there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review. when the site was at it's peak (and at the time busier than the current active AP) you'd get close to a 1:1 return on reviews, and it wasn't even compulsory! seriously, fuck compulsory reviewing!

so maybe something like that would be nice.
or, make reviews a 50 character minimum and then make another "best of" list for top reviewers (i.e. people who wrote the most reviews)
seriously though, fuck compulsory reviewing.

...or compulsory anything else really haha

At 6/17/13 03:22 AM, gridcrawler wrote: This thread is going nowhere, same to others. We all like to talk, but could anything we said be done for once?

actually both @WadeFulp and @TomFulp check up on this thread once in a while.

At 6/17/13 04:21 AM, Sequenced wrote:

At 6/17/13 03:22 AM, gridcrawler wrote: This thread is going nowhere, same to others. We all like to talk, but could anything we said be done for once?

actually both @WadeFulp and @TomFulp check up on this thread once in a while.

The last time I heard someone discussed about NG voting problem was 2009, and probably way before I knew this site.

Anything changed? Answer me.

At 6/17/13 04:35 AM, gridcrawler wrote:
Anything changed? Answer me.

I've noticed a significant lack of votes in the audioportal over the past couple of years. it's more about the reviews nowadays.

At 6/17/13 04:55 AM, Sequenced wrote:

At 6/17/13 04:35 AM, gridcrawler wrote:
Anything changed? Answer me.

I've noticed a significant lack of votes in the audioportal over the past couple of years. it's more about the reviews nowadays.

I would like to believe so, but sugar coating statement won't help the fact that so many people are still complaining about old age voting problem.

At 6/17/13 04:18 AM, midimachine wrote: there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review. when the site was at it's peak (and at the time busier than the current active AP) you'd get close to a 1:1 return on reviews, and it wasn't even compulsory! seriously, fuck compulsory reviewing!

That is really really really tempting to try out! Could get more artists to participate in reviewing, in general.

At 6/17/13 11:48 AM, TomFulp wrote:

At 6/17/13 04:18 AM, midimachine wrote: there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review. when the site was at it's peak (and at the time busier than the current active AP) you'd get close to a 1:1 return on reviews, and it wasn't even compulsory! seriously, fuck compulsory reviewing!

That is really really really tempting to try out! Could get more artists to participate in reviewing, in general.

definitely! they used to let you write a short description as the hyperlink text too, i thought that was worth noting
oh, and this is a thing that would be good for the other portals too i think. except maybe not flash. i dunno!

At 6/17/13 12:38 PM, midimachine wrote: definitely! they used to let you write a short description as the hyperlink text too, i thought that was worth noting
oh, and this is a thing that would be good for the other portals too i think. except maybe not flash. i dunno!

Maybe we could only allow you to plug things published under you account, so it wouldn't be a total mess of link sharing, but could keep artist to artist interaction going.

At 6/17/13 04:18 AM, midimachine wrote: there was another site i used to visit where we had a review system where you had the option to leave a link to a track of yours at the end for a return review.
or, make reviews a 50 character minimum and then make another "best of" list for top reviewers (i.e. people who wrote the most reviews)

I think this 50 character minimum (or some other number) would be great - especially if the option to link your own track at the end is implemented.

Even though it be would awesome, random listeners/ non artists shouldn't be forced to write a minimum of anything, as long as their reviews stick within the guidelines. They may just not have that much to say - not everybody can be a great reviewer, right?

But maybe, for ARTISTS who are leaving a review and would like to link their own track, THEY should have some sort of character limit. I mean, people with at least some audio experience should have more than a couple of words to say about a track - especially if they're going to link their own track for review at the end.

Otherwise with no minimum, wouldn't it be easier (but stupid) to just leave a really nonconstructive review in order to leave a link/gain exposure ?
I don't know if this kind of thing can be implemented, but I think it makes sense.

TL;DR - Make a character minimum for reviews where people would like to link back their own work. (and would this apply to linking only audio, btw? What if different types of artists want to cross-promote ? )

At 6/17/13 09:53 AM, gridcrawler wrote:

I would like to believe so, but sugar coating statement won't help the fact that so many people are still complaining about old age voting problem.

those people haven't got the idea that voting doesn't matter in the audio portal anymore. to get to the best of from what I've seen, it's about the views and reviews.

