General Discussion Forum.

beatboxing techniques used in round 36

beatboxing techniques used in round 36

Postby tenfour » Tue Mar 10, 2009 6:20 am

Continuation of discussion at http://www.sdcompo.com/entry.php?e=501

(post-typing disclaimer): i probably sound angry or something because i'm getting all logical... I'm not! Maybe it's my lack of the use of emoticons or something. Or maybe the fact that it's STILL NOT SPRING in Brussels.


believe it or not i'm not a rules freak. the issue regarding render-to-sample i don't really care about that much.

this particular issue has a good reason it's not allowed. and it's been specifically discussed in the past a couple times, and clearly forbidden. maybe the biggest restriction of this compo is that we use a samplepack, instead of using our own samples. EXCEPT vocal tracks, which can work because they have a distinguishably different role than instrument samples. So there's no problem as long as recorded vocal tracks remain vocal tracks and don't turn into instrument samples. If they start turning into instruments, then the concept of a samplepack is ruined. Thus, this is a pretty easy rule to enforce for the most part.

Airmann: there is nothing inherently bad about restrictions. Every rule that exists could be thrown out in favor of your argument of "indeed if you CAN do it, respect!" Would you feel the same if I used FM8 in my next tune? This compo is great because of its particular set of rules. Do you want to throw them all out - and whatever sounds cool is OK (btw there are plenty of other compos that do that)? What do you envision as the rationale for allowing beatbox samples? Do you want to allow people to use vocals without any restriction on usage as long as it's a human mouth making the sound? How would it be a better rule than what we currently have?

I would guess that the reason people are apathetic about this instance of rule-breakage is because it's not likely to win the round. if an epic round-winning tune featured beatbox techniques, I believe it would be a different story. for that reason i'm also a bit apathetic about this song. i don't really care if anything is actually done about it only because i doubt it's going to be a featured, precedent setting, sdcompo tune.

but if it wins, having broken the rules, then i would feel cheated that I stuck to the restricted samplepack instead of just bringing in my own samples.

I think the current rules are fine :)
User avatar
tenfour
Regular
Regular
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:33 am
Location: #musicdsp on EFNet

Postby organic io » Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:36 am

Well, I have used beatboxing in a song before as you all know in round 26 -- The difference is that mine was 1 entire take where it is obviously beatboxing. His is broken up into 1-off samples.

Sonicade has previously ruled that you can do beatboxing, or vocals, but "only if they are recognizable as vocals".

I think 1-off mouth-drum samples should be disallowed because it is too easy to mask them as other percussion. Too tempting to add a bunch of effects and make them sound massive whereas you wouldn't really be able to do that to an entire beatboxing track.

Trust me, I would have done it already if I thought it wash kosher, but I don't.

Anyway. I don't think it will come up too frequently.

Any more thoughts?
User avatar
organic io
Compo Admin
Compo Admin
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:55 am

Postby gilli » Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:24 pm

I'm fine with the current rules, too.

I do have some ideologies that follow the spirit of trackers. To me a tracker musician is responsible for a great part of the sounds himself. But it's not like the tracker scene is so big that it's easy to make more restrictions without loosing members.

SDC rules are okay as they are. But as it's also suggested by Airmann by now - there's still some room for more exceptional rounds(?)

Carl, sorry to have such a bad weather in Europe. I could use some more sun, too over here in Germany. But as a compensation we have a women's day that we celebrate ;) (Btw. what they do is show some respect to women. This culture came up when women fought for their rights and was powered by left-winged minds).
User avatar
gilli
Regular
Regular
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 8:08 am
Location: Germany

Re: beatboxing techniques used in round 36

Postby Airmann » Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:55 pm

Heyo tenfour,

Would you feel the same if I used FM8 in my next tune? This compo is great because of its particular set of rules.


I have no general problem with the current rules. But I would like to have as few rules as possible / necessary.

Regarding render to sample I just don't share the concerns some people might have. IMO most of the described possible concerns of "what might happen if we untighten or not tighten the rules" are IMO not very realistic.

As I've written several times before: how often do things like AndyRays song or pure vocal songs happen ? Do they happen all the time or just once in a while ? Are they really damaging the Compo ?

I just don't see the sense of more rules that regulate problems which are not existent. As few rules as necessary. May the rest be freedom. We Humans tend to over-regulate. It's mostly against innovation.

What do you envision as the rationale for allowing beatbox samples?
Do you want to allow people to use vocals without any restriction on usage as long as it's a human mouth making the sound? How would it be a better rule than what we currently have?


Cool ! So where do you set the border ? I've heard a lot of Vox sound in the last 7 month which were pretty strange, vocoded, processed and so on. E.g. Keith303 won this round. He used vox / vocoded vox (?) and processed them a lot. A lot of people use them as rythmical add ons.

I dare to say that there are a lot of Renoise songs which uses vocals that are almost not recognizeable as such. Now tell me: where's the big difference to beat boxing, AND who shall decide which song has crossed the red line and which not ? Who wants to be responsible for an A/V entry ?

I would guess that the reason people are apathetic about this instance of rule-breakage is because it's not likely to win the round. if an epic round-winning tune featured beatbox techniques, I believe it would be a different story.


This wouldn't bother me at all. If my primary goal was to win,
I wouldn't blame the gear or missing technical possiblities for a defeat. It's like in Sports: if a football team looses a game then often the referee, the gear, the coach is made responsible for the defeat.

A mature player would not blame others for the defeat, he would start at himself. In case of our music: maybe it's not the missing beat boxing, maybe it's a missing catchy melody ?

because i doubt it's going to be a featured, precedent setting, sdcompo tune.

