I don't belong to OverClocked Remix Forums, but I've been over there a few times. I noticed some talk about a restriction on lengths for the narratives, so I just wanted to put in my n00by little two cents...
The length of Mr. Smith's entry doesn't bother me that much, I have no problem with the length, but I do feel that he, though created a very vivid soundscape, seemed to tend to rely on the narrative to tell about each and every detail involved in the piece as it happened with timestamps instead of
letting the listener figure it out what represents what. It's okay that he 'got a little bit carried away' with it, but I think contestants should keep in mind that their music should tell the story, and that the narrative should only open and hone the imagination to the ideas they are trying to get across, not tell every detail as it goes each moment in the piece, that almost defeats the purpose. I think a fair course of action would be to simply discourage play-by-play, time-stamped synopses of the pieces, even if not entirely but to just refrain from them. I know it's kinda hard to draw the line, but do you see where I'm coming from? I think what I'm basically getting at here is the timestamps, or maybe I'm just not plain sure.
So basically, my view is that the narrative is to enhance the listening experience by providing explanations of the interpretation of the theme, but the piece should stand alone without the explanations.
Of course, maybe you can just beat me down on this
.... the idea of this competition is to get the listener to buy into the ideas presented using conceptual music. So I guess it's however you want to interpret the
idea of the competition.
Again, just my (albeit possibly n00by) point of view.