How to Review Midi Music?

Criteria suggested for Reviewing MIDI compositions:

Reviewers are free to apply the criteria they think is better for their reviews. However, there are some guidelines which can help.

Some areas of criteria should be considered in order to effectively and accurately evaluate and score a composition. You should consider each one independently as you listen to the music, before you decide on a score.


Overall

Reviewers are free to choose his/her personal method but we ask to use the following criteria approach.
Reviewers who are not comfortable to evaluate some genre or specific composition should skip it. When a new reviewer is accepted, he/she gets a profile for the three categories he/she can judge. The reviewer should use his good sense to do his/her best to "make things better".

Obviously, the following criteria are not exclusive. They correlate each other in some degree, but it helps a lot to make things clearer and helps to avoid some mistakes or to base a score just in taste or in the equipment sound. It forces you to think about a specific particularity of the music and helps the composer a lot, because if, for example, you get 10 in orchestration and 5 in themes/melodies, you will know immediately what is your weakness and the reviewer doesn't need to write hundred words to say that. Just a number. The reviews get faster and the composers get more objective feedback.
1 - Themes and Melodies
The themes can be melodic or rhythmic based; they can be supported by strong harmonies or percussion; they can be short or long.
2 - Orchestration
Instruments choosed, sound and balance. Do they fit? Do they color the piece? Was the composition able to transmit the intended goal the way the instruments were choosed and used? Orchestration several times is capable to boost a poor theme using effects (very common in cinematic music).

A Cat- Complexity, Coherence, and Practicality are important here. A wide variety of instruments used effectively together is important (this, of course, excludes compostions for single instruments such as piano, organ, etc...) Smart use of instrument ranges should be observed as well (incorporating notes out of a range for a particular instrument is acceptable, but at the risk of penalty in the Orchestration score- a smart thing to do in this scenario would be to submit to the C category instead). For classical compositions using single instruments, the reviewer should make a choice: either do not score orchestration at all, or base the orchestration score on performance.
B Cat- Coherence is important. Complexity and Practicality are less important in this category. Here a composer need not have a huge array of instruments to score well. More focus is on how the instruments interact with each other. That is not to say that a B cat piece needs to have limited orchestration though. Complex orchestrations will mostly likely score higher providing that the product remains coherent.
C Cat- Coherence and Complexity are the main focus. Practicality is less important as this category is a prime category for experimental music where instruments might be used in an impractical manner (i.e. out of range). The product should convey a soundscape to the listener and this is strongly dependent on the interaction of the instruments.
3 - Harmonies
Chords sound, balance and chord progressions.
A good example: Beethoven Moon sonata, adagio movement.
A bad example: a music all done (several bars) using only the same chord.
Also, do the instruments fit together to create a good harmonic effect (cross-related with orchestration)?

A Cat- Needs a certain level of complexity for a good score in most cases. For instance, I-IV-V-I chord progressions are typically not enough to score highly. Also, 2 or 3 note chords only, throughout the duration usually won't cut it.
B Cat- Simplistic patterns are more acceptable here, as are minimal notes. Timing of the progression should have a strong function though (i.e. does it groove, does it jive, etc.)
C Cat- Chord progressions here have the most freedom. Complexity vs Simplicity have no bearing as the harmonies main function is to create a vivid atmosphere. How effectively the harmonies create that atmosphere is what is important, whether they be simplistic or otherwise.
4 - Development
The structure, the sequence, the story, the form using clever structured accompaniments (fugues and counterpoints) or just good rhythms. How it starts, develop and ends. Does it repeat too much? Does it keep changing too much without holding the attention of the listener because of endless variations? Does it concatenates well several themes (if applied)? Does it fit the gente it was submitted to?

