How my judging process works (NGADM '14)

Orchestral music, weird instruments, and sample libraries just about sums it up.

Sam Gossner @samulis

Age 29, Male

Sample Library Dev

Berklee College of Music

New England

Joined on 1/3/10

Level:: 9
Exp Points:: 715 / 900
Exp Rank:: 95,727
Vote Power:: 5.08 votes

Rank:: Civilian
Global Rank:: 79,711
Blams:: 14
Saves:: 64
B/P Bonus:: 0%

Whistle:: Normal

Trophies:: 7
Medals:: 173
Supporter:: 3y 10m 19d
Gear:: 4

How my judging process works (NGADM '14)

Posted by samulis - August 25th, 2014

**If you are interested in seeing a full breakdown of your score and you are not in one of my three review groups, please let me know via PM or comment!

There are five categories I judged you in. Each category was determined independently of each other, and the final result was a mathematical result of the determinations I made, so really, I put in my thoughts, and I get out a single number that is your score out of 10. The categories are weighted to add extra emphasis on more important categories. Below is a list of each category, the weight, and what it includes.

Production- /30
The quality of your sounds and recordings if sampled or live (less important), your mix's clarity (very important), the quality and depth of the mastering process, spatial positioning, balance, tasteful use of earcandy. I also include how well you use your samples- is it painfully obvious that is a 2xRR stacc violin? Do you use the 127 velocity of the horn ensemble in EWQLSO that has a 100 ms attack and sounds like shit? etc. If live performance, I include the tightness of your performance here. A top-rated production track sounds completely flawless and like it was recorded or produced in a professional studio and I could buy it on CD and not feel any regret.

Composition- /30
The complexity and detail of your work, relative to your chosen genre/style, tasteful choice of chords, varied chord prog. and cadences, effective use of form (i.e. not repeating the same thing over and over again, having a contrasting B section), tasteful use of backgrounds and counterpoint if applicable, tasteful layering of front, mid, and back sounds. Things like tasteful ornaments, subtle counter-melodies, and award-winning melodies will have a large impact. I add bonus points here for songs that use lyrics that are well written. A top-rated composition track will make Bach turn red in envy and make my jaw hit the floor with your incredible detail and mastery of music-ing. A piece that is super complex but unclear or boring as a result will not receive many points.

Instrumentation/Orchestration- /15
Did your instrument or synth choices properly reflect the feel and style you were going for? Less focus on sound quality and more on the actual choice of instruments. I'm looking for use of texture, blending, zones, layering, arpeggios, using different instrument families, having variation in the synths/instruments that are present with the melody, and how well you used each synth/instrument. Extra points if you perform parts live, with focus on the tone and timbre of the instrument or vocals and if they match the music (i.e. blasting trumpet is a no no on quiet sad song, quiet trumpet is a no no on a loud blasting song during blasting part). For orchestral songs, I also look for traditional orchestration techniques and practices- use of texture, function, and balance. A top-rated track in this category will have all the instruments required in the genre/style chosen, and if adds others, uses them tastefully and appropriately.

Originality- /10
It is okay if your piece "sounds like you" (in fact, that's a good thing). What I am more concerned about is if your piece sounds like every other piece I hear in this genre (i.e. your cinematic music sounds like exactly what I would expect for cinematic music and has no remarkable features other than that), as well as if your piece's content, both melodic and harmonic, felt trite and boring. I rewarded pieces that also presented innovative approaches, such as sampling household items, or pieces that presented innovative combinations of genres that worked. Note that if you are innovative and it sucks, you will not gain extra points here. A top-rated originality track presents an innovative method of either blending ideas or elaborating on an existing genre to create a personalized sound and touch that stands apart from the rest.

Interest/Emotion- /15
This category is kinda a 2-for-1 sort of thing. Part of this is straight up how much I like listening to your piece as an end user. Is it tolerable? Does it hurt my ears? Does it feel good? The other part is if it conveys any meaning or emotion (or if it is supposed to and does not). If you write a happy song about bears dancing with hot girls on clouds, I want to be grinning so wide you will mistake me for the Joker. A top rated interest track will have my foot tapping the floor so hard it shatters and have so much feeling I cry out all the water in my body and turn into a mummy.

Now, I'd like to talk a bit about what I think about when I am judging.

I'll admit, I unfortunately am not a sadist. I am, however, brutally honest. In this contest, I'm not just comparing your pieces to you, I am comparing your pieces to industry standards and professional recordings/compositions, and not just in production values. I want the person who wins this contest to be the kind of guy who will go on to score the next big game or record a big album. I want the people who don't win to want to be that guy, so I've decided to be honest and exacting in my grading. I reward creativity. I reward your best ever effort. I do not reward tracks that feel like the same quality and depth of detail as all of your other tracks.

If you are a good composer, I expect a brilliant, 5-star composition that will leave me cold, hungry, and rocking back and forth like a baby wanting to quit music and go do underwater basket weaving for my career. If you are good at synthesis, I expect you to build your pads by hand or even crazy stuff like formulas and not just use presets. If you are decent but learning, I expect something that pushes beyond what your best existing peice has achieved.

All this may sound hard, but really, that's how the real world works. When you pick up a scoring job, they don't say "I want you to really not try at all and just spit out a bunch of your normal fare." Even if they don't say it out loud, their thoughts and actions say "I want you to dedicate yourself to making this score the best you can possibly make it." This is the same with people working as artists- the label doesn't want NORMAL. They want INSANELY EPICLY AWESOME. Pieces that can capture and bring people along with them for the ride that is their duration.

