Discouraging budding composers

lol wow I am not even going to begin to read the several pages that I missed in this topic....

but to me it seemed like a long time ago the thing is....

Its obvious as a composer you can't be disheartened by bad reviews since its not a perfect world and its sometimes hard for reviewers to be tactiful in certain cases and as a reviewer its preferable to be helpful and aware of the composers attachment to their work at the same time. However I simply agree with derek on a single ground....

What is the point in expressing an opinion that will in fact serve no other purpose except to degrade the work a person has done?

I can understand expressing an opinion to help the person even if its harsh, but you are not effectively doing this as a reviewer unless some attempt is made to let the composer know that ultimately you are trying to help them. Even then shockingly there are people who feel compelled to give harsh opions when in fact there seems to be no motivation in helping the person...

So well me personally in my opinon I would think this is a bad case, sure it exists, and sure a composer can't be discouraged by this, but honestly these sorts of people anger me, and I don't understand why there are people out there who support degrading other peoples work.... I mean there is no rationale that can justify it imo, you can say I was trying to help etc etc, then well if you end up discouraging the composer, that shows that maybe you should be insulted as a reviewer because obviously you are not very good at helping people. There is no excuse for purposefully insulting composers, its completely understandable if you do it by accident and are intending to help. Even in some cases people are very to the point and blunt, which is fine, even if it comes across as harsh, because the bluntness is meant to help the communication process in order to ultimately help the composer. But still as a composer I would prefer to get reviews by people who are intending to help me, which sometimes doesn't happen, and well these people anger me, and I say, these people who call people bad composers should be called bad reviewers because most likely they are oblivious to any real purpose of offering their advice, such as hmmmm HELPING the person maybe.

the key is I think the anytime a review is written its always possible that the composer could get disheartened, but the point is as a reviewer in order to do justice to the review you need to be more in touch with your positive intentions of helping the person than the negative intentions that may be present of degrading the person, no one is expecting the perfect review, just a reviewer that is concerned about constantly striving to see their opinion is being used to help the composer istead of hurt the composer. Otherwise I don't think the reviewer deserves respect..... at least in the case of what derek is talking about.... because I mean a reviewer for like a newspaper doesn't write to help the person they are critisizing, instead these reviewers are trying to let the general community know about what to expect from whatever is being critisized.

gently caress being nice(awaits ban)

Just tell it how it is in your opinion. If there is more good, then a lot of good things will be said. If there is more bad, then more bad will be said. A person should know how to take the good with the bad and know when a person is just being a jerk. It's that simple. If I ever tell nico i like his work, i'm sure he'll die of an orgasm. Why? Because I tell him how I call it. Things tend to mean more when you earn them. Giving a good job and good effort when they are not called for is a waste of time.

Giving a good job and good effort when they are not called for is a waste of time.

I can only think of very extreme cases where I think that would be appropriate. For example, say someone went into Finale and LITERALLY randomly clicked notes in with a blank C major time signature, absolutely no effort at shaping it into anything resembling a deliberately composed piece of music. Then it would be appropriate I think to say " uhh....you didn' treally try to compose anything here did you?"

HOWEVER---I think there is something to say for believing in someone, even if you hear their earliest works. They might not be overall impressive or interesting or unawkward at all. However even in the simplest, most amateurish, most boring works, one can hear potential. If you can hear potential..tell them about it and encourage them! That is what someone needs at that stage of experience anyway.

My very earliest compositions would have appeared insufferably boring to everyone on this site. I'm sure that "good job" and "good effort" by most people's standards would most decidedly not have been called for with my earliest work. However, I found someone who was very generous and encouraging. I sent him my works and he has been encouraging me ever since. Never with a negative word, either. He was able to tell me what I should do more of and what I should do less of...and I have improved by leaps and bounds....because this man believed in me. If I had been cut down at the very beginning by arrogant jerkoffs who didn't care how I felt, as I had been when I was a programmer, it is very doubtful I would be the musician I am today!

