Round 14: Kacelano v. TomBobBlender

[Colin Comard (Delay)]

I do agree with Axel (not regarding the post directly above me), I mean, when I saw TBB v. Kace I was like "DUH! Kace is going to win of course. Kace has much more skill and while TBB is awsome at arranging and using the best of limitations, Kace produces at a much higher quality than that of TBB." But then that brings up the issue, is it because Kace uses dickspeed that he is able to do awesome pieces like "clash on the big bridge"? If TBB switched to MPC, could he do the same thing? Both of these composers use different things so it's nearly impossible to compare the two.

Regarding your idea, axelrod, voting pairs would be very tedious, because there are so many pairs that can be voted. You could do (using me as an example) me v. Axel, me v. Levus, me v. Bucky, me v. RC, me v. [You name it!]. It would be very difficult for winter to keep track. I do think there should be categories, however. Now, these categories would be divided by what the composer USUALLY does. For example, we could put Balloon303 in "Dickspeed" or "Soundfonts", and TBB would go in "SNESMP". But then we'd have to vote for each category and there wouldn't be a whole lot in some categories. However, that seems like the most reasonable compramise.

Kace, you are right about it being more song v. song now.

Augh, Kacelano! All you had to do was pick ANY song but that... I'll still give you my vote though since you're clearly the better composer.

Now, RC did choose you because he thinks you're better overall (although this takes us to the issue at the top), but from the first part of the sentence, it seems clear that people are voting on the song, and this is a problem because everyone's going to have their favorite songs and styles and you can't really make a song to satisfy everyone's tastes (unless it was some mega-medely), which may warp the results. Now I'm not saying anyone actually does song v. song, but seeing as how I consider TBB's Earthbound medely to be his ONLY song that could rival Kace's skill (albiet the skill is in a different area), it seems to be that way. Personally, I didn't even look at the songs.

Now, Kace, remember that the song you choose is supposed to be a display of your skill, and that's why winter does it that way. I don't think he was precisely trying to do song v. song when he started this.

(Don't you just love playing devil's advocate?)

[kacelano]

May 18, 2009 21:51:34 GMT -6 Colin Comard (Delay) said:

Now, Kace, remember that the song you choose is supposed to be a display of your skill, and that's why winter does it that way. I don't think he was precisely trying to do song v. song when he started this.

I'm going to say it straight out. A single song is not a good measure of a composer's skill. For every mistake I've made in one piece, I have certainly fixed and pronounced it in others. For every great opus there are weaker half-hearted endeavors. This is why composers need to be judge as a composers, not as songs.

[Colin Comard (Delay)]

I realize this. I was just trying to look at it from Winter's point of view. now, winter may express a different opinion, but that's how I see he sees it. I know there's no perfect song, and I know that each song should be looked at independently rather than having it become a symbol of skill. (Now, I think Rocky displays my skill, but I have not nearly as many compositions as you).

[lih]

I agree with axelrod

[Friedfischer]

+3 me, +2 adolfo

[AbsoluteZero255]

In a way, I agree with Axelrod, but if Kace had chosen Pokemon Center Remix, then it would have been more equally matched.

[eataninja]

I have to argue in Winter's favor here. If it was truly composer vs. composer, matchups like this one would be manslaughter, meaning that Winter woiuld have to choose the matches himself (which isn't fair). At least, by doing it song vs. song, people have a fighting chance in matches because they can pick a song that will best compete with the other composer. It's sort of like playing a Pokemon game: pull out the pokemon that is best suited to victory. And Weekly Composer Challenge is a very ambiguous name. There are a million different ways you could interpret it.

[RC]

Axelrod's point is exactly why I made the concept for this.

[kacelano]

Go back to the ideas that axelrod theorized. Under his system and and taking what delay said, this match-up would never have happen. TBB and I would not have been even an idea as a pair. We would have been in separate categories all together according to style and skill. TBB would have grouped with other MPSNES users such as Azure and oyan55 while I would have been with the various dickspeed composers such as Balloon and Domino. That way, neither person would completely blown out because they would be relatively equal

@az, I'm sorry, but the Center was more or less a side project


(OMG VIDEOGAME ANALOGY)

[AbsoluteZero255]

@kace. I could see separate divisions for SNES MP and MPC, but I couldn't see separate divisions by skill/style. That may not received enthusiastically enough by the community.

[Rusty]

Problem is how do you categorize a composer? I can see categorizing a song very easy, and composers who only do one thing, like TBB.

But what about those who do a lot of different things? How would you categorize them? By which of their songs are more popular?

[AbsoluteZero255]

May 19, 2009 15:34:42 GMT -6 Rusty said:

Problem is how do you categorize a composer? I can see categorizing a song very easy, and composers who only do one thing, like TBB.

But what about those who do a lot of different things? How would you categorize them? By which of their songs are more popular?

Exactly. It would be a lot easier if there were just separate divisions of MPC and SNES MP.

[kacelano]

May 19, 2009 15:36:15 GMT -6 AbsoluteZero255 said:

May 19, 2009 15:34:42 GMT -6 Rusty said:

Problem is how do you categorize a composer? I can see categorizing a song very easy, and composers who only do one thing, like TBB.