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT GENRE OR STYLE YOU CHOOSE. I WILL JUDGE YOU SOLEY BASED ON YOUR ABILITY COMPARED TO PROFESSIONALS AND ROLE MODELS IN THAT GENRE OR STYLE.

Remember: I'm proud of everyone who has made it through the open round. This is an insanely hard contest. I myself have never made it past the first round with the exception of the time I worked with Bosa. If I give you a low score, it does NOT mean you suck. It means I expected and hoped for more from you, for greater, for more emotion and more energy put in to the work. This is not Throw It Together: The Contest. This is a deathmatch, which means I want strangling and teeth and hair ripping, not just little pushes and shoves. ;)

Your insane judge,

-Samulis

Comments

Log in to Comment

adieuwinter 2014-08-25 22:45:16

this is great information (although I didn't make it into NGADM much less receive one of your reviews). Any chance I can use your judging methods as an outline of things to avoid and then ask you for a review of a track I'm working on right now?

samulis 2014-08-25 22:45:16

Haha, no need, these are special criteria for the contest. I'd be glad to review anything you are working on. I must warn you, I'm really only good at solidly critiquing orchestral, ambient, and some jazz tracks, but I can give some ideas and feedback on most things.

adieuwinter 2014-08-26 07:39:51

great, so I'll PM you when I have something? I'm writing a bit of a punk rock track but it has some ballad-y parts. (generally I write ambient and trance though)

samulis 2014-08-26 07:39:51

Sure, if you'd like. I also recommend you find someone who has experience in punk rock to provide feedback on that sort of thing. I can mostly comment on flow, repetition, lyrics if present, chord choices, voicings, etc. but not really on mastering or performance or composition for that kind of music.

Jakey-San 2014-08-27 10:53:12

This is a nice read, and a helpful way to get into your head. But one passage in particular bothers me:

"your cinematic music sounds like exactly what I would expect for cinematic music and has no remarkable features other than that"

Are you debasing the cinematic category as a whole? You make it sound as if all cinematic music sounds the same, but that is FAR from the truth. There are quite a few fresh and inventive soundtracks out there that stray from classical orchestral, and they are just as compositionally legitimate. Perhaps if you called out cliches from another genre (for the sake of multiple examples), then that would be at least a little less-biased. But as it stands, your judgement sounds extremely unfair, especially for the small number of cinematic guys here on NG who push hard to find a unique voice, and a couple of them are still in the competition.

samulis 2014-08-27 10:53:12

That was an example... I might as well have said "Your pop song sounds like an average pop song and has no remarkable features other than that". This doesn't mean "Your pop song sounds like an excellently written, catchy, and enjoyable pop song". This means "Your pop song sounds like an average-effort, decent pop song."

As I said, genres are, as much as I can make them, irrelevant. I judge entries compared to examples from my perceived standards for genres, and those standards presented to me by others.

That being said, it is obvious and factually evident that I have more experience in certain genres, mainly those including orchestras or live recording. Because of that, I am more aware of those tropes. If it appears I am judging "cinematic" entries harder, it is true.

Almost every entry in "cinematic" this year aside one was action cinematic, the most tropiest and standardized of all cinematic sub-genres. It almost ALWAYS follows the same pattern and uses the exact same ideas, sounds, instrumentation, and tropes. It's like getting to write pop music without words and have everyone automatically love you for it- formulaic, straightforward, and incredibly quick. In film scoring, that is WONDERFUL. That is amazing. That is the best thing since sliced bread- you can double the speed you write, you can have a wonderful sounding track without killing yourself due to the generally incredibly unfair deadline and the painful complexity of writing traditional romantic-infused tracks of the Golden Age.

However, in a contest where you have several weeks to do 2-5 minutes (on average) instead of two days, I'm would assume a professional composer would be able to do much more with their piece than the basics. It's like if I gave Wagner 5 years to write a short opera and all he came up with was this little simple string quartet suite that uses four chords. It may be catchy, but it's an average attempt at writing music, it's not Tannhauser or Das Rheingold.

I don't want people to change what they are doing, I want them to explore how much they can add to what they are doing. Film composers have intense deadlines. Here is a time when you can move at relative leisure and explore compositionally, tonally, and texturally in new ways that they are unable to. I want to urge people to try doing things that push beyond just the basics. Instead of just having staccato strings, what about staccato woodwinds? What about having a break with a harp and oboe duet? There are so many possibilities with textures and harmonies in the orchestra, it pains me to see people lock in on just one texture or one rather standard chord progression and never try different things. Contrast is a huge part of music, and it's not just about quiet and loud, it's also about different chord progs, different vibes, and different textures.

I hope that a bit better explains that point. Let me know if it still doesn't make sense.

Jakey-San 2014-08-27 17:59:48

I agree with you that a good composition utilizes many colors and techniques, and yes maybe some of this year's entries have been the cliche action stuff. But as far as instrumentation goes, you've got it all wrong. Mixing multiple colors doesn't mean just organic orchestral or ethnic elements. This isn't the 19th century anymore. Rules are made to be broken, and music of all styles have been known to constantly break down barriers of what you can or can't do. Who's to say that following a formulaic classical style isn't cliche either? It really is, but not many people are willing to admit it, just because traditions are more widely accepted as compositionally superior to some obscure, impressionist piece of music. Why not have staccato synths or electric guitar in place of staccato woodwinds? Why not have drums propel the intensity of a track if the mood calls for it? To say that most of these guys locked in on just one set of textures is doing them a major disservice, because EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM branched out from their norm and tried something risky.

