??SUGGESTION??

DmbFanJason · Unread post by **DmbFanJason** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 12:07 am

listen to more dave.

ticohans · Unread post by **ticohans** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 12:13 am

i personally think that that's going too far. this isn't supposed to be some great love fest where we all say aww man, you're so wonderful. and i don't think that anyone has been excessive in their criticisms except you.

gravedigger · Unread post by **gravedigger** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:28 am

being one of the few authorities (whatever that means) around here, I have to say that the 1st rule is a good thought but not necessary. When the site is down, you can just wait for a few hours and then listen to it, or first post that when they get a chance to listen to it, you'll post some feedback. the thread isn't going to be deleted or locked ( :wink:

) and one can always top it, and eventually they'll get to hear it and bash it, I mean critique it. The 2nd rule is a matter of manners, so its not necessary to call it a rule but for common courtesy purposes, one should watch they're wording when they bash uh I mean critique (damn) someone's cover or original.

peace,
Ken

DmbFanJason · Unread post by **DmbFanJason** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:32 am

ok, thats cool....but I just think if they're gonna take a listen they should at least post something ya know...

DmbFanJason · Unread post by **DmbFanJason** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:35 am

evaluation is no good....telling people how they should be or what they are...it doesnt work. Presenting it in a way where they say, "hey, I'm gonna do it this way, because "I" want to!" that should be done more often i think.

Unread post by **jpittman** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:56 am

I think both of those are good guidelines. The bandwidth on these sites does go down quickly, so any response from a listener would be a good thing.

And couching suggestions in agreeable and non-offensive language is a matter of simple courtesy (which is often overlooked in this world...). I think everybody would be well served by that.

One might even call it constructive criticism.

DmbFanJason · Unread post by **DmbFanJason** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:57 am

i dont really think there is such a thing as constructive criticism...per the definition.

gravedigger · Unread post by **gravedigger** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 2:01 am

DmbFanJason wrote:evaluation is no good....telling people how they should be or what they are...it doesnt work. Presenting it in a way where they say, "hey, I'm gonna do it this way, because "I" want to!" that should be done more often i think.

yeah ok, like they should present their cover with a little description which I've seen done by a few people.

ok here's my theory, there are 3 reasons why people post covers/originals. the 1st is because its fun to do it - its fun to record yourself and post what you've done on the internet. here's an example of how this type of person could present their cover:

" this me and my buddies recording of #36. I played a trombone, and my buddy played a harp and my little sister layed down the vocal track. just a lil something for your enjoyment"

the 2nd reason why people post their covers is to get feedback (yikes!) into what they can improve on. ya know if they're beginners, intermediate, whatever, because they are good musicians around the boards who can give some great advice. so here's an example of how this type of person could present they're cover.

"I've been workin' on Tripping Billies and I think I have it down, but I've only been playing the guitar for 7 weeks so I'm not sure if I have the rhythm (is that what you call it). So here's my attempt at Billies with no singing. "

and the 3rd reason why people post their covers is to "show off" their skills which is fine - I love hearing Dave covers. an example how they should present their cover.

" Here's my cover of Rapunzel, but I changed the time signature to 13/49 instead of 234/356 for the intro/verse and I jacked up the metronome so the song wouldn't be so fucking long. I know I can't sing all too well, so no need to say anything. Enjoy!"

whoa, what a long post for me. I usually keep em' short and sweet. Oh well.

peace,
Ken

Unread post by **jpittman** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 2:03 am

Most artistic societies would beg to differ, as would Google, which returns about 159,000 different pages with that term. Sure seems to be a lot of attention focused on a supposedly non-existant concept.

Here's a worthwhile read:
http://muse.widener.edu/~egr0001/REDoct ... icism.html

Constructive Criticism must be criticism and it must be constructive. It is criticism when it focuses on standards; it is constructive when it articulates those standards so that the shortcomings in a piece of writing can be dealt with.

"Pats on the head," effusions of delight and the like are not criticism. They dodge the issue of criticism, except in the case where the text being critiqued is so excellent, so far removed from improvement that there is nothing left to do but to express wonderment and pleasure. (This is a rare situation.)
Criticism minimally expresses to an author,"There are standards which are relevant here that your paper does not meet." To be constructive, the critic must go beyond, indeed, avoid simple formulations like,

"This is poorly written," or "This makes no sense."
It is more useful - not to mention, non-threatening - to avoid using such statements entirely. One might say, "The problems with this paper are that ...." This foregoes unnecessary emotional engagement and does the work that a critique should do: specify what it is that makes the paper fall below expectable standards!

We may - and sometimes do - encounter the following situation: a disagreement as to what standards are applicable in judging a paper. For example, what is acceptable as a report in a business might be criticized in an academic context as a hodgepodge pasting together of plagiarized material. Understanding the context of presentation and the audience that will receive your text is, consequently, important here.

The best procedure as as constructive critic is to adapt the attitude of a team-member trying to improve the workmanship of a colleague. Don't hold back from expressing concern if you think there is a problem; but don't try to intimidate or "one-up" the person whose paper you are criticizing by delivering judgment, but withholding the reasons for it.

IronMike778 · Unread post by **IronMike778** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:11 am

DmbFanJason wrote:i dont really think there is such a thing as constructive criticism...per the definition.

I gotta disagree. I appreciate constructive criticism. On my 'What You Are' cover, I got a couple of "....slow the tempo down" suggestions. THis just confirmed to me what I thought I already knew - that I tend to play songs too fast. I guess because there's no singing, I like to keep the song moving. Ironically, J., I haven't heard from you on that cover....bandwidth is fine now.
I agree with the point that it sucks when you see '77 views' and only 6 responses or so. Does that mean I sucked and people are being polite, or what? But then, on Firedancer's Minarets cover - which was freaking awesome - I think only about 9 people responded on 80 views or so (these numbers could be off). So, when I see that, it just shows me people just don't like to respond. I don't know how a Dave fan could listen to that cover and not want to give props to the guy.

Xoosh · Unread post by **Xoosh** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 8:16 am

Im in agreement. Basicly i think it goes back to the orriginal topic i posted long ago about "acceptable criticism" or what-not... really the reason we post here isnt to toot our own horn... we've got friends to show off for for that... instead i always post my music here because im surrounded by fellow musicians... who i HOPE would takek the time to listen to my stuff as i do to theirs... i've been somewhat inactive on the musical side of critiques lately becuase of my work schedule... but i've been downloading everything.

/x

cave_cricket · Unread post by **cave_cricket** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 1:29 pm

I feel that we need criticism. When I posted my pieces I wanted people to tel what I was doing wrong...but I also anted to hear what I was doing right.

I love compliments, but I knew my pieces weren't anything clsoe to perfect. So, I wanted a batter ear than myself to tell me why they weren't perfect and how to make them better. That's how I intend to improve here as a guitarist.

If we were to candy coat everyhting we would have some god-awful covers and/or original songs floating around this place because we were all afriad to tell them.

Of course you cannot be rude about it. I don't feel anyone was rude to me.

Peace, love, good tunes....

ticohans · Unread post by **ticohans** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 2:01 pm

I just want to say publically that I think it's awesome what Jason is trying to do. Way to go!!

DmbFanJason · Unread post by **DmbFanJason** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 4:18 pm

I'm in agreement with the most of the ideas yall have presented...the way you go about giving someone a critique is very important...

Here are some examples of constructive criticism:

"You need" to slow down the tempo

"You need" to sing louder

"You are" hitting the wrong notes

"You hit" the guitar too hard

....you get the idea? After hearing this, the person will feel discouraged, enturbulated, and/or uncertain somewhat now that they know they are doing something wrong. And in some instances, the person might purposefully do it the wrong way just so that they can be, in the mind, right on the matter. Even though one way seems better, they will continue to do it their own way, just to make the other person wrong.

Here are some of the same examples using encouragement/critiquing wothout evaluation:

It was good. Maybe try slowing down the tempo a little bit and it might sound even better.

I liked it, although I couldn't hear you that well. Maybe try to sing closer to the mic?

I think it would sound great with just a little more practice on the song.

Good job, however when I play the song, I hit the strings a little softer.

you get the idea?...After hearing these examples, the musician will then, on his own determinism try out what the person has suggested, and will feel good about it and encouraged.

Do Yall see the difference?

Brock · Unread post by **Brock** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 5:21 pm

DmbFanJason wrote:I'm in agreement with the most of the ideas yall have presented...the way you go about giving someone a critique is very important...

Here are some examples of constructive criticism:

"You need" to slow down the tempo

"You need" to sing louder

"You are" hitting the wrong notes

"You hit" the guitar too hard

....you get the idea? After hearing this, the person will feel discouraged, enturbulated, and/or uncertain somewhat now that they know they are doing something wrong. And in some instances, the person might purposefully do it the wrong way just so that they can be, in the mind, right on the matter. Even though one way seems better, they will continue to do it their own way, just to make the other person wrong.

Here are some of the same examples using encouragement/critiquing wothout evaluation:

It was good. Maybe try slowing down the tempo a little bit and it might sound even better.

I liked it, although I couldn't hear you that well. Maybe try to sing closer to the mic?

I think it would sound great with just a little more practice on the song.

Good job, however when I play the song, I hit the strings a little softer.

you get the idea?...After hearing these examples, the musician will then, on his own determinism try out what the person has suggested, and will feel good about it and encouraged.

Do Yall see the difference?

/me agrees (for what that's worth, ya know :wink:

)

DMBTabs.com

??SUGGESTION??

??SUGGESTION??

Who is online