create sounds that aren't normally possible from a synthesizer, and that's fine. But I really want to see what people come up with creatively when they have to work with what the synthesizer can and cannot do within it's scope of ability. It's like working with an analog synth. The most you could do is automate midi messages, and even then you can't go crazy without things getting wonky.

I want to say that MIDI automation would be okay, but again in the digital world and with some DAWs it can basically be used as a replacement of parameter automation, especially when considering most VSTs have pretty much every parameter CC mapped.

[zarf]

Hi!

Was just checking out tutorials, and found that the link to bj's snare tutorial
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 8#p5484078

...is now missing the images

Brian or anyone - are they recoverable do you think, by any chance? Or moved? I got the link from the OSC site.

Cheers!