So to a large degree, it depends on the individual. One would hope that all individuals who post here are aware enough of themselves to know the possible internal consequences of receiving criticism from a stranger on the internet, however young people, as well as being sensitive, need a lot of attention.

So I would conclude by saying that we should all just remain aware of how our words can impact others---and if whomever we are reviewing happens to be a rank beginner and young, what they need is encouragement. All they are saying at this point is "gah gah goo goo," but in that we can hear the potential for musical words and sentences. Until they start writing coherent music we should encourage them.

"However even in the simplest, most amateurish, most boring works,...."[/b]

Can you stop bashing amateurs, please? Most amateurish? What's that supposed to mean? - that it's work produced with the most loving care? The most shoddy and untutored work, bracketed with "the most boring?"

I'm an amateur 50% of the time. The rest I get paid for and don't care as long as I get the money. Many members are students. One day they may get qualified by a professional body whereon they can claim to be professionals. Until then, their work is amateurish because they're amateurs.

Okay. I won't post any more on this topic. The problem could be solved by common sense, tact and civility. Why people make such heavy weather of it, god only knows.

M

Can you stop bashing amateurs, please? Most amateurish? What's that supposed to mean? - that it's work produced with the most loving care? The most shoddy and untutored work, bracketed with "the most boring?"

I'm an amateur 50% of the time. The rest I get paid for and don't care as long as I get the money. Many members are students. One day they may get qualified by a professional body whereon they can claim to be professionals. Until then, their work is amateurish because they're amateurs.

Okay. I won't post any more on this topic. The problem could be solved by common sense, tact and civility. Why people make such heavy weather of it, god only knows.

M

If you were only calling me out on my use if the word "amateurish," that was probably the incorrect word to use. It does, however, have a negative connotation in everyday english, even though that does not necessarily imply that experienced amateurs create crappy art...of course they don't. This site is testament to the quality of the work of amateurs. Anyway, I hope I cleared that all up! Nothing I hate more than trying to communicate and being misunderstood! Haha

The only point I was trying to make is that absolute rank beginners at composing will probably not make very interesting music---therefore we should not review these at all we should encourage them. Criticism can only be useful once someone has gained enough experience to make more informed decisions about the direction of their composing.

Bitterduck had said that we shouldn't say to someone "good job" etc. unless it is warranted, and I was saying, yes we should, because perhaps that person hasn't reached any level of fluency at composing yet and merely needs to be encouraged! That's the bottom line here folks.

*waves hand* wrong. If that were true, most composers would be "perfect".

'Perfect' is a subjective term when applied to music - that is why I put it in quotes. Music is - to some extent, an abstract art. One's idea of "perfection" differs from others. If there were only one "perfect", then there wouldn't be a need for many different types of music, from simple to complex, from tonal to atonal etc. Music isn't "reaching perfection" because it moves toward more simple or more complex, more counterpoint vrs less, or anything else - since perfection (or perhaps preference or liking is a better term) is, applying your meaning below, ultimately in the eye of the beholder.

I am for the most part satisfied with a piece of music when I finish, until someone criticizes it, which I think it over, and sometimes I disagree with them, but most of the time, they're right, and I correct a passage etc. Of course, some would think that passage IS perfect.

There are plenty of things one can do in music to turn a logical, coherant and pleasing piece into music that has awkward/unfitting and/or unwanted "harsh" moments. If the composer didn't intend for these moments to be there, and is at a loss as to how to correct them (so they are fitting,pleasing,wanted and not harsh) then I agree.

If however, they are there on purpose, or the music is mind-numbingly simple on purpose, for instance, then it may be musical choice on the part of the composer and "improvement" is again in the eye of the beholder.

But to be able to judge this you have to know what the composer aims for in the music he or she writes.

This is all a matter of opinion: Music is in the eye of the beholder...and the listener for that matter.

Agreed.

Mozart and Beethoven and Mahler didn't get to where they are today, just by liking they're own music.

