john

Agreed that some do not warrant much in the way of comment. Where it enters "production" and "arrangement" there is more scope for most to offer. After you pass mix levels arrangement and production offer the ability to like sounds, effects, instruments etc. Most guitarists I know do care about the sound they create. Too thin, too thick, too distorted, too busy, too 80s, swamped by reverb and delay etc. Also "listen to this track as an idea where you could take this" is something I used to do in the studio with bands, producers and recording engineers. After all we don't need to play like Steve Vai to recognize a sound that would work on another recording, and referencing the recording directly is a great way to demonstrate a point. Agreed. Probably not a new section, probably the next step for the members only boards.

The radio station idea I had considered. Not dismissed, just not a huge priority unless members would really like it. It's not a small overhead of effort for me. If some members are willing to take on the DJ role, even if that is putting the stream together, then it is something I would consider.

Ah okay, gotcha Yes I agree, if it ticks the box, many people would say something.

You make a lot of good points. To be honest it starts with attracting the right members, which is an inexact science at best. Forums cultures can be driven with rules and enforcement, a carrot and stick approach for example. For me, I like the fact that members vote with their feet. Yes, site staff do some steering, but it's a bit like a trying to steer a super tanker lol The fact is if the steering sucks members don't like it. Member can also affect the steering of the site, which is partly where the idea of the group boards came from. Drive by posters, in general regular members manage their own reactions etc, but staff can help in some ways, for example it is possible we could disallow the creation of topics on the critique boards until a certain number of posts is passed. the reason we haven't put that in place is that we felt that would then just flood tha boards with pointless posts aiming simply at quickly increasing post count. believe me, we are open to all ideas on this. The same goes for people only interested in receiving critique. So far our approach is to yet again let those offering critique to vote with their feet. Bring together all those ideas, and the concept of keeping drafts within the community, that is partly the idea for the members only board. We could raise the barrier for entry either in post numbers, members of a particular group only (and having applications moderator previewed, perhaps meeting a specific set of criteria, and / or adding a small subscription payment that would help the site to pay for itself and deter simple drive by posters, cost wise that is undecided but I am open to suggestions. It could be a combination of all of those criteria) The member-only boards are so far getting some usage, but I have had little feedback on the board or the suggestion that it be subscription based. I think we have an excellent community, that is improving (hopefully you agree!), and the direction that it is going in I think will accelerate just how useful the site as a whole is, not just the community. I can say, your thoughtful opinions all really do affect the shape of the site and community to come. One point I would suggest: When you see a member posting a song for critique and they haven't set up their About Me page, and their Critique preference, please point them at those features and encourage them to do so. Lastly, to all, Songstuff does need moderators. Members who would like to take a more active role in the shaping of our community and are enthusiastic about what we are trying to achieve. Just saying

Much appreciated that you took time out during your lunch to provide valuable feeback! Absolutely. I would be worried if that was all Songstuff was about. A big part of looking discussing ideas for the site and gathering feedback is to improve what we provide. To deliver what is wanted and what is needed. If anything it's not so much about serious critique as it is about valuable critique, and that value is as much for the person performing the critique, but I totally understand your point about volume of comments and using them as indicators. An interesting suggestion on the serious critique board, I'll perhaps start a topic where that idea can be discussed in some detail . Thanks again

Welcome to Songstuff!

Many thanks for a thoughtfil reply Rob. It's funny how things go in phases. Once upon a time, hard core critique was what we did. That was back when I was far more active on the forums than I currently am, as were the other staff. On my part, that's the problem when you are the main site developer... adding improvements take you away from taking part. Not that I was the sole reason the site was far more about critique, or anywhere near it, but I and the other staff and many site members focused far more on pushing for higher quality critique from everyone. Everyone is so busy these days. As staff gradually moved on (it happens over the years), or simply spent a bit less time here, instead focusing more on their own music for a change rather than spending so much time encouraging others towards performing a proper critique, and the number of members increased, critique quality dropped off. Saddly people need to be heavily and continually encouraged and often educated towards giving a proper critique, but I am sure members who went through the process with the staff would attest, they did greatly benefit from doing so. I still try to contribute as detailed a critique as I can, when I do offer critique. I think we've always had a friendly atmosphere here, which is always a plus. We do still have a lot of talented writers. Who knows, we may again have more hard core critique, after all it is the members themselves that decide that with every critique they offer. Perhaps a campaign to do so? I am aware that most will feel they do not have enough time, or knowledge to offer an in-depth critique, those are oft cited reasons... but I'll take the point on the chin and see what I can do to encourage a higher standard of critique. It is more than a one man job. It relies upon members walking the walk, demonstrating what should be aspired towards and that in itself does encourage everyone towards something better. As for your points about DA, I completely agree, and can only say that retaining the ethos of the site is very important to me and it is certainly the direction I would prefer. By far. We have a great community here, and I don't plan to undermine it. Keeping it personal is a big part of retaining that, I think. I for one believe we have a loyal membership precisely because our site has always been loyal to the members. What goes around comes around and all that. Thanks again for your comments Rob.

You might want to check out http://www.videoblocks.com as a footage source. There are others but videoblocks has a pretty cheap pricing model.

Hi and welcome to Songstuff Great to know people are recommending our community One thought, if you are composing thematic scores then using moving footage would definately help sell your compositions... and it would give you great experience in how footage is composited, an insight that is worthwhile gaining. If you don't have footage you can use, and don't fancy taking up filming in any way, then there are some very good stock footage firms out there. On a more musical note, a nice piece. Well done. Only comment I have is on the dynamics... strings are a wonderfully dynamic instrument. Your mix would perhaps be more powerful with a little work there. All in all I enjoyed it.

Welcome to Songstuff Tanner

Hi and welcome to Songstuff Dan