I am a newer member of Artist Weekly and so far have enjoyed all
aspects of the site. It is certainly a welcome change from the
money grabbing masses and probably far more effective. There is
one thing that bothers me however; I'm sure someone will let me
know if I'm just being too 'sensitive' or indeed have a good
point.
I have no problem with reviewers comments in general. I believe
that anyone who isn't willing to accept (or cannot take)
criticism shouldn't be posting songs in the first place. What I
do have a problem with is specific comments that allude to
plagiarism of one type or another. So far in my short time here
I have only seen this twice, but the second time was directed at
my first posting, and so, here I am.
The comments I received from the reviewer were not malicious as
a whole; however, with one quick line I believe the idea that
the work may not be entirely mine is passed on to other
listeners (readers.) Here is the entire comment; I will leave
off the name of the reviewer:
"If that was your work Don (and not a yamaha scaryokie) it was
very interesting. Kinda fun to listen to."
Now, before I go further I would like to make it clear that I
hold no animosity towards the member that wrote the above. I
understand where he/she is coming from and am willing to take it
in stride, really. Besides, the comment was positive taken in
its entirity and I am trusting (hoping) that the reviewer didn't mean any harm. What I see as a problem is that, when other
members see this, it may put doubt in their minds also. If the
person that wrote the comment has doubts about its authenticity,
so be it, but please do not suggest it publicly. If you are
absolutely certain that plagairism has taken place then go for it, show no mercy, but otherwise, the comment is not relevent nor is it appropriate. I will tell you now that
every note is my own and represents many hours of painstaking
work. The song is not mainstream by any means, in fact, I only
posted it because of a forum topic I read about marketable songs. The topic got me thinking, made me curious about how people would view a song like that one. To tell you the truth, I was actually flattered when I read the comment suggesting that the work might not be mine. Even if it was a Yamaha Scaryokie
referred to, I still considered that a compliment. Someone
thought the song good enough that it couldn't have been created
by me - that's how I took it anyway. (I do not own a
"scaryokie" incidentally, or even a karaoke for that matter. Also, I mention the fact that the song is not mainstream wondering if that had something to do with doubting my work?)
As I mentioned at the start of this post, I have read one other
comment that actually contained the word 'plagairized' in it.
(Directed at another member who was also annoyed at the
suggestion.) This tells me that perhaps there is a problem with this. If not, you will correct me I'm sure.
To put this in perspective - to make it clear - this is not
about the comment I received specifically, but rather people
leaving comments such as that to anyone, any time. I am not spinning in circles angrily or anything, but I do think these comments should not be written unless the reviewer is certain. Is there a point to be made here? I look forward to hearing what others think. And by the way, I wrote this all by myself.
Get over yourself. How would I be able to tell the difference, I'm just some moron in a monkey suit. Plagerism indeed. I never intimated it was "stolen" Don it was a reference to "I COULDn'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOW GOOD THERE STUFF IS AND YOURS".
I was just trying to make the point that comments along those lines shouldn't be referenced in reviewer comments unless it is a blatant case. The specific comment I received wasn't a big deal to me and I stated that clearly; however, the idea of people making insinuations for no good reason could be. When I saw "if that's your work" I chuckled, thinking about how many hours I put into that thing and I don't even listen to that type of music. I must say however, I don't know that anyone would have taken "if that's your work" any differently then I did ... but enough of this. If my point wasn't relevent then that's that. If it was, it was. I'm done.
Dude, I am the "Jack" that made the comment, get it?
All censorship aside, you had, at the time I made "that comment" one other. It was negative to the effect of your work. Then I made mine, it was positive. So out of a possible 100 percent (2 comments being the 100 mark, divided by 2) 50 percent liked it. That's better then ANY song in the real market could hope to achieve. But noooo, your not happy with that:) Now you have the good 50 percenter one a hook for percieved slander. As of this writing you have had 4(FOUR) listens....still only one positive reply and one negative, now your at 25 percent.
That is the trouble with a "text" only mode. Sure I could have used an emoticon but I "assumed" that any one articulate enough to piece together a diverse work such as yours would understand. There is not a black box or keyboard in my studio that will not give me some type of demo that is awesume in effect but difficult to achieve by the average user. There again, I "assumed" you had to have some variation of what I own to get your song produced. My mistake.
To complicate matters more you had to include a "DSPOC" copyright notice that led me to no-where. So in effect YOU are guilty for not giving ME enough information where it mattered and too much where it did not.
In the future try to love the ones that make you shine, and stop defending what does not need defending, it makes us look guilty.
You know Jack, I think you should really read my first post again, only this time carefully. Nothing was directed at you personally and I only used your comment as one reference point out of two. I was simply interested in hearing what others thought about 'careless' remarks that suggested a member might not be entirely honest in presenting his or work. That was it. Nothing more, nothing less, and I have made that absolutely, perfectly clear in both my posts. For some strange reason you have twisted it around, making it appear as if it was a personal attack on you. I don't get it? Do you have a guilty conscience or something? It would seem that you are attempting to alter people's perceptions of what this was really about in order to clear yourself, or at the least, make yourself feel better. The funny thing is, there was nothing to clear up in the first place. If others would chime in on this it might help. Did I step out of line? How about Jack? If you received the same comment I did how would you have taken it? ("If that was your work Don (and not a yamaha scaryokie) it was very interesting. Kinda fun to listen to.")