To many people, these composers are nothing but names. I have a friend who commented recently to me "It's hard for me to understand why classical (meaning everything that fits into older, esteemed instrumental art music) is held up in such esteem". This friend listens to popular music on the radio. Is his opinion wrong simply because it differs from mine? Are his preferences for more simple music something to be deplored?

To re-itterate: Sometimes "improvement" is a matter of personal taste and preference. Even in art music such as that that we write.

The poster should have an open mind when posting the composition up for criticism. Sometimes you may not get the critique you expected. Similarly, the people who critique, if negative, don't just say bad things about the composition. Please provide constructive criticism and ways you would improve the piece

-Chopin

gently caress being nice(awaits ban)

Just tell it how it is in your opinion. If there is more good, then a lot of good things will be said. If there is more bad, then more bad will be said. A person should know how to take the good with the bad and know when a person is just being a jerk. It's that simple. If I ever tell nico i like his work, i'm sure he'll die of an orgasm. Why? Because I tell him how I call it. Things tend to mean more when you earn them. Giving a good job and good effort when they are not called for is a waste of time.

Well thats fine if you want to be mean instead of nice, but its likely people are not going to like you when you are mean, and well that will lead you to experience the same level of ill-will you put towards other people.... which is fine, I usually don't like people who are really cruel, and well I think most people are like this.... so well usually I am not nice to these people, and well these people usually get crueler and well it becomes a conflict that keeps worsening.... is that really the way you like things, because its fine if it is.

Regardless you are still being hypocritical since you are saying giving a good job and good effort when they are not called for is a waste of time...... because I personally believe just taking the initiative to compose is worth some kudos for the effort they made and the work they've done. I mean you don't have to shower them granduer feelings of being the absolute best composer that writes masterpeices everytime their pen touches staff paper.... but I mean a simple E for effort lets the person at least feel good about composing.

Also -- A person should know how to take the good with the bad and know when a person is just being a jerk..... yes but reviewers should also know how to take the good with the bad and know when a person is just being a jerk, its not really realistic as a reviewer to expect people to completely admire your opinions as the wisdom of the gods, in fact chances are they will not like you much if you harsh and label you a jerk and then you as a reviewer losses your credibility of judgment.... now in art their isn't so much pressure on the reviewer..... but in politics, people are always at each others throuts because they present their judgment without considering anything but their own feelings and believes and in return they are made fun of and disrespected.

You really avioded much of what I said. I am simply stating that a person should take a review as an opinion. That implies that reviews are opinion and not to be taking as the bible. A person should write a review however they feel like writing one and a person should receive the reviewing knowing this is merely how the person felt. Can I say it any more easier than that? Just because I don't colour my reviews with subtle phrases doesn't mean i'm just being a jerk. Most of my reviews have helpful tips.

So overall, get your head out of your donkey and use your mind.

You really avioded much of what I said. I am simply stating that a person should take a review as an opinion. That implies that reviews are opinion and not to be taking as the bible. A person should write a review however they feel like writing one and a person should receive the reviewing knowing this is merely how the person felt. Can I say it any more easier than that? Just because I don't colour my reviews with subtle phrases doesn't mean i'm just being a jerk. Most of my reviews have helpful tips.

So overall, get your head out of your donkey and use your mind.

THE ONLY POINT I AM MAKING is that really young kids or VERY inexperienced composers CANNOT BENEFIT from being told that their music sucks or hurts your ears or any other negative comment you can think of. Only an experienced composer could take negative criticism and use it positively. What is so hard about this point to understand?

Let me illustrate with an example. Say you are attempting to have a conversation with a baby who can barely form words. You hear something like "Ball" come out of their mouth:

BABY: "...BA!"

you:" YOU SUCK AT TALKING, DON'T EVEN TRY!"

BABY: ::CRIES::

see what I'm saying? the baby needs to be treated with encouragement and patience. You don't tell it it is wrong when it goes "gah gah goo goo" the same is true for very inexperienced composers. They have to build a level of fluency before criticism can be useful.

