|
Dudnote -> RE: !!!John Walsh Solea Falseta Challenge!!! (Aug. 2 2015 2:08:45)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sr. Martins
How so?
Well, perhaps not. I was really mixing two rather different things when I wrote that. Let's try and clear up that ambiguity a little.
First...
Todd really knocked the nail on the head when he wrote
quote:
You have to be willing to slow down and really understand the rhythm of the phrases, bit by bit.
If I go back and look at what I wrote in my scoring of the challange, the word "timing" crops up for both you guys. I just listening again to your video Rui and I noted 0:03, 0:05, 0:13 as lurchy timing, 0:27 as a bumb note and 0:19 as a section that I liked. I'm very very impressed that you pulled that off at the speed you did, I can't match you there, but listenning to your video is like an accedemic exercise where pleasure (or "sensuality" as the Asian food crowd are calling it these days) somehow doesn't make it into the game. It's like making love on the back of a mule cart as she pulls you down a pot holed dirt road - you feel bruised afterwards, if you know what I mean. It's very impressive that you manage to play at that speed, but it's too jerky to be music I'd choose to listen to. Kiko too didn't really improve on his original entry challange by posting the video, although he did slow down a wee bit - again, the main area to improve on seems to be lurchy timing. Perhaps I missed the point of the videos - if it was just a bit of fun then that's OK. Ole Rui y Kiko!!
Second...
Throughout the discussion on speed I always had in the back of my head the question "how big a chunk of the total score should the speed category be?" Let's say you write a formula for the final score of some future challenge like
Total Score = (A * SpeedScore + B * CleanlinessScore + C * AireScore) / (A+B+C)
How should we weight each element? When I heard you guys lurching away in your videos I was thinking A=0, B=1, C=1 (Lenador's weightings) was really bang on - who cares about speed if the timing is consistently lurchy?
But may be A=1 B=2 C=2 is better - if you go fast you gain, but if you lurch or bum notes you loose more than you gain.
Alternatively, each contestant submits their own preferences for A, B and C and we take an average to calculate the final scores - this would be more democratic - but is democracy everything it's cracked up to be?
I'm just playing with ideas and numbers and am not dead set on any of this, but what weighting would you give A, B and C for future challenges?
quote:
I feel that some people thought that the "debate" was about restarting the voting process but it was only a discussion on "how to improve this kind of challenge and make it more fair to everyone". I think most of us agreed that there should've been speed categories.. something to consider next time there's a challenge like this one.
The thought did cross my mind, but it was obviously too much like moving the goal posts so was always way out of the question. The rules were laid out clearly at the start, everyone agreed to them and it was a lot of fun to compete in the challange and hear what everyone came up with. You can't go changing rules once everyone has uploaded. I enjoyed the whole ride and really appreciate the contributions of everyone who got involved. I also appreciated that you were so passionate about discussing potential improvements for the future. My only regret is I didn't play as well as I'd have liked to - but that's just the nature of the game and anyway, if it was easy it would be boring!!
I'm not sure how you can say "I think most of us agreed that there should've been speed categories" - not everybody who played in the challange commented on the speed element of the scoring. Off the top of my head, only about half of us did, I was in favour, but without being clear about the relative importance of speed compared to aire. Perhaps A=1 B=2 C=2 is about right.
|
|
|
|