It really wasn't a big deal Jack. I'm not sure why this irritated you so much when it certainly was not personal, but I suppose you'll have your fun with this post also. Go for it, but don't expect me to understand why you're doing it. I'm far too stupid for that.
Don wrote: interested in hearing what others thought about 'careless' remarks
If there is nothing to clear up why do you refuse to let it die? If it wasn't a big deal why do you keep on, verbosely, making it out to be nothing?
You did three things in your first post that keep me involved in this:
1. You called me out, you used my words, sorry, I get to explain them, which I did.
2. You made reference that people in general see a word and like sheep they follow each other over the cliff. Strike two!
3. And last but certainly not least, You asked for censure of the people.
Mentalities like that will want the bad words removed next, then political posture will be evaluated and sanitized. Damn that loud music that has got to go too. What do you mean your doing drugs, we just do NOT do that here, you'll have to go, but not before you get that nasty ass hair cut. And get a job ya bum. Jesus why aren't more people like me?
Thank you for making my point for me, my work is done. You do indeed enjoy twisting things to suit your needs. I, for one, am convinced that is how this got carried away in the first place.
A perfect example ... you quoted me as saying "interested in hearing what others thought about 'careless' remarks"
Here is the full, ACCURATE quote:
"I was simply interested in hearing what others thought about 'careless' remarks that suggested a member might not be entirely honest in presenting his or work."
There is a very big difference and you know it, so, nice try but it doesn't fly. That's a very old trick and quite transparent. It's no different then taking a quote like "I love ice cream when it is fresh but I hate ice cream when it has urine in it" and quoting the sentence as "I hate ice cream." Of course that's not censorship though is it, oh nooo.
As far as I am concerned this topic can be closed. I will not be returning either. A simple question about SPECIFIC remarks being made has been turned into a debate about censorship, among other things. I've lost interest. Before I go, I will leave you with this Jack: Out society has made it perfectly clear what is acceptable and what is not. We have freedom of speech, which of course is a great thing. We are not allowed, however, to state publicly things about another person that are not true. Now, you did not do that, but you came close, and although a remark such as that may be legitimately written, it is inconsiderate in the least. I still hold no hard feelings and this will not affect the way I look at any future posts by you. That would be downright ridiculous. Obviously we don't see things the same way so each of us can go our merry way convinced that he is right and that will be that. I have nothing more to say. Topic closed.
I hope you come back and post more songs. I can't imagine that one veiled plagerism accusation would stop you from creating music, and it certainly shouldn't stop you from benefiting from this site. Plus, who listens to Jack? :) No offense jack!
I appreciate your comments, thank you. There is nothing that could stop me from creating music - I couldn't do it if I wanted to, I think I'm possessed. :~) Jack taught me something anyway, so I did get some insight out of this. I'll leave it at that so I don't ruffle any more feathers. Whether good or bad, you haven't heard the last of me. I am trying to find a good vocalist to sing my 'real' songs since I have a slight problem in that area.
Great to hear. Try posting in the "vocalist wanted" section. There are plenty of people here that could do vocal parts for you remotely, via mp3. Don't be affraid of posting a non-paying gig either -- we're all starving musicians! Although, you'll probably get more offers than you can handle if you give out a $20 gift card to Chili's.
I doubt this will be to your satisfaction but I will explain.
There is no organization called DSPOC if that is what you've been looking for. It stands for Don Sutton (City) Ontario Canada. This is how it came about:
I am legally blind. I have only a tiny portion of the macula in my right eye still functioning. (The macula is required for detail work such as reading, writing and doing such things as adding tags to MP3 files.) Both retinas for all intents and purposes are in shreds. It's genetic, nothing I can do. A year from now, maybe 2, I'm done, no vision. When I look at the computer monitor, I see bits and pieces - most of it is obscured with blind spots, places where the retina has deteriorated to useless scrap. I cannot read the forum posts without highlighting the text (to get contrasting colors) because to me, the text and background colors they use here are almost identical. (I rarely change the settings on the computer because I am not the only one that uses it, and if I am alone, it is a real pain.)
The song I posted here was created entirley by software, one note at a time for melody and fills and many large cut and paste portions for drums and the 'rhythm section.' (Also edited later to add realism.) When finished, I recorded it to MP3. I use an MP3 tag generator program to add information about my songs to the MP3 afterwards ... artist name, song name, copyright info, album title ... etc. (If you right-click on a song in Windows Media Player and select Properties you can see this type of information.) Some fields I use, some I don't. As egotistical as it may be, I do this for future 'generations' to easily gain info about the song. I come from a long line of musical people and I expect there will be many more to come. (World class opera singer, pianists, a symphony conductor - not household names, but very talented nonetheless.) I am even writing songs that I am leaving unfinished for others to complete in the future. (Personally, I think that will be amