Jump to content

FALL 2020 COMPETITION: SUBMISSIONS THREAD

Noah Brode

By Noah Brode
in Monthly Competitions

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tónskáld Experienced

Tónskáld

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, PaperComposer said:

Just to clarify - we'll only be voting for our top 2 favorite picks - but will there be three winners?  1st, 2nd, and 3rd place?  And is there some kind of point system for each pick?

Great questions.

Yes, only pick your top two favorites. First choices will be weighted twice as heavily (i.e., two points instead of one). We'll tally up the three highest scoring submissions once the poll is closed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tónskáld Experienced

Tónskáld

Posted
Posted
On 12/15/2020 at 8:07 AM, zhenkang said:

Hmm since there are only six entries, is there a possibility of a reinstatement of traditional judging by @Tónskáld ? Cos we will really like feedback for our pieces from the more experienced members here. 

 

22 hours ago, Joshua Ng said:

yea I agree with @zhenkang

 

Of course I don't mind judging, especially since I agreed to it in the first place. However, I must admit that I've already seen who composed what, so it won't be a blinded (and therefore unbiased) assessment. I'm not sure who that benefits more: the entrants I know from outside the forum or the ones I've only interacted with here.

In any event, I'm willing to provide detailed feedback as if I were judging, and I might even provide a score for objectivity's sake, but I think it's probably best if the competition winner be decided by popular vote.

Others' thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joshua Ng Collaborator

Joshua Ng

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Tónskáld said:

In any event, I'm willing to provide detailed feedback as if I were judging, and I might even provide a score for objectivity's sake, but I think it's probably best if the competition winner be decided by popular vote.

I see, my main concern is actually regarding the popular vote being a bit biased in a sense. I fear that this sounds like I'm trying to downplay orchestral works, which is never my intention, but my honest opinion is that chamber works tend to be less well-received via a popular vote and get a sizable disadvantage in a popular vote because orchestral works are perceived as 'more impressive'. During the Summer competition, this was quite clear as the popular vote and traditional judging component winners differed very greatly from one another. The popular vote was all large orchestra pieces while traditional judging contained a mix of chamber and orchestral pieces. In reality, some of the pieces that won the popular vote fared quite poorly in traditional judging as while it may have sounded enjoyable at first glance, they were glaring issues behind their works upon deeper analysis. Hence, I feel that chamber works will always be at a major disadvantage to orchestral works. Another issue I have with just the popular vote is the point that pieces that sound more easily enjoyable or tonal will always receive more votes than say a piece that is more atonal or requiring deeper analysis. A Brahms or Mahler piece at the first listen will most likely not be as well-liked as say a Dvorak or Mozart piece. It's simply human to be swayed by a first impression and I myself also fall victim to this.  That is the other glaring issue I have with the popular vote.

11 minutes ago, Tónskáld said:

I must admit that I've already seen who composed what, so it won't be a blinded (and therefore unbiased) assessment. I'm not sure who that benefits more: the entrants I know from outside the forum or the ones I've only interacted with here.

Thus as aforementioned, I feel that traditional judging should be reinstated as a component as it is the only way that pieces of different instrumentation can be given equal footing in its assessment. I would say that while the assessment may not be 100% unbiased, it is definitely more impartial than say a popular vote. I'm not advocating for a complete overhaul of the entire judging system and calling for the popular vote to be abolished, I feel that it is still a good way to have a gauge how the general public perceives a piece. However, I feel that both traditional judging and popular vote should be instated to judge a piece for the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Left Unexplained Experienced

Left Unexplained

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/16/2020 at 3:17 PM, Joshua Ng said:

I see, my main concern is actually regarding the popular vote being a bit biased in a sense. I fear that this sounds like I'm trying to downplay orchestral works, which is never my intention, but my honest opinion is that chamber works tend to be less well-received via a popular vote and get a sizable disadvantage in a popular vote because orchestral works are perceived as 'more impressive'. During the Summer competition, this was quite clear as the popular vote and traditional judging component winners differed very greatly from one another. The popular vote was all large orchestra pieces while traditional judging contained a mix of chamber and orchestral pieces. In reality, some of the pieces that won the popular vote fared quite poorly in traditional judging as while it may have sounded enjoyable at first glance, they were glaring issues behind their works upon deeper analysis. Hence, I feel that chamber works will always be at a major disadvantage to orchestral works. Another issue I have with just the popular vote is the point that pieces that sound more easily enjoyable or tonal will always receive more votes than say a piece that is more atonal or requiring deeper analysis. A Brahms or Mahler piece at the first listen will most likely not be as well-liked as say a Dvorak or Mozart piece. It's simply human to be swayed by a first impression and I myself also fall victim to this.  That is the other glaring issue I have with the popular vote.