Also, I have to disagree with you about what a good piece of music means. Sure putting together a contrast of chord progressions, melodies, etc. means that you are fundamentally savvy, but does it always mean a good composition? Hardly. Have you heard of minimalist writing? Philip Glass, John Adams, Steve Reich, Arvo Part, Johann Johannsson, those guys are geniuses who make use of unorthodox tones, textures, and very little movement of techniques that would have been laughed at a century ago, but are praised today because of progress. Most important is context and emotional gravitas. The techniques in conveying those things may serve as interesting case studies, but aren't any more or less legitimate than one another.

samulis 2014-08-27 17:59:48

I understand why you seem upset, but I am at a loss for some of your points. Oddly enough, my argument seems to be essentially the exact same as yours.

First off, I am COMPLETELY accepting of mixtures of genres and influences. I have not said ONCE that entries must follow "rules". I have no idea why you insist I want people to write "formulaic Classical." (I haven't even mentioned Classical, and I think you are mistaking it for Baroque anyway) I have absolutely no desire to hold people back, as I said to another person. I want people to explore not only their potential at the present, but try to reach out and find additional inspirations which can provide them with more insights. The reason I mention the periods or examples I do is because those are the most immediate examples of possible routes that I myself among many others took when I was in their shoes, but in no way intended as any sort of limit. For people to truly branch off, they need to be attached to the tree first. You cannot simply start out on a limb.

As you well put, why not have electric guitar or staccato synths? These are again, fabulous ideas. I would welcome this very warmly. However, I don't know why you mention these things because ABSOLUTELY none of the cinematic entries did either of these things as I can recall. You are thinking I am trying to restrain people again, I am afraid. I am not. I am trying to free people to reach out and find new things they can adapt and use in their pieces by presenting immediate and common alternatives, like suggesting you have oatmeal for breakfast if you don't want cereal. You're kinda saying "well, why didn't you tell them to make ham and eggs?" Because oatmeal is more similar to breakfast cereal? It was the first on my mind? The two have a common heritage? Because it is almost as easy to make?

If everyone copied the same style of music just like the same exact person, it would be an extremely boring place. This is pretty much what I experienced this past round. In fact, MAYBE one or two of the cinematic entries did anything even REMOTELY risky. Every. single. one. took the conservative, safe, modern approach. They went for the friendliest, most normal, typical style, instrumentation, feel, and textures. I have no idea why you insist that I am somehow against innovation when innovation is one of my criteria and something I am trying to push for!

I am a big fan of Minimalism. Minimalism is the greatest mastery and exploration of the art of texture ever taken on by musicians. In truth, if you actually LISTEN to what these people do, it is NOT completely new. Nothing, ever, in music or ANY of the arts is completely new. It is always, and forever will be, recombination of previous elements in ways that appear at a first glance to be novel. There is always a clear and straightforward pathway of evolution radiating out from mankind's earliest adventures into music because that is how the human mind works.

We are physically hardwired to work by recombining elements- every single invention in history is simply a recombination of existing elements or ideas into a more efficient platform. Just because someone like Adams or Glass or Reich can freeze a texture in its place and take the time to analyze every element of it in front of you doesn't mean it isn't changing. It doesn't mean there isn't contrast. There is tons of contrast going on, and tons of tiny motions and changes. Not to mention, if you listen to an entire work by one of these, you will find an enormous amount of contrast, they're just better at spreading it out and really dissecting each part before moving on.

Philip Glass, in fact, has a number of works that are (proclaimed by himself and generally agreed upon to be) greatly inspired by Baroque, Classical, and Romantic works, as do John Adams or even John Williams or even Hans Zimmer. My point in all of what I have said is, I do not want people to pigeon hole themselves in one little area for all eternity. I can promise you, from both my experience and the experiences of dozens of others I have learned about in books or in conversations, the best way to advance as a musician is to diversify yourself and your influences.

Every single successful composer has a broad foundation across multiple eras, genres, and styles, and even cultures. Charles Ives started out studying traditional classical before he turned to polytonality and modernism. Beethoven, one of the first of the great Romantics, studied Classical composition and ended up turning away from it. His final works are even to this day, impressively modern for their time, and served as inspirations for everyone from Richard Wagner (the most insane of the romantics) to Bela Bartok (one of the greatest composers post-romantic). Countless numbers of film composers from the Golden Age of Cinema drew heavily upon the at-the-time lingua franca of music, the Romantic style, which was not too complex for a general audience, not too boring for music snobs, and designed and built from the ground up as a series of tropes designed to express and contain emotion, thought, and feeling, and they didn't stop there! They added bits from post-romantics, enthusiastic nods to people like Bartok and Schoenberg, essentially encompassing everything from Early Music to the music of their times.

This isn't some snobby history book I am preaching to people. These are people, just like you and me, who hundreds of years ago were denounced as blasphemous and radical. They had new ideas, brilliant ideas. Beethoven's radical idea were just as radical and risky as Wagner, just as radical and risky as Bartok, just as radical and risky as Adams, just as radical and risky as you and me.