IDK if this has already been suggested... im assuming it has but here goes:
Stream like service so that you can listen to the new tracks, popular tracks, or best month and classics... all with their respective radio like station, also do it for genres... id really love that
( able to rate song while they play in the stream and leave comments and see a play marker somewhere)

At 6/17/13 12:56 PM, alternativesolution wrote: Even though it be would awesome, random listeners/ non artists shouldn't be forced to write a minimum of anything, as long as their reviews stick within the guidelines. They may just not have that much to say - not everybody can be a great reviewer, right?

yeah i agree on principle, but on the other hand:

this right here is a fifty character sentence haha

so most random jackoffs are going to write about that much off the top of their head anyway.

I think a proper medal system could increase the quality of music throughout the portal. This could also allow for a song of the month award as well....

At 6/21/13 12:17 AM, midimachine wrote:

At 6/17/13 12:56 PM, alternativesolution wrote: Even though it be would awesome, random listeners/ non artists shouldn't be forced to write a minimum of anything, as long as their reviews stick within the guidelines. They may just not have that much to say - not everybody can be a great reviewer, right?

yeah i agree on principle, but on the other hand:

this right here is a fifty character sentence haha

so most random jackoffs are going to write about that much off the top of their head anyway.

Yeah the fifty character thing is useless, I just meant some sort of minimum. But it looks like we've got that new "Review for Review" thread, which isn't working too bad at all.

At 6/22/13 03:29 PM, XToxicReaper wrote: I think a proper medal system could increase the quality of music throughout the portal. This could also allow for a song of the month award as well....

I second this.

Well I've just recently joined NEWGROUNDS so I don't know a lot about how the old system and so on, but I can tell you this about the current one:

- music genres are messed up and incomplete: for example for metal songs there's only the "heavy metal" tag available - which says nothing: is it a thrash, death, metalcore, etc song? Same goes for Electronic. As a result song labelling is inaccurate.

- tags restriction makes no sense: especially considering how vague the music genres roster is.

- last, but probably the most important aspect: the scouting process(coupled with the lack of more in depth control & statistics) is very confusing and poorly explained. There should be some clear simple steps to complete that would guarantee a positive result (as in publishing your work). Sitting on your ass waiting for someone to notice your stuff is not the way to go because on one hand the ranking/display system is messed up so not all songs are listed, and on the other hand it's down to ppl preferences/liking - which is highly subjective.

Just my 2 cents.

I still think the big problem isn't voting, its traffic.

People come to NG for flash games & movies. The old system let us Audiowhores ride that wave, now we are isolated and have to feed off of each other.

Just looked at the stats for the Top 3 VIEWED of each portal for the last week:

Games - top 3 combined 70,000 views sharing in 28 pages of reviews.
Movies - top 3 combined 93,000 views sharing in 67 pages of reviews.
Art - top 3 combined 25,500 views sharing in 13 pages in reviews.

Audio - top 3 combined 1,970 views sharing in 6 pages of reviews.

NG just isn't considered a place for audio these days. Not sure if there is a fix for that.

At 6/25/13 11:23 PM, Bafana wrote: NG just isn't considered a place for audio these days. Not sure if there is a fix for that.

Sadly, I have to agree. I've joined NG because a good friend insisted on it, precisely for promoting music to a specific type of listener (more open minded to non conventional music than a generic music portal's crowd), and although I do love the idea of having everything contained within 1 platform (instead of hunting the Web high and low) and liking the games / movies sections, I can't help noticing a drastic lack of interest for audio. Except for devs/creators looking for colaborators (soundtracks, themes, etc), the whole system looks still - and it's a shame 'cause there's a lot of good music that you won't find anywhere else.

Maybe the plethora of digital music plugins give ppl the impression anyone can mash up some sounds together and make a "song" within minutes - as opposed to game / movie creation which require more skills (that of course is far from the truth - music creation is a very complex process)...who knows...

At 6/25/13 07:24 AM, idfpower wrote: for example for metal songs there's only the "heavy metal" tag available - which says nothing: is it a thrash, death, metalcore, etc song? Same goes for Electronic. As a result song labelling is inaccurate.

try tagging your audio uploads. seriously, the admins can't stuff every single genre known to man.
also, consider the "metal" category (or any other category, really) as an umbrella term

- last, but probably the most important aspect: the scouting process(coupled with the lack of more in depth control & statistics) is very confusing and poorly explained. There should be some clear simple steps to complete that would guarantee a positive result (as in publishing your work). Sitting on your ass waiting for someone to notice your stuff is not the way to go because on one hand the ranking/display system is messed up so not all songs are listed, and on the other hand it's down to ppl preferences/liking - which is highly subjective.

post your audio in the audio advertisements thread, the review request club, the R4R thread, whatever. if you want to be noticed, you gotta do something about it. someone would be bond to find something interesting in your work (from all your legitimate promoting), and will scout you.

What would be the downside of forcing a review when voting 0-1?

<insert personal drama about zero-bombing here>

At 6/27/13 04:12 AM, Yoshiii343 wrote: try tagging your audio uploads. seriously, the admins can't stuff every single genre known to man.
also, consider the "metal" category (or any other category, really) as an umbrella term

post your audio in the audio advertisements thread, the review request club, the R4R thread, whatever. if you want to be noticed, you gotta do something about it. someone would be bond to find something interesting in your work (from all your legitimate promoting), and will scout you.

Then how come other music dedicated platforms have very specific & large category lists? It looks like the person in charge of that knew a bit about electro, but nothin' much about metal (for ex) - you know, it doesn't look professional. Of course I've tagged my songs accordingly, but still, makes me wonder...

As for the main issue...IMO it has deeper roots. The real problem is that nowadays ppl are getting access to things (thanks to the Internet) too easy and that kills any desire to scout around and dig up the hidden gems - everything is just 1 mouse click away. It's a general phenomenon and ppl simply don't care anymore. Sad, but true.

At 6/27/13 02:27 PM, NikeTheSword wrote: What would be the downside of forcing a review when voting 0-1?

<insert personal drama about zero-bombing here>

Actually it's more of a benefits:
- You know who 0-bombed your music.
- They wouldn't spend time to write review. Therefore, no 0 bombing.

But the Cons are:
- Vengeance wars between users since they know who 0-bombed them.
- Non-user can still 0-bomb you without review (unless you add non-user can't 0-vote)

At 6/27/13 04:12 AM, Yoshiii343 wrote:

At 6/25/13 07:24 AM, idfpower wrote: for example for metal songs there's only the "heavy metal" tag available - which says nothing: is it a thrash, death, metalcore, etc song? Same goes for Electronic. As a result song labelling is inaccurate.

try tagging your audio uploads. seriously, the admins can't stuff every single genre known to man.
also, consider the "metal" category (or any other category, really) as an umbrella term

- last, but probably the most important aspect: the scouting process(coupled with the lack of more in depth control & statistics) is very confusing and poorly explained. There should be some clear simple steps to complete that would guarantee a positive result (as in publishing your work). Sitting on your ass waiting for someone to notice your stuff is not the way to go because on one hand the ranking/display system is messed up so not all songs are listed, and on the other hand it's down to ppl preferences/liking - which is highly subjective.

post your audio in the audio advertisements thread, the review request club, the R4R thread, whatever. if you want to be noticed, you gotta do something about it. someone would be bond to find something interesting in your work (from all your legitimate promoting), and will scout you.

Other music hosting platforms have very large, specific categories for music genres. In addition, why should we have to sacrifice one of the four limited tagging spots for a genre that should have been included? This is a thread for developing ideas for improving the Audio Portal, not telling other members that we should simply suck it up and deal with the current system.

Oh, the audio advertisements thread? Because a massive amount of people obviously don't post their tracks there and leave, simply expecting a sudden influx of viewers without interacting with other producers. There is no encouragement for audio producers to scout, search, and interact others. Entice them with some form of reward.

One more thing. Just to address your previous spout of ignorance, 0-bombing is indeed a major problem. Even if a portion of the low ratings are genuine, and not some ploy to get your own art to the top, we would think there would be some sort of constructive criticism. Seriously, it seems you have a total disregard for how difficult it is for the majority of producers to get noticed.

At 6/27/13 02:27 PM, NikeTheSword wrote: What would be the downside of forcing a review when voting 0-1?

<insert personal drama about zero-bombing here>

because not every 0-1 vote is a bomb, and when you genuinely think something is that bad it's a waste of your time to spend any amount of time writing to the author for any reason.

any review accompanying a 0 vote is just going to be useless vitriol, and the exceptions are almost invariably going to be met with "omg ur wrong my music is da best fuck you".

a captcha for 0 votes is probably a better solution. but i'm still opposed to that, on principle.

At 6/28/13 12:11 PM, midimachine wrote:

At 6/27/13 02:27 PM, NikeTheSword wrote: What would be the downside of forcing a review when voting 0-1?

<insert personal drama about zero-bombing here>

because not every 0-1 vote is a bomb, and when you genuinely think something is that bad it's a waste of your time to spend any amount of time writing to the author for any reason.

any review accompanying a 0 vote is just going to be useless vitriol, and the exceptions are almost invariably going to be met with "omg ur wrong my music is da best fuck you".

a captcha for 0 votes is probably a better solution. but i'm still opposed to that, on principle.