So, de-embed your head from your own posterior and consider others' feelings.

*waves hand* wrong. If that were true, most composers would be "perfect". I am for the most part satisfied with a piece of music when I finish, until someone criticizes it, which I think it over, and sometimes I disagree with them, but most of the time, they're right, and I correct a passage etc. Of course, some would think that passage IS perfect. This is all a matter of opinion: Music is in the eye of the beholder...and the listener for that matter. Mozart and Beethoven and Mahler didn't get to where they are today, just by liking they're own music.

well I think what derek intends to say is the ultimate goal of the composer is to create the vision they have.... usually a composer comes to just being satisfied with the work they have enough to share it, but they still aren't completely and 100% satisfied to the largest amount with their work. However sometimes composers are simply just satisfied, and well in that case the composer should not take critiscism so seriously because if they've satisfied themselves then thats all that matters, they shouldn't compose in order to please people. Anyways the true negative feeling a composer feels when their work is harshly torn to peices is that maybe to them they were proud and satisfied with their product and their progress, and well they hate to see that work go unnoticed or when their vision is completely missed, I mean harsh criticism is fine to push and motivate the composer to acheive higher standards, but I mean as a reviewer its just down right cruel to rob a composer of the confirmation of the effort and vision they want to achieve and instead make them feel like what they did was nothing.... I mean this is like going up to a person on the street and telling them they are nothing and have no purpose, that they are crap, simply because they haven't mastered certain areas in their life.

You really avioded much of what I said. I am simply stating that a person should take a review as an opinion. That implies that reviews are opinion and not to be taking as the bible. A person should write a review however they feel like writing one and a person should receive the reviewing knowing this is merely how the person felt. Can I say it any more easier than that? Just because I don't colour my reviews with subtle phrases doesn't mean i'm just being a jerk. Most of my reviews have helpful tips.

So overall, get your head out of your donkey and use your mind.

Hmm I find this funny.... because obviously the lights must have been upstairs for me if I can piss you off enough to make you insult me by saying my head is in my donkey! This is actually very exciting......

Well the thing is people present reviews not just for the hell of getting their opinion out there, usually its because of some objective the reviewer has, I mean their is a specific underlying motivation to the person doing the review. Its not like people are just programed to spit out opinions reflexively, and well its not the fact that people are presenting their opinions to the composer, is the fact that the person is presenting their objective to the composer..... in most cases the objective should be to offer advice and help to the composer, and well your not really doing justice to that objective if all you end up accomplishing is destroying the composers motivating, in fact you completely screwed up your objective, because your head is in your donkey and your a horrible reviewer..... and like I believed I mentioned before a review is not always meant to help the composer, but still the objective should be in good will in my opinion, or else I really don't want to hear it.

THE ONLY POINT I AM MAKING is that really young kids or VERY inexperienced composers CANNOT BENEFIT from being told that their music sucks or hurts your ears or any other negative comment you can think of. Only an experienced composer could take negative criticism and use it positively. What is so hard about this point to understand?

Let me illustrate with an example. Say you are attempting to have a conversation with a baby who can barely form words. You hear something like "Ball" come out of their mouth:

BABY: "...BA!"

you:" YOU SUCK AT TALKING, DON'T EVEN TRY!"

BABY: ::CRIES::

see what I'm saying? the baby needs to be treated with encouragement and patience. You don't tell it it is wrong when it goes "gah gah goo goo" the same is true for very inexperienced composers. They have to build a level of fluency before criticism can be useful.

So, de-embed your head from your own posterior and consider others' feelings.

My post wasn't directed towards you but meh

First off how can you compare how you treat a baby to how you treat a beginner? Seriously? We are not dealing with eight year old kids here. We are not dealing with even 12 year olds. For the most part, the kids here are at around the age of 14-16. They are the age where they do not need to be babied every step of the way. I Agree, don't be harsh for no reason, but don't give praise for no reason. I know you say that you can spot talent early on, I Agree, therefore you should encourage them to keep on composing, but if their work isn't good, don't say it is a good. Don't even say it is bad. Just state what you think they can do and what you liked. Let them form their own conclusion about their work from what you have said.