It is important to remember the past because it provides the foundation for the future. You cannot be so ignorant as to denounce 500+ years of musical evolution full of wild radicals and risks in a time when you could be beheaded for such things as "formulaic" or "normal". There were John Cages in the 1700s just a much as there are John Cages now, but you know what is special about all those John Cages? They knew EXACTLY what came before them. They knew all these different inspirations and blended them, like Romantics drawing from folk music, like post-romantics and impressionists drawing from the music of Asia or Africa, or even like the early Renaissance composers drawing from the instruments of the Orient because Europe pretty much had none.

My goal here isn't to force people, but to open them up to new things and old things alike and help them get a broader foundation to the music they write. I have already sent out very large review messages to two individuals and they have both said the feedback, ideas, and suggestions I have offered to them have been extremely helpful and will come in very useful. The evidence stands that I am here strictly to help people achieve greater, not conform to any dumb standards or cliches, be they modern OR historical.

Go write a dubstassicopjazockballaelectro polka waltz march symphony etude extreme using boomwackers, a bear juggling chainsaws, and your grandma's dentures for percussion, a herd of african elephants as brass, 12 electric guitars, 49 jaw harps, blown bottle, and a choir of 1,000, but make it all work, and you will get a perfect 100. :P

Jakey-San 2014-08-27 22:09:45

TL;DR. I'm not impressed by your book-long research paper rebuttal that I'm sure took you at least an hour to come up with. The fact is that your music tastes and judgement of others' music speak louder than any encyclopedia you copy/paste from. I've come across some real talented people in this competition, and your pretentiously harsh judgment criteria was a major contributing factor in shafting most of these people from any real opportunity to shine.

samulis 2014-08-27 22:09:45 (Updated 2014-08-27 22:29:30)

I still have absolutely no idea why you are so hateful towards me. I used to admire you, Jacob Cadmus. I used to consider your name among a list of many of the greatest musicians on Newgrounds, but your actions and words these past two days have deeply wounded my respect for you.

Your entry was an amazing piece, one of the most innovative in the contest, and quite well composed. It is one of my favorites for the contest. Furthermore, in case you were so blind to see, I rated you as the BEST in your bracket! I wanted YOU to win! If you're just here to troll because you didn't win, go find something better to do. I'm not going to baby someone, especially you, a person I admire greatly, just because you are a little butthurt because of my rating of your entry and don't want to admit it, and would rather accuse me of having poor judgement or poor taste because that helps you rationalize your own shortcomings.

If I hurt your arrogance in any way by giving you a score below a perfect 10, it is the fault of you and you alone. No one here is going to get a perfect score in my books, especially not myself. Criticism and hard hits are what life is, so sorry I can't dolly-face up your loss with a big apologetic sob for you. "Oh, I'm so sorry I hurt your feelings, I'm such a shithead judge and don't know anything about good music, since you are always correct, so here have a cookie."

Well then, why don't you just consider that I have the judgement of a dunce and the musical taste of a man without ears if it will just make you just stop your bitching about every little thing I say! I'm not a counsellor OR a punching bag and I refuse to be used as either any longer.

Goodbye and try again next year.

SkyeWint 2014-08-27 22:39:17

This is why I review all the pieces

samulis 2014-08-27 22:39:17

ROFL, I wish I had time for that... At least I've beaten you in the length of my reviews so far...

Jakey-San 2014-08-27 22:47:51

Wow. I really couldn't give two shits about what happened to me in the contest; it has come to my attention from a few people I spoke with personally that your reviews to their pieces were ridiculous and overtly harsh. I'm merely supporting them; not myself. I'm not trolling; just here to tell you to lighten up because you're not in any *real* position to be so critical on others' work. And I'M the arrogant one? Heh.

samulis 2014-08-27 22:47:51 (Updated 2014-08-27 23:24:01)

Reasons I am in a position to be critical of others' works:
1. I am a judge.
2. Judges are critical by nature. That is how you JUDGE anything, by being CRITICAL. I don't know, maybe judge means "Votes ten on everything" in French or something, but it means analytical, critical examiner in English, I'm pretty sure.
3. I am judging a contest where the choice of the winner is IMPORTANT. I have to be critical to make sure I pick the people who present the most qualified entries across the five criteria of my judging rubric.
4. My results are averaged with five others. If I am wrong, it will balance out. If I judge harder, it will balance out.
5. People deserve a honest, truthful impression on their piece when they submit it to a CHALLENGING contest. I refuse to flower up my ratings OR my reviews because people cannot handle a honest and serious piece of feedback.

Fair is what you get when six people with different opinions that average out judge you in a challenging, rigorous contest to determine the best composer/producer of the year on the entire NGAP.

Nice is what you get when I am going around listening to songs outside of this contest at my leisure and give everyone lots of 10's and 9's because I seriously like to do that and it makes me feel good to be nice to people.

All the few people that I have spoken to personally who were smart enough to ask me why said they were extremely pleased with the feedback they received and thanked me for my time and effort. I am very careful to not step on the nerves of those who don't step on mine and get to the point of what they've been talking about instead of going in this roundabout accusatory game of cat and mouse for two days.

I have not reviewed ANY pieces aside from the two individuals who said the reviews were very nice and thanked me for my time and effort. Perhaps you are referring to my judgements I made for Newgrounds' Audio DEATH MATCH (i.e. not spelled "circlejerk", "hugfest", or "intergalactic pajama party"), the website's longest running, most challenging, and most prestigious contest, which is definitely a contest I want to go about giving everyone perfect 10/10 scores in, because, according to everything I have heard from you so far, that's how being a judge totally works!