If the individual giving such a low rating for it cannot justify his or her rating, then she should not be rating it. If the producer happens to reply to reviews like that, then the artist will not maintain any viewership. Simple as that.

Hmm... ways to improve the Audio Portal...

1) Consider allowing some flexibility in licensing (see my thread about this).
2) Let votes on audio give experience like votes on games and movies.
3) There doesn't seem to be a Daily Feature or other awards for audio. Having those would be much appreciated.

At 6/28/13 02:26 PM, Sundans wrote: If the individual giving such a low rating for it cannot justify his or her rating, then she should not be rating it.

elaborate. what is it about a low score that inherently warrants justification? does a high rating warrant similar validation? maybe you would like all scores to be accompanied with a review, but then you'll just end up with a lot of junk reviews or people not voting at all. believe me, the AP does not need an even lower signal to noise ratio with reviews.

besides, in the case of a low score i think keeping your justification to yourself is far more polite. like i said, most reviews accompanying a genuine 0 are not going to be helpful.

If the producer happens to reply to reviews like that, then the artist will not maintain any viewership. Simple as that.

people who make genuinely shitty music generally have difficulty maintaining viewership anyway.

the ones who don't will have a sycophantic following who'll respond to low-scoring reviews in exactly the same way as the author. i won't name names.

At 6/28/13 11:54 PM, midimachine wrote:

At 6/28/13 02:26 PM, Sundans wrote: If the individual giving such a low rating for it cannot justify his or her rating, then she should not be rating it.

elaborate. what is it about a low score that inherently warrants justification? does a high rating warrant similar validation? maybe you would like all scores to be accompanied with a review, but then you'll just end up with a lot of junk reviews or people not voting at all. believe me, the AP does not need an even lower signal to noise ratio with reviews.

besides, in the case of a low score i think keeping your justification to yourself is far more polite. like i said, most reviews accompanying a genuine 0 are not going to be helpful.

If the producer happens to reply to reviews like that, then the artist will not maintain any viewership. Simple as that.

people who make genuinely shitty music generally have difficulty maintaining viewership anyway.

the ones who don't will have a sycophantic following who'll respond to low-scoring reviews in exactly the same way as the author. i won't name names.

Yes, any judgement requires justification. If you are willing to persist in your cynical outlook, then the Audio Portal is screwed either way. You either have artists that purposely 0-bomb music, with no justification, for the purpose of forwarding their tracks to the front, or you make the few reviews and ratings that will be given out [i]mean[/i] something. Which is better? Constructive criticism or a dirty popularity contest?

A viewer who rates it 0 should explain why it is rated 0. Was the mixing poorly done? How could the artist improve on it? Was the mastering badly executed? How can the artist better the rendering quality? Was it repetitive? How does one add variation? If the rater has absolutely no suggestions or justification to assist the author of the track, they should not say, or rate anything at all. This is basic etiquette.

Yes, and if the artist who makes poorly-rated music reacts in a hostile way, they will definitely not improve either. Reviews are for the artist to learn about what they did wrong and what they did right. We do not have a large following, at all, and yet we like to hear what listeners have to say so we can improve. Neither one of us (Sundans) are hostile towards constructive criticism. If any artist's fans happen to be so entirely engrossed in their enjoyment of the music that they find it their duty to respond to negative reviews, that is their prerogative. I am speaking about author-reviewer interaction.

sorry, you're just listing the things that make a thorough review and telling me i should do them just because it's "basic etiquette". if i rate something with 5 do you think i'm bound by etiquette to write an essay about why i rated it so highly? i'm not cynical of the AP, i'm cynical of people. if you seriously think forcing people to review for any reason will increase the quality of reviews then you're just naive.

besides, you're not even talking about reviews now. you're demanding critcal analysis, and most audio portal users are casual listeners and production beginners who aren't capable of providing the kinds of suggestions and assistance you're demanding from them. speaking of prerogatives, you are not entitled to reviews or constructive criticism just for having made something; nobody owes it to you to review and analyse your works.

for what it's worth, my suggestion for the AP has always been to remove the charts altogether, thereby removing the incentive to vote dishonestly. apparently this would mean people would get less exposure and in turn less meaningless pats on the back for producing mediocre work, so this idea is not very popular!

I've seen a lot of people complaining about the rating system. I don't know if anyone has suggested this yet, but the entirety of the internet outside of Newgrounds has compressed votes down into a simple like, dislike, or ignore. Make it where people can do that and only vote once, and get rid of the numbers. Having a precise score like that creates competitive mindsets, and music is an art, not a game. When you make it a game, that's when the cheaters and the sore losers and everything in between start coming out in people.