Hmm I find this funny.... because obviously the lights must have been upstairs for me if I can piss you off enough to make you insult me by saying my head is in my donkey! This is actually very exciting......

Well the thing is people present reviews not just for the hell of getting their opinion out there, usually its because of some objective the reviewer has, I mean their is a specific underlying motivation to the person doing the review. Its not like people are just programed to spit out opinions reflexively, and well its not the fact that people are presenting their opinions to the composer, is the fact that the person is presenting their objective to the composer..... in most cases the objective should be to offer advice and help to the composer, and well your not really doing justice to that objective if all you end up accomplishing is destroying the composers motivating, in fact you completely screwed up your objective, because your head is in your donkey and your a horrible reviewer..... and like I believed I mentioned before a review is not always meant to help the composer, but still the objective should be in good will in my opinion, or else I really don't want to hear it.

Actualy, I insult anyone regradless. Stick around longer, you'll see.

Still I don't think its write to attempt to spot talent early on, this is a difficult matter of judgment, there are many cases were people fail at first, but their talent lies in their motivation to excel, or even the cases were people misjudge their talent, einstien was not a good student, so they misjudged him as being stupid, in fact einstein was a genius, because their error in judgment to see that good student =/= smarts in all cases..... just the same its pretty arrogant to believe you hold all the answers to who has talent and who doesn't, this is still a matter of opinion because talent is not something that is easy to judge, true talent is more seated in potential and will than actually being able to start something off in the lead.

Actualy, I insult anyone regradless. Stick around longer, you'll see.

In which case I was right about you being a jerk, therefore proving that I was thinking and didn't have my head in my donkey, because I was right, further proving you only meant to say that to piss me off, further proving your a jerk, further proving I was right..... and it keeps continuing in a big circle of logic all pointing to me being right =)

In which case I was right about you being a jerk, therefore proving that I was thinking and didn't have my head in my donkey, because I was right, further proving you only meant to say that to piss me off, further proving your a jerk, further proving I was right..... and it keeps continuing in a big circle of logic all pointing to me being right =)

I don't deny it. What's your point?

I don't deny it. What's your point?

That I was right and you were wrong lol, which I am glad that we are on the same page :w00t: .

That I was right and you were wrong lol, which I am glad that we are on the same page :w00t: .

On which point? Yo've only proved that i'm a jerk. It isn't like i'm debating it. You have really talked about anything else I Wrote about. Oh well, idiots will be idiots. Who am I to stop them. :o

On which point?

come on now get your head out of your donkey and start thinking! I just posted the points above :w00t: .

come on now get your head out of your donkey and start thinking! I just posted the points above :w00t: .

Like I said, we weren't discussing the issue that i'm a jerk. You only proved that I am one. What am I doing? I'm trying to be logical with an idiot. That is simply a waste of time. *goes get food*

On which point? Yo've only proved that i'm a jerk. It isn't like i'm debating it. You have really talked about anything else I Wrote about. Oh well, idiots will be idiots. Who am I to stop them. :w00t:

actually I also posted that I was right that I was really thinking and didn't have my head in my donkey because I obviously had to have been thinking in order to be right about you being a jerk, and you posted back you don't deny it.

I can say you started to think only because I told you too, which makes me your master.

Like I said, we weren't discussing the issue that i'm a jerk. You only proved that I am one. What am I doing? I'm trying to be logical with an idiot. That is simply a waste of time. *goes get food*

Yes thinking is a waste of time for the less intelligent, instead they spend their time eating food and calling people idiots out of jealousy because they fail to understand obvious facts....

I can say you started to think only because I told you too, which makes me your master.

Well I at least I started to think =), seeing as how you passed over the point I made in disillusion, besides I posted my post in before you told me to start thinking, so nice try with the master thing.