The only people who can judge ME are those who have either A. done this before and indeed have more years of experience critically (read: seriously/actually/honestly/with effort) judging the NGADM than me or B. have something other than a sobbing fit and a huff-puff chest regarding their losses.

Tell your "few people" (a.k.a. the people you made up so you could keep attacking me like this) that I will GLADLY and OPENLY reveal all my thoughts on their scores, if they would please PM me, I will tell them whatever they want to know about why and how I arrived at the score I did and what I personally feel they could do to improve their score in later contests.

SkyeWint 2014-08-27 23:39:17

For the record, Jacob, I judged in much the same way last year and I got a grand total of three complaints. I think part of the problem is that there aren't that many reviews in the first round, so people don't get to see the exact reasons why their piece isn't a winner.

I was a harsh, arrogant prick, but that's the point. The judges are supposed to be harsh (maybe not arrogant pricks though), that's what makes the contest a challenge. Knowing why the judges are judging the way they are is important, it helps demonstrate why pieces got the scores they did. Reviews would be better, but sixty reviews is a lot. They probably don't have the time (though admittedly, it does seem like Sam does considering the novella he's written here).

Also for the record, a LOT of film music is the same kind of stuff, same kinds of techniques. Doing the same kind of stuff isn't going to win you contests. Doing the same kind of stuff really well WILL lose to someone who does something creative really well, and this is a contest of people who make music really well.

samulis 2014-08-27 23:39:17

Pretty much exactly what I have been getting at, thanks.

Re: reviewing everything... uh... we'll see about that one. Most of my reviews for these sorts of things end up being incredibly long.

SkyeWint 2014-08-27 23:45:34

oh, also. Sam.

roflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflroflrofl

samulis 2014-08-27 23:45:34

Intergalactic Pajama Party Time!!! WOOOOOO

Jakey-San 2014-08-28 00:00:05

What are your ACTUAL qualifications to be a judge, other than NG stats? Have you talked to EVERYONE whose music you reviewed? I doubt it. Even if you did, how many "thank you's" were actually honest? I'm appalled that you think I would stoop as low as making up fake people to "attack" you. If everyone had been so receptive to your reviews as you claim, then I wouldn't be talking to you now about it. Look down at @KatMaestro's comment and you'll see that I caught you in YOUR lie (and no, he's not one of the people who PM'ed me). Listen, I can respect the other judges' reviews because they are straight to the point and genuinely helpful (most of the time), and not some self-righteous 20-page nitpick to shove down our throats how educated you are. I'm not saying that all judgment has to be nice. If a piece of music or artwork is bad enough to warrant harsh criticism, then so be it. But as an unbiased perspective, I've heard lots of outstanding pieces that you ripped apart.

samulis 2014-08-28 00:00:05

"What are your ACTUAL qualifications to be a judge, other than NG stats?"

Well, let's see here:
1. Studying Film Scoring at what is acclaimed to be the top music school in the US, if not world (Berklee), and made it in besides the point. Also studied previously with an influential bitonal composer from my state, who has scored films.
2. Five years of experience as a composer on NG, for over a dozen projects, and over a dozen years of experience with music in general.
3. Written over 200 reviews or pieces of feedback on pieces on NG and off, almost entirely receiving very pleased replies and lots of "great" ratings.
4. Judged AIM, ran NGMT w/ Skye.
5. Won the state composition contest three times, and has placed in no less than a half dozen contests in my time on NG.
6. Has read countless guides and books on music, composition, music history, orchestration, film scoring, film scoring THEORY, game scoring, and more.
7. Has written for, and had works performed by everything from concert bands to bassoon trios.
8. Has taught at least half a dozen individuals music theory and orchestration.
9. Has attended countless performances by live symphonies (particularly Hartford Symphony Orchestra and Boston Symphony Orchestra and ensembles in a variety of styles (everything from French Christmas Music from the Renaissance to a whole entire concert with music by Philip Glass), and taken in countless hours of live performance to judge the quality of mixing/mastering of virtual performances.
10. Served as an administrator and "reporter" for the official blog of a major browser game, giving me skills to judge quality work and provide effective feedback and mitigate bias in my reportings.

Those are my qualifications. Any questions?

"if everyone had been so receptive of your reviews as you claim..."

Of my REVIEWS yes, of my RATINGS/JUDGEMENTS, that I do not know, but you are currently officially the only person who has complained to me in any way, shape, or form.

"you'll see that i caught you in YOUR lie"

aaand which lie is that?

"other judges reviews... ... are straight to the point and genuinely helpful."

I still don't see any reviews I have done. All I have done is provided feedback, and both of those people told me they were absolutely satisfied and glad I did that for them.

"20 page nitpick to shove down our throats..."

I preface every feedback message/review with the words "take this with a grain of salt" and end every one with "I hope at least one thing in here will help you and inspire you to continue your work." Not sure where the shoving is.

"I've heard lots of outstanding pieces that you ripped apart"

Wait... so the point of this contest is for me to NOT find anything wrong with the outstanding pieces, but only rip apart the terrible ones? I thought people wanted to find room for improvement. Just because you find a piece outstanding, doesn't mean everyone else does btw. It might sound good, like sugar might taste good, but every single piece ever made has problems, and as a judge, it's my job to ignore the fact that I might love a piece to death and find the problems, which I painfully and with great regret did, and here is how I am rewarded, by you throwing a hissy fit.