But what about those who do a lot of different things? How would you categorize them? By which of their songs are more popular?

Exactly. It would be a lot easier if there were just separate divisions of MPC and SNES MP.

Well, I think they would be categorized by how they say they would like to be or by the things that they currently do the most of. For example, JohnFreeman used to many low tempo songs with original sf, but now does high tempo ones with modified sf's. Thus, he would go in a dickspeed category. Someone like Levus has dabbled in everything would be categorized with say brianLED.

EDIT: wow, epic ties all the time

[winterbourne2k]

Why you guys gotta break balls? ;D, LOL.

First off, @rc: dude, seriously, stop bringing it up. Your initial idea was that of a tournament style, what I came up with was like Rate the Composer, only in a competing sense, so no, they are not the same ideas (I even changed the title so there'd be no further complaining).

However, after round 16, what will happen is building upon your first idea of an actual tournament, where the winners of each round will be seeded, and I guess that based on what Kace and Axel have brought up, they can be voted on a general skill set (use of soundfont, tempo, volume control, MPC usage ability, etc.). So yes, in a sense, this is your idea being put into use, and if you want to add anything, feel free, I'll leave the floor open on that.

However, the choosing of competitors are based solely on the nominations from each person here in the community. I don't choose who goes against whom each round, that's left entirely up to them. Some matches tend to be one-sided, and some (as in the case of Brian/Cat, Snowdog/Buckyboy, and this round), the results are very evenly matched. Like Battle of the Bands, only with MPC songs, if you want to put it that way. So I don't want this to change, I like this random format, the unexpected match-ups build upon the excitement.

I'll have to give this one some thought, but keep in mind I can't please everyone, there will be some disagreements here and there.

[kacelano]

May 19, 2009 18:04:30 GMT -6 winterbourne2k said:

Why you guys gotta break balls? ;D, LOL.
(I even changed the title so there'd be no further complaining).

1. It's just so damn fun to break balls ;D
2. OH LOL THAT'S IRONIC

Yeah, I don't have any complaints at the moment based on what you are saying. I'll let things pan out a bit before I say junk.

Now if only I had chosen my latest work to for this

[superiorlarxene]

+5 evilgrimace

[winterbourne2k]

May 19, 2009 20:13:35 GMT -6 kacelano said:

May 19, 2009 18:04:30 GMT -6 winterbourne2k said:

Why you guys gotta break balls? ;D, LOL.
(I even changed the title so there'd be no further complaining).

1. It's just so damn fun to break balls ;D
2. OH LOL THAT'S IRONIC

Yeah, I don't have any complaints at the moment based on what you are saying. I'll let things pan out a bit before I say junk.

Now if only I had chosen my latest work to for this

That part was also directed at RC, since the first title was Battle of the Composers, which was the same as what he came up with as a title, so I changed it.

Well, I don't know how this week will turn out since Blender's in the lead, but I think after the tournament is over, I'll start a new competition where only the community members are eligible to participate. Since Blender never comes here, it wouldn't make sense to have him compete, even though he's a composer.

We'll have to figure some sort of method that will measure both composer's level of skill, and match them based on that level. Or a ranking system based on what we've seen so far in Rate the Composer, or an overall general consensus from the community here that will eventually provide a rank for the composer in the next round, like Rank C, B, A, S or something to that effect. We're still early in the week, so throw out some ideas when you have them and we'll work out something that can make use of the "Weekly Composer Challenge" title.

[kacelano]

Bah, Rate the Composer is too nice; too many 97's

I think the last idea would be the best as long as it is a bit rigid; i.e. not 10 people in S rank, and not one in C. And then of course I lobby for separate divisions, but that in theory could be taken into account for the ranking.

We have about 38-45 composers in the community judging by Rate the Composer. Speaking of which, may be a good place (ignore above^^) to start. Regardless, a community wide consensus looks like the fairest and thoroughest. To me at least.

(Japanese rankings are interesting)

[Colin Comard (Delay)]

May 20, 2009 16:26:54 GMT -6 kacelano said:

Bah, Rate the Composer is too nice; too many 97's

Except me.

Anyway, I don't know about ranking thing. As Kace said, a lot of people are rated too high (no offense to anyone), especially since there's no designated scale to rate on. So people rate high either to be nice or, as I said, because everyone has their own scoring ruberic. I mean, look at HCBaily. I think he's not all that good, and mainly just gets the melody, drums, and bass line as concise as possible. I gave him a 67 for "ok composer". Yet there were plenty of 90's in there. So I'm stuck thinking, WTF? Is the scale 100=Excellent, 90=good, 80=average, something lower? It's like everyone has more of a directional scale where...

No! I should not go on a rant about RTC, especially here. Anyway, a ranking system would not work out. I'm sure a consensus would take forever and just turn out the same if we took the RTC scores. But we don't have really enough RTC scores yet to make a ranking system off of RTC scores.

[AbsoluteZero255]

Let's say:

100 - Excellent

90 - Nearly Perfect

80 - Very Good

70 - Good

60 - Semi-Good/Improving

50 - Average

40 - Improving

30 - Up-And-Coming

20 - Noob

10 - RedRanger2001 or something

0 - Thief

Heh?

(NOW DON'T FUSS ABOUT REDRANGER)