A Cat- Multiple themes, key changes, tempo shifts, and distinct variations are all signs of a well made A cat composition. Generally speaking, a composition that relays only a few themes over and over with out much variation will not score well in development in this category. This is not absolute, but it is a good rule of thumb as there are few exceptions. Repetition is generally a musical form of hari kari for an A cat composition.
B Cat- Repetition is probably most acceptable in this category. That is not to say it will always result in a good Development score if a B cat song is repetitious, but it stands a better chance than a composition in one of the other genres does. Sometimes the best B category pieces are the simplest ones. Variation is always a good thing of course, and will usually help the Development score of a B cat piece. Transitions are a stronger focus in the B category however. Bridging from the verse to the chorus should be seamless in B cat pieces. They don't need to have many different sections, but the blending of those sections is very important.
C Cat- Repetition is somewhat acceptable here as well, but not to the same degree as a B cat piece. Here development is dependent on the story being told and the blending of sections is just as crucial, but C cat pieces typically need to be constantly exploring new paths. C category pieces are the most organic in nature and usually will get a good Development score if they evolve from one idea to the next without losing coherency.
5 - Reviewer Taste/Impression

Needs few explanation.
The impression the music, how much it shakes your emotions and it transmits feelings. The score you would give it if there were no criteria items.
6 - Creativity and Originality

If there is a tendency to imitate styles or to use fragments of known melodies and themes, this item score should be lower.

 
About Midi Technique versus CompositionAbout

1) DO NOT EVALUATE YOUR EQUIPMENT. If a midi sounds bad, check your midi equipment first: what does play midi files in your computer?
2) Use good midi players and soundfonts.
3) Remember the reviews should motivate people to compose.
4) Use the six criteria items. A lot of 6.0 6.0 6.0 and no comment is meaningless and do not motivate people to compose, on the contrary.
5) If you compose for category B, avoid to review (at least the first time) for the other categories you do not compose. This is specially true if you do not compose for the A (classic) category even if your priority table let you do so. It is wiser.
6) If you do not have large experience with midi and computer stuff, it is a must to listen to the MP3 files (if available).
7) It would be ludicrous to evaluate a composition as bad because the violin you are listening to is bad. It would be as if you evaluate the 9th Bee symphony bad because the singers used in the last movement are poor.

 
What criteria are universal for all categories?About

1. Themes/Melodies: Are they universal for all categories?
Heck no. I'll take the extreems here.

A category extreem: fugues. A good fugue melody is one that fugue-ifies well, not necessarily one that is catchy or that you can hum, or even pick out from the rest of the music.

B category extreem: genres like drum & bass, house trance. These may not even HAVE a melody as defined by the bulk of western classical music. Some genres are so minimalistic that you cannot apply the standard melody formats from any other categories. Another extreem: jazz improv. Should a solo stick in your head? Probably not...but it should knock your socks off.

C category extreem: star wars. Ok ok that's not a genre but the point is that it is music with clearly identifiable idefix elements and, by classical music standards, the melody may seen disjoint and strange as a result. By popular music standards, the melodies would probably suck because many get too long winded. The other C cat. extreem: sound effects...

------

2. Orchestration: Is it universal for all categories? Heck no.

A category people: "keep your friggin' electric guitars outa my chamber group."

B category people: "keep your friggin' tuba outa my rock band."

C category people: "Can I order a side of drum kit with that string section salad?" So, although there is the rare rock sympony that works by some fluke, odds are that traditional orchestration is the goal for the A category while modern instruments are preferable for B. And C can do whatever the hell it wants as long as it sounds good.

---------

3. Harmonies: Are they universal for all categories? More tricky, but still...heck no.

A category people: "WTF is with this I-IV-V-I crap?!?! Give me augmented 5ths and a chord progression so complicated even the compose can't explain it!"

B category people: "WTF is with this augmented 5ths crap?! Give me power chords dangit!"

C category people: "...and I'll have a large major sevenths soda with that dissonance. I'll have some creepy minor seconds too. Bob would also like some sappy romanic chords in the middle of his dark dreary fudge sunday."

-----

4. Development: Is it universal for all categories? Well, I will knock down any piece that is 1:30 with little exception. I will also be plugging my ears and running around the house going "LA LA LA!" with most pieces that pass the 10 minute mark. Between those ranges, the developement has to fit the form. And, that is very different not only from category-to-ategory, but also from genre-to-genre within a category. Basically you can't nail down developement for any category specifically because it is at the genre level. So, another heck no. But, also a heck no for within a single category.

------

5. Impression/Taste: Is it universal for all categories? Well, I hate atonal mishmash no matter what categor it's in. So I would say yes, it is universal within an individual reviewer

6. Creativity/Originality: Is it universal for all categories? I'm not touching this one with a 10-foot pole.








The Comments

The comments written about a particular MIDI are one of the most valuable aspects of the judging process. It's these comments that help the composers evolve--this is one of the reasons the MIDI contest will get better every year. "Let's make things better".

Song comments also take the most time on the part of the reviewer. It's inevitable that a good number of the judges will spend the last few minutes before the deadline, hacking away at the song comments, trying to get them submitted in time. Do yourself a favor and start early. You are not required to comment on every song, but you should make an effort to explain the criteria you used to score most of them, especially the ones that stand out in the crowd.
Procedure

 

Yes, do it:

First and foremost, start early. Your reviews should not be rushed the last day before the deadline.
This is not fair to the composer, or the contest. If you cannot take the time to review music properly, you should not be a reviewer. We are striving for excellence. Excellence cannot be rushed.

More you listen, more the score will converge and more fairer it will be.
If possible, listen the song more you can. Many ones are only understood after several listenings. Usually, if you score the same composition the first time you listen to and then the third time you listen to, 90% of times the scores will be significantly different!

Give thoughtful reasons for each one. Explain what areas could be improved, and, if you can, how to improve them. Use sentences like "I marked you down in technique because..." and "I gave you a high originality rating for your...".

Don't do it:

Comment and score must agree! Never say "beautiful music" and give it a score less then 8, for example. How could be a beautiful music get less then 8? If so, correct explanations should be given.

Don't score the equipment! If some instrument sounds too loud, too low, weird, bad, or it has a voice which seems doesn't fit, probably the reason is not a bad composition, but differences between the equipment used by author and listener. If are not sure about, it is better to SKIP the submission than give it an unfair score because your equipment maybe is worst than the author's equipment. Take care because this is a very common mistake.

Don't be cruel. Do not flame. Do not bash. Use clean language. Encourage the composers, don't make them feel like they wasted their efforts. Point out what they can do to improve, so they have a desire to do so.

Don't get side-tracked.
Don't try to guess who wrote the song. The composers identity is kept secret until the end of the contest for good reasons. Comments like "You sound like Joe Blow" and "This sounds like a song John Q. composed" are not recommended. This is an anonymous contest, and it should stay that way. Try saying "Your overall mix was very professional" or "You make an excellent use of harmonies" instead.

 
Good Examples

Following are 2 reviews of the same song. The first, well written. The second, not.

This is a good example: the reviewer covered all the bases, gave reasons, and used specifics to point things out.

"Cheesy 80's style pop. The annoying hihat in the 2nd part needs volume changes. Bird sounds were way overused and distracted me from the main melody, and the lead is cut off in too many places which sounds harsh. The key change comes too late; my ears wanted it sooner. The bass in the tune is too repetitive, and uses pointless panning slides. Main melody needs more expression to make it sound smoother, and sounds very strained in places. The choice of instruments is okay but some tracks were too loud, most notably the drums. The tune faired badly in the originality section mainly because you take the disco influence too far throughout the piece. more key changes would have kept the song fresher and more interesting, and would have earned it a higher 'form' score. Mediocre, but style is fairly covered."

This example, from the same song, was miserable. This is the kind of comment we want to avoid... Please don't do things like this! The reviewer makes a judgment, gives one simplistic comment, and then bashes the composer:

"It's awful. It's so simple it hurts! The author didn't really care about the quality, I think, and shouldn't be in the contest."

Conclusion

Know your rights:

You have the right to stop each song after listening to the first four minutes, if it's making you miserable. You have the right to refuse to review a song, if you know who wrote it, and it may influence your objectivity. Be honest with yourself, and serve the best interests of a fair and impartial contest.

Know your duties:

Submit your reviews on time. Start early. Your name appears on every review you give, and will be available to the public. Keep your language clean and explain your decisions. Use some criteria for evaluation, and the point scale. Don't vote on your own song. (This would be considered an attempt to cheat, and would be grounds for immediate dismissal.) Judges that do not follow these guidelines may be disqualified.

What do I get out of this?

It's a small price to pay for everything you get out of it. And what, exactly, do you get? Well, to name a few perks...
The ability to shape the outcome of the MIDI contest. The ability to steer the contest in the right direction. A voice. And most importantly, a better understanding of music, not to mention a sense of accomplishment. (it's not easy being a reviewer)

Enjoy, and thanks for being a reviewer for the Midi & MP3 Composition Contest! Your time and effort are very much appreciated, because we could not succeed without you.