Anything other questions? Denouncements? Etc. Feel free, I am here all week, ladies and gents.

Jakey-San 2014-08-28 00:22:27

OK guys, how about you give me your thoughts on my last track (PUBLICLY). Be as harsh as you want, I won't say a word about it. I'll just let others read what you say and let them decide for themselves if they agree or not.

samulis 2014-08-28 00:22:27

Alright Jacob. I'm going off of a copy of your track I just downloaded. this will be a public, open feedback message. This is exactly what you would see in a message. Since you asked for this, I expect you to not TL;DR. This is a genuine attempt to provide my thoughts.

============
Alright Jacob, let's do this.

Your score is broken up as follows:
Production: 24.5/30
Composition: 24/30
Instrumentation/Orchestration: 11/15
Originality: 8.5/10
Interest: 10/15

Total: 78/100 OR 7.8/10

(for more info on what each category includes, see this newspost)

Elaboration:
The following is my feedback on your piece. Please take it with a grain of salt, as it is just one opinion in six.

Starting off in instrument choices, I especially enjoyed the pad sound and the ambient piano at the start, as well as the gorgeous fluttering of the trem violins at 30 seconds in. The guitars sounded great as well, and were an effective addition.

Compositionally, the track is not bad as a whole.

The strings have some nice playing around. However, once we get into the main body of the song, things start to get a little busy and it is hard to tell the separation of near, middle, and far elements in piece, as many middle and far elements (rhythm guitars notably) are too loud for their position, and then at 1:35 when the violins are playing all sorts of wild staccato patterns on the same note, they stand out like a sore thumb in the mix, this kind of high whining sound chugging away above the ground, dragging our attention away from all the guitars so that we can't even hear what they are doing. In that regard, the entire song after 1:35 is some strings in the foreground with guitars doing who knows what because my attention is elsewhere.

You chose to keep your violins up there for a long time. There are a few issues with high violins. The first is that the human ear acoustically has a harder time distinguishing pitch in high notes and low notes. The second is that violins are more troublesome to keep in tune together when they are really high, as a result of the first and also a result of the way a violin works (i.e. the "frets" or space between notes get "smaller" the higher you go). This also means that your listeners will have trouble making out melodic content really high up (this and hearing loss are why piccolo solos aren't as popular as Sousa wished they would become).

It's generally a bad idea to have strings taking solos without doubling them when anything loud is playing. There are several routes of dominance one can take when trying to make a melody over loud middle and far layers- go higher, go louder, and go bigger. I would recommend bigger- mix something in with the violins and/or double them an octave down- violas, trumpets, horns, oboes, clarinets, flutes are all great options, even a synth or a piano would work, or having one of your guitars double it to give it extra power. These are just a few suggestions, I urge you to experiment around and find a way to really get the violin lines clearer and more present.

One of my favorite things about this piece is the fabulously relaxing yet badass mood. I felt the mixing of orchestral and rock instruments was effective, much more than many attempts I have heard at it in the past. However, this also has some repercussions in the mastering.

It is clear you went with a more modern rock approach to mixing mastering a track than a classical one. The track is very loud for most of its duration, reducing the endurance of the listener, which is a practical consideration for a score. This compression also has the negative effect of making it harder to hear the individual elements and the contrast between them.

As a result, you ended up with a rather muddy mix, as Step pointed out, especially up in the 1:35 end of things. It was, in the nicest terms, a couple violins and cellos hanging above a big pile of freshly tilled ground. Throughout the piece there is still quite a bit of clashing instruments, even after you have updated it (or at least it sounds like you have, less clash than I remember).

Part of this may be because there appear to be two different approaches to mix going on- a full LR approach where you pan stuff all the way over, and a more partial approach where stuff ends up floating around the middle, like in an orchestra (e.g. piano, cello, pad). As a listener, this may be disconcerting if a melody jumps around between these points, or if we are trying to listen to something in far left while trying to take in the rest. I suggest taking a more even spreading and avoid a super wide spread with elements that carry melody. Far LR approaches work best with background stuff, like middle-of-the-piano arps, pads, and rhythm guitars. Lead elements work best when more centered.

The guitar/piano that comes in around 10" is a little odd sitting in the mix. We start off with this great stereo spread and gigantic reverb, normal in an ambient piece, and suddenly we are hit with a mono source from the left with very little to no room.

I think the real losers in this mix were the strings. For some reason, either due to EQ choices, compression, or the samples themselves, they come off sounding extremely tinny and thin, with almost no presence, not to mention nearly drowned out by everything else going on (especially the guitar right below them to the left that is obscuring their lower harmonics with its mid and upper harmonics). Moreover, the violins get unnaturally pressed to the far left.

Now let's address the use of reverb in the mix. You really have a war going on here. Our pad and reverby piano suggest a solid wetness. Your guitars and strings suggest dryness and wetness at different points. It's normally best to balance these, I would suggest by taking away reverb, especially from the background elements (when in doubt, take away reverb). The drums come in fine, but at around 0:35 when I am listening to them, the high hat has this really roomy reverb that makes them asynchronous with the room of the rest of the piece (drying them out more could work). Also, they are a bit wide. A physical set is not the entire size of a soundstage no matter what set you're working with.

The drums later end up getting swallowed up a bit, notably with the toms and cymbals... and the kick... and the snare... I would definitely consider turning everything else down. It's sometimes good to try turning everything down in a mix and then using a maximizer/limiter on it to bring it all back up.