Sorry, but this is really strange thinking for me.
Is it the goal to create typical "featured precedent setting sdcompo tunes ? Shouldn't the spirit be all about music, sharing knowledge, doing some competition while having fun ?

Original citation Sonicade (http://www.sdcompo.com/about.php):
...."The goal at SDCompo is to bring musicians together to compose and share inspiring and original music. "

I think the current rules are fine :)


I also think that the current rules are fine, except that I'd like to see natural instruments to be allowed.

But if you are fine with it, why do you vote for render to sample to be forbidden ?
Airmann
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:51 pm
Location: Germany

Postby organic io » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:12 pm

Natural instruments have been allowed during both of the christmas rounds. I'm sure Sonicade could set up some more natural instrument rounds if there is enough demand for it... Which there appears to be.
User avatar
organic io
Compo Admin
Compo Admin
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:55 am

Postby tenfour » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:13 pm

i'm not terribly passionate about either subject to be honest, and i didn't want to sound like i was being dramatic or anything.

i agree about the spirit of the compo 100%! :)

And that we should not patch up things with rules. everyone here is putting forth energy in the best of interests; i don't think adding police is necessary.

really this just started because i said "isn't this forbidden" - a totally legitimate question. when pressed, yes, i agree with the existing rule.

At the end of the day *if* someone stretches the rules too far, what do you propose should happen? Nobody is going to use outside samples or VST effects as a malicious way to win the compo.

But, does that mean we don't have any rules? (i think no)

Is there even a purpose to enforcing rules even when there is no malicious intent when they're broken? I guess this is really a difficult question in general. And I don't want to make it sound like I have much vision of what sdcompo does.

Cheers sir
User avatar
tenfour
Regular
Regular
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:33 am
Location: #musicdsp on EFNet

Postby Airmann » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:03 pm

organic io wrote:Natural instruments have been allowed during both of the christmas rounds. I'm sure Sonicade could set up some more natural instrument rounds if there is enough demand for it... Which there appears to be.


Yes, I first intended to add some guitar stuff, but then I only used some external VSTs. To repeat this was a nice thing !
Airmann
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:51 pm
Location: Germany

Postby Airmann » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:16 pm

tenfour wrote:At the end of the day *if* someone stretches the rules too far, what do you propose should happen? Nobody is going to use outside samples or VST effects as a malicious way to win the compo.

But, does that mean we don't have any rules? (i think no)

Is there even a purpose to enforcing rules even when there is no malicious intent when they're broken? I guess this is really a difficult question in general. And I don't want to make it sound like I have much vision of what sdcompo does.



I agree that those questions + solutions are important.
It's nearly a philosophical thing to solve it. And I guess that this is also the reason for the existence of real-world judges. In our case the judge has a name: "Sonicade".

BTW: did we already had A/V's because of rule breaks ?
Airmann
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:51 pm
Location: Germany

Postby organic io » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:10 pm

Airmann wrote:BTW: did we already had A/V's because of rule breaks ?


The only one I know of to this date was Crosfire because he tried to enter under 3 different usernames in the same round. Then we figured out there had been several rounds previous where he entered under 2 names. :?
User avatar
organic io
Compo Admin
Compo Admin
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:55 am

Postby Airmann » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:31 pm

organic io wrote:
Airmann wrote:BTW: did we already had A/V's because of rule breaks ?


The only one I know of to this date was Crosfire because he tried to enter under 3 different usernames in the same round. Then we figured out there had been several rounds previous where he entered under 2 names. :?


ha ha ha :-)))))))))))))))))))))) this is really an obvious case !
Airmann
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:51 pm
Location: Germany

Postby Airmann » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:40 pm

tenfour wrote:i'm not terribly passionate about either subject to be honest, and i didn't want to sound like i was being dramatic or anything.


Hey peace tenfour, me neither.

I think this discussion is totally ok and still pretty polite.
Even if it would be not so polite and a bit emotional I would have
have not too much probs with it. I'm sometimes quite emotional,
you know.

We are different people, have different backgrounds and goals,
and it's interesting to read the opinions of others.

I just try to bring in my point of view and thoughts.
Airmann
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:51 pm
Location: Germany

Postby organic io » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:06 pm

Oh don't worry dudes... It has been quite a few years since we've had any heated discussions..

http://forums.sdcompo.com/viewtopic.php?t=73&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 is about the worst it's ever gotten.
User avatar
organic io
Compo Admin
Compo Admin
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:55 am

Postby paulnewns » Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:31 am

People :)
I think these discussions are great!
It displays a passion for the music and the compo.

Was it not agreed with regards to vocals that "as long as they are recognisable as vocals" it is ok? (Or something).

Rules: Necessary? I think so. For them to be policed forcibly would seem a bit extreme. I am sure everyone who contributes here is reasonable and would accomodate changing their track should it be apparent it was breaking a rule.

With regards to the render to sample, I doubt it is ever going to be particularly harmful. Given the size of a rendered file and the restriction of the submitted file size it is unlikely to ever be a way of writing a whole track.

:D
8)
AMBTAX1 - USING RESNOISE
User avatar
paulnewns
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 8:44 am

Postby Andy:Ray » Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:53 pm

word.
I go where you dare not go...
User avatar
Andy:Ray
Newb
Newb
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:15 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby RobWilliamsJnr » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:45 pm

organic io wrote:Oh don't worry dudes... It has been quite a few years since we've had any heated discussions..

http://forums.sdcompo.com/viewtopic.php?t=73&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 is about the worst it's ever gotten.


yeah - that was scary back then!
User avatar
RobWilliamsJnr
Insomniac
Insomniac
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:13 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

Return to Compo Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests