Search options (Page 16 of 48)

On the other hand, the only reason it's an important social skill is that you can't easily ignore people you dislike or find uninteresting in most situations, which doesn't really apply to websites. Whether it should be a feature of the site or a simple client-side script is another matter of course.

Similarly, I have to deal with a lot of junk mail in real life. I either throw it out or it piles up. Some mail is important and require my attention, so it's definitely useful to get into the habit of sifting through your mail throwing the junk away on a daily basis, but that doesn't mean I have to apply the same strategy to my email inbox where this task can easily be automated.

If there are members of the forum you find write consistently useless and uninteresting messages, I don't see any reason not to ignore them if the medium allows doing so without imposing on the experience of other users. I think that "finding another bar" is a much less constructive way of dealing with it.

I can't run it on my Game Boy.

Hey, you've got a lot to work on, but don't let that put you off! As a general tip, what people say that they think about your music isn't necessarily what they actually think. Not-too-close friends and family will want to put their critique nicely, but sadly, sometimes in a way that will obfuscate their true opinion. They will do this either deliberately or subconsciously, but most likely with the best of intentions. A friend might as well say that your song is "pretty nice" if they dislike it or if they are not sure how to constructively phrase their critique. When asking people for critique (and when you are honestly looking for actual critique), stress the fact that you want an honest opinion and call people out on their bullshit if you notice that they are weaselling out of it . I've found that asking people who have no problem being blunt is the best strategy.

For the song itself, it's very repetitive but quite melodically oriented, which I don't think is a good combination (it gets annoying). It seems like you could spend a lot more time on the melody.

Hint: One is against the rules, and the other is a personal opinion.

Similarly, if you disagree with the original poster, why don't you just stop reading? Oh right, we're expressing opinions which we are entitled to even though we could just stop caring!

I think voting and structured sharing would solve a some of these problems. I'm not sure how it would create a nazi elite. Letting random people upload songs, giving them the benefit of the doubt by not revealing any substantial information of who liked/disliked it and why will at least cause people like me not to bother with it. For example, ordering songs by the average rating within a list of users you trust would be pretty useful.

Yeah, I definitely agree with your last point, and I agree that there's a tendency to aim for transparency in a lot of music software, but that's a tendency of software development more than anything else, and being clicky in many cases is something you have to opt out of rather than something that you simply don't have to deal with when developing. I also agree that there are limitations of simple hardware that prevents this freedom of choice, so I have a hunch that we aren't really disagreeing about anything

Well, yeah, any music is shaped by the constraints of its platform. In the "clicky" case, for example, I'd say that the perceived limitation is really one of modern computer music software, not of the Game Boy or LSDJ, and it's more a case of limited software resources than limited hardware resources.

Agreed!

As long as there are people who will either agree or disagree with the points made in the original post, and are willing to discuss them, I'm not sure what the problem is. You haven't made a single post relevant to the discussion yet.

For anything to technically be chip, I think "chip" (in the context of music) needs a clear technical definition. ZX spectrum beeper music (which I think is generally accepted as chipmusic), for example, isn't chipmusic by the definition you presented in your last post.

What about DSP music? I mean music that is 100% generated by a sound chip. No-to-minimal CPU interaction. The only difference between a modern audio DSP chip and any YMxxxx chip of the 80s or whatever really is that it's a lot more capable.

What about the Amiga? The word was really coined to describe a certain type of music produced on the Amiga, so I think it's relevant to point out that the Paula chip is quite unlike any sound chip before it and also a lot unlike modern sound cards, and that the definition back then had nothing to do with the particular software or hardware used to produce the music.

Why is this "caving in" something to worry about? Are you afraid that the music won't stand on its own? Consider the person A and B example egr posted.

I think the point is that hardware isn't more relevant to the technique than software.