One Synth Challenge #150: TAL-NoiseMaker (Aiynzahev wins!)

[1980-F]

OK, I voted. It was a harrowing experience, and I gave out way too many fives, and actually a lot of fours and threes too... there were a lot of tracks to vote on this month!

I'm totally with you. Since most contributions show a certain (or even big) amount of effort, I think 3 points (which for me means "an enjoyable, well done listen") is appropriate for most of the tracks.
I only give a '2', if the track seems to me kind of effortless in comparison to the big bunch or if it somehow gets on my nerves...
1 point means to me, that the track is really awful or technically bad (e.g. clipping)
4 points are for the tracks that are (in whichever way) above average concerning sound design and/or production
5 points I give those which are kind of outstanding for me (which, of course, is subjective)

So here an overview of my ranking criteria:

5 pts - top-notch, great, outstanding, flawless production
4 pts - above average, somehow special, but not totally thrilling or with minor flaws
3 pts - well done, an enjoyable listen from start to end, but not overwhelming
2 pts - ok, but with some stronger flaws (too simple, partially annoying or just boring)
1 pts - bad (seemingly made without real effort, has obvious technical flaws or sounds just "awful" to my ears)

Does anyone agree?

[SeBaer]

I am also done voting. I, too, have been dealing out 5s and 4s like candy... Too many tracks, too many good tracks, still too many brillant tracks...

[briefcasemanx]

finished voting too. I gave everyone 1's. A 1 is the top rating, right?

[neverbeeninariot]

OK, I voted. It was a harrowing experience, and I gave out way too many fives, and actually a lot of fours and threes too... there were a lot of tracks to vote on this month!

I'm totally with you. Since most contributions show a certain (or even big) amount of effort, I think 3 points (which for me means "an enjoyable, well done listen") is appropriate for most of the tracks.
I only give a '2', if the track seems to me kind of effortless in comparison to the big bunch or if it somehow gets on my nerves...
1 point means to me, that the track is really awful or technically bad (e.g. clipping)
4 points are for the tracks that are (in whichever way) above average concerning sound design and/or production
5 points I give those which are kind of outstanding for me (which, of course, is subjective)

So here an overview of my ranking criteria:

5 pts - top-notch, great, outstanding, flawless production
4 pts - above average, somehow special, but not totally thrilling or with minor flaws
3 pts - well done, an enjoyable listen from start to end, but not overwhelming
2 pts - ok, but with some stronger flaws (too simple, partially annoying or just boring)
1 pts - bad (seemingly made without real effort, has obvious technical flaws or sounds just "awful" to my ears)

Does anyone agree?

OK, I voted. It was a harrowing experience [...]

Yep. Who in their right mind would be a judge?

It was my first entry and the first time I have voted, and writing the song was waaaay easier than voting. I mean, where, how do you start? There was over 3 hours of music, with some fantastic entries, it was so difficult...

I didn't have a formal scoring system at all, but I did start with the simple assumption that every track was a 3, and as I listened to them all, my thoughts went one of a few ways; a) this is 'better' than others with the same rating so move it up, or b) hmmm, yeah for now this is probably has the right rating, or c) hmmm. this is 'not so good' as others with the same rating and moved it to down. After a couple of iterations, all the tracks ended up in what felt like the 'correct' position relative to the others, based on my highly subjective and likely unfashionable tastes, and my experience of sound design, composition, and mixing.

I have to say though, I was really knocked out by how good some of the sound design was, especially given the relative simplicity of Noisemaker, and likewise some of the compositions and mixes were really outstanding.

[neverbeeninariot]

finished voting too. I gave everyone 1's. A 1 is the top rating, right?

[Aro]

I base my voting on an amazement factor. 5s keep me engaged throughout. 4s usually have strong starts, or strong moments, but somehow are either not cohesive or fall flat in areas. And everyone else is a 3, because its amazing that they even got a track done, which I didn't this month. I'm not saying that all 3s are equally good. However, I just don't see a need to differentiate them.

I don't necessarily give high points for complexity. I often prefer a catchy tune in a well formed piece to a wild drum beat or a difficult guitar solo. I guess I'm less objective than other people, and mostly vote on what resonates with me. I wish we could vote a 6 for that rare occasion when someone composes something that really surprises me.

[neverbeeninariot]

Couldn't you make 2 the default, then use 5 for that rare surprising moment?

"This goes to 6, so it's 1 better..."

[gorgorgathgorgorgor]

in the old days we picked our five favorites and rated them 5-1! Can you imagine trying to do that with this batch! I'd be losing my mind!

[IrionDaRonin]

The good ol' days...

[Aiynzahev]

wasn't there a rule that you have to leave a comment on every entry?

[mmGhost]

maybe. but only if its "your track fire bruv"

[Aiynzahev]

maybe. but only if its "your track fire bruv"

or "yoooooooooo!!!!"

[z.prime]

maybe. but only if its "your track fire bruv"

or "yoooooooooo!!!!"

... or "click my profile for more plays"

[Aiynzahev]

Remember when people would follow you just so you'd follow them back?

Anyway, voted. Good times!

[mmGhost]

i think i wrote 'yo!' or 'yello!' on someone's track. so that works too.