Thus as aforementioned, I feel that traditional judging should be reinstated as a component as it is the only way that pieces of different instrumentation can be given equal footing in its assessment. I would say that while the assessment may not be 100% unbiased, it is definitely more impartial than say a popular vote. I'm not advocating for a complete overhaul of the entire judging system and calling for the popular vote to be abolished, I feel that it is still a good way to have a gauge how the general public perceives a piece. However, I feel that both traditional judging and popular vote should be instated to judge a piece for the competition.

 

Yes but this competition isn't an aristocracy it's a democracy. People like what they like, and we all knew it was a popular vote, shouldn't you have realized this before you made a piece you thought wouldn't win due to bias? just saying.

Edited by Left Unexplained
missing word
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joshua Ng Collaborator

Joshua Ng

Posted
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Left Unexplained said:

Yes but this competition isn't an aristocracy it's a democracy. People like what they like, and we all knew it was a popular vote, shouldn't you have realized this before made a piece you thought wouldn't win due to bias? just saying.

 

I understand where you're coming from, but I think my argument has been misinterpreted. In no point of my answer was I implying that a piece I made would not win or be hampered due to bias, I stated clearly I am not trying to downplay orchestral works, or trying to blame external factors for faults that I've made in my composing. My intention of typing out such a lengthy post was to ask for a traditional judging component as I felt that it would minimise at least some bias as aforementioned. I am not trying to abolish such a system, or deny its benefits as stated very clearly in the last paragraph of my post. I am still for the popular vote, and as I already said that it is a good way to judge how the general public perceives a piece. As you said, "people like what they like". As I stated in the last line of my previous post, all I'm arguing for is to have traditional judging to be instated along with popular vote and for both to be considered as a form of evaluation, not merely 1 form of judging. Both traditional judging and popular voting have their pros and cons, I simply believe having both instead of just popular voting will be more fair and be a more impartial way of evaluation, similar to how a democracy where for example in the US, there are many different levels of courts from the District Courts all the way to the Supreme Court, where decisions can be made through different courts and different people, ensuring a more impartial vote. Overall, I just hope my lengthy post can give at least some feedback for this current competition and future competitions, because my friend, @zhenkang, also feels the same.

P.S: Just another thing: the decision to remove traditional judging was actually made only a short period of time before the deadline, by then most of those who have submitted should have started and completed a bulk of their pieces at that point. However, I understand your point of view that I should have recognised that the popular vote was always going to be flawed and I apologise for that. I do not wish for a lengthy dispute for the matter, I apologise for this post for being rather lengthy as I wanted to make my points clear. Hopefully we can reach a mutual understanding with each other, and if anyone wants to weigh in on this, feel free to 🙂

Edited by Joshua Ng
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Left Unexplained Experienced

Left Unexplained

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Joshua Ng said:

P.S: Just another thing: the decision to remove traditional judging was actually made only a short period of time before the deadline, by then most of those who have submitted should have started and completed a bulk of their pieces at that point. However, I understand your point of view that I should have recognised that the popular vote was always going to be flawed and I apologise for that. I do not wish for a lengthy dispute for the matter, I apologise for this post for being rather lengthy as I wanted to make my points clear. Hopefully we can reach a mutual understanding with each other, and if anyone wants to weigh in on this, feel free to 🙂

absolutely. I was reacting to your post but looking back at it, I was a little mad at it. I understand where you're coming from I just think it wasn't the time to say it. But yes now that I see it wasn't a self serving action I can see I overreacted, my apologies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joshua Ng Collaborator

Joshua Ng

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Left Unexplained said:

absolutely. I was reacting to your post but looking back at it, I was a little mad at it. I understand where you're coming from I just think it wasn't the time to say it. But yes now that I see it wasn't a self serving action I can see I overreacted, my apologies.

 

I understand, and it's fine. I probably shouldn't have brought this up at that time, I apologise and will take note of that in the future. Thanks for your understanding!

Edited by Joshua Ng
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...