I hope at least one thing I have mentioned here will help you in your future compositions and I look forward to your next work. :)

Best,
-Sam

SkyeWint 2014-08-28 00:24:58

I thought you were defending others' tracks though, not your own.

...are you sure about that? Sounds a lot like you're more concerned with your own loss than others' tracks.

SkyeWint 2014-08-28 00:42:44

...also, *have* you ever judged a contest before? It's actually pretty damn difficult to give accurate scores and be harsher than normal.

I honestly just gave up on trying to keep being nice with my critique and haven't really turned off "judge mode" when reviewing since then, when people ask for critique. You NEED to be harsh, otherwise people will get through who don't deserve it.

samulis 2014-08-28 00:42:44

Confirmed: you are an asshole when judging my tracks. :P

Jakey-San 2014-08-28 00:48:53

This IS my way of defending other people's tracks. If I were concerned about my own, then I wouldn't give you guys the go-ahead to rip on it.

samulis 2014-08-28 00:48:53

Alright Jacob, I spent my entire day replying to you when I could have used it writing reviews for the people in my review group or catching up on my projects or doing anything but arguing with someone on the internet. I wrote a review on your previous comment with my thoughts and I hope you will be satisfied.

SkyeWint 2014-08-28 01:07:46

Ow.

You just made me fall off the couch from laughter.

Okay, seriously. I don't know whether you think I'm ignorant or not, but that is far from defending other people's tracks. If someone thinks they got an unfair score and actually cares to know why rather than just caring about whining about it, they WOULD want a review. They wouldn't want to know why someone else's track didn't make it, they would want to know why theirs didn't, because that helps them, and specifically them, improve. If, then, the reasons were unfair, they would probably still complain - and they would actually have an argument for it.

So actually, no. No free extra review from me. I don't care to give critique to liars, and it sounds like you either fall neatly into that category, or have so little experience in judging and giving good critique that almost all of your argument falls flat on its face (it only does this to a lesser extent if you're lying about being concerned about others' pieces).

Guess what else? I actually thought that some scores were unfair too - particularly Neon-Bard's score on DamienFleisch's track. I didn't ask him to review another high-scoring track in the same category, I asked him to review Damien's. That way, Damien could know what Neon thought and everyone else who might have been curious about why the low score happened could know, too.

MetalRenard 2014-08-28 05:00:01

That's a really in-depth scoring system you have there. I guess it helps to break it down that much, but I prefer a more simplified approach for my own sanity.
Speaking of... *looks down*

samulis 2014-08-28 05:00:01

hahaha don't look down into the abyss of this page. You will regret it!

Jakey-San 2014-08-28 05:16:32

OK listen Sam, I realize that I may have been a BIT aggressive towards you. Perhaps I was a little judgmental of your judging, and for that I apologize. But my view still stands that your tastes are somewhat skewed (IMO) in the cinematic category, and that your reviews are overtly harsh and lengthy, yes even on MY track. I like my high violins, my loud rock mastering, and my uber reverbs. But I won't fight you on it; you're the judge and I'm the judgee. You do your craft and I do mine. In regards to the other composers, I am 100% honest when I say that I have in fact gotten complaints about your reviews. Perhaps I was out of line to stick my nose in and play "defender;" from now on I'll just let it be and let them handle it if they want to.

Skye, laugh all you want. I merely put my own track on a pedestal to prove that I'm not scared of anything that anyone has to say about me or my music. It is not a cry for attention or reassurance. I don't care if you even have an opinion at all.

samulis 2014-08-28 05:16:32

I too apologize that I at points got a bit aggressive trying to explain things. This is the internet, we are people, these things happen.

I know they're your high violins, loud rock mastering, and uber reverbs, just like how I have my wash it all away reverb and non-existent drums and recorded recorders. These are tropes we each subscribe to and they make our pieces tasty to some and smelly to others.

If people have complaints about me, they are welcome to speak to the only three people who can do anything about that, me, or Step and Echo as organizers if they don't feel comfortable asking me. :)

EvilRaccoon 2014-08-28 08:17:58

There's a lot of concern here, and to be honest it's quite good that it's out and the open as we're all on the same playing field, and ultimately we want the same thing, to improve. Sam and Jacob both have a lot of experience from seeing what's below, and speaking to them. We all do, I've been listening to Film Score music before Sam was born (yes yes imma old) so I have a lot of different experience, as well as work in the audio too in games.

However this is still a subjective matter, and when we're at NGs we use this as a playing field, to experiment, learn techniques and improve on them. I'd hate to think that people are being judged on how good they're expected to be, or if they pushed beyond their own personal boundaries. Entries should be judged amongst the same criteria on the same level, and past experience should not be taken into account. If so, we means well give the winner for being best improved not best track. So although it's good to explore genres it should not be thought about when judging.

There's a category which I think Sam seems to skip not that ive relooked at it, which I take into account when judging and this is overall impression. Although you can break a track into Production, Composition, Instrumentation/Orchestration,Originality and Interest. I think that the overall piece should be considered as a whole. Breaking up these elements is like dissecting individual components when the piece is actually meant to be taken as a whole. These areas that you have pointed out are the areas which help to improve. But as a whole, this is how it was made to be listened to. Granted if you listen to my track 5 times, it becomes boring. But it's not made to be heard 5 times, again and again.

Cinematic as Jacob says can be more than orchestration. We can turn to the likes of Daft Punks Tron, Steve Price's Gravity (which at one point he states he stayed in the same chord for 3 minutes), Ryan Amon, Steve Jablonsky, Howard Shore, Hans Zimmer, Alan Silverstri, Bryan Tyler and John Williams, etc. They all sound very different. Yet they all are cinematic.

After looking at the entries, there's very similar quality tracks that get very different scores. For instance, my entire group were under 6 for your vote Sam. Yet Luny Alex's track which I say was on par with that group, got a 7.5. As we've seen even a 0.1 can make a difference. :)

samulis 2014-08-28 08:17:58

Totally. I'm no "pro" at this. We're just trying to figure out what works and what doesn't work.

I for the most part do judge pieces as what they are, but when you write a piece, you do treat it as individual elements, so I try to dissect it as so. Maybe this approach doesn't work? Maybe it does and I am just a step away from the best judging system evar? Maybe I need to make some changes? Comments like this help me realize these things without any arguing needing to take place. :)

Listening to your track ten times didn't make it that boring. If I can keep a track on for a half hour and not get bored, it is an ideal cinematic track. :)

Step 2014-08-28 08:51:17

@JacobCadmus
While I don't want to step in to this too much, as I feel like samulis handled my thoughts on the matter well enough, I just want to reiterate one of the things he said:

These, so far, are *just ratings*. I would agree with you entirely if samulis just went about handing low scores to everyone without any justification, but he always writes, dare I say, more detailed justification than any other judge would, and so far I think that all the critiques he mentioned on people's tracks, both on the judging group on Skype and on Newgrounds, have been fair and honest.

Do I agree with him on EVERYTHING? No I don't, and thank god I don't or else why would I have him on the judging team if, mentally, he's a clone of me? Judges disagree, and that's the whole point of having more than one. There are plenty of other examples in the Round 1 scores of outliers in the judges' ratings (just at first glance we can see the first one - headphoamz at 7.2 - on the very first submission of the very first group, when everyone else gave that submission a much higher score).

And that's OK. I think it's an entirely healthy thing to have occasional outliers in the scores, as long as there is a fair judgement and thought process behind each score. Considering I don't just find NGADM judges from the comment section of "how to make a beat in fl studios: beginner guide" videos on YouTube, I trust that they all have valid reasons behind their ratings.

Sure, we can't all review everything because that's simply infeasible for most people, but I'm sure all the judges would be up for giving a reason behind any score they submit, as long as they are asked to do so in a PM, instead of complaining to people like you (Jacob) about them only for you to mention them anonymously in this comment section, which doesn't really help anyone.

In the end, music is still subjective. I've told this to the other judges before as well. It's not suitable giving numbered scores to an art form like we would a maths exam. However, there would be no competition otherwise. While I can't say that what we all do is perfect (which is why we always accept feedback), we do everything in our power to be a fair judging team, and I think samulis is no exception to that struggle.

+ calling samulis out like that publicly was a little uncalled for IMO, so good on you for apologising for it :).

samulis 2014-08-28 08:51:17 (Updated 2014-08-28 11:21:31)

Step, thanks for stepping in (heh) and clearing stuff up. I definitely will review my judgement system and process after the more reasonable feedback I have received from Peter. I do not think too much will change though, as I explained quite clearly, I have expectations for people in a contest deemed a "death match". There is a reason to me being "hard" on people, and it's because that's how the world works. Call it stupid, call it philosophical, but as a whole, we are all very forgiving as judges compared to what we could be. :D

EvilRaccoon 2014-08-28 10:01:21

I don't think you should seeJacob as offending.

Concerns about the way things are and work are good to bring to the front and validate one way or another. Many people like myself, have ready the comments below, (and I thought I typed a lot!) and actually find the conversation somewhat educational. I think there's always many thing that impact your judging too. I even find that my interest can impact a piece. You know...how some days you fancy a little bit of this, or a little bit of that. And then there's the fatigue you know.. after hearing track after track.

I do like the NGADM, and the judging is hard work, however. Being analytical n all that, fluctuating scores between judges can have a harsh effect. So if say JudgeA goes from around 7- 10 in scores. Yet JudgeB goes from 5 - 10 in scores, the impact that Judge B makes is larger than Judge A. And it means when Judge B sees a negative, it impacts on the other judges decision.

In the end. I think we all need to stand back from this, and think, It's a bit of fun to push ourselves and have a bit of a panic and passion while NG's audio community band together. I think the comments below from everyone is validated through their own experiences, and we should not look negatively on each other for it. Afterall, we're all striving for improvement and it's near impossible for one person to be right and the other person to be wrong in a subjective art.

samulis 2014-08-28 10:01:21

Very well put, but you can't call a punch a poke because you found a grain of truth in it all. :P

We actually all had roughly similar ranges in our scores. I really wanted someone to post some additional stats, but I guess that never got done.

Of course my scores will be skewed to one way or another. That's simply how my experiences with music affect my voting. This is completely unavoidable and human. But so is Elspeth's, and Step's and everyone else's. That's why there are (six?) of us, so it will even out.

I never would want any hard feelings to be the cause of my ratings, comments, or reviews as part of my experiences as a judge this year. I'm glad all of this has come to an end without someone disappearing or calling Tom Fulp or some big scandal as tends to happen around here unfortunately.

More Results

How my judging process works (NGADM '14)

Comments

Log in to Comment

Main Sections

Extra, Extra!

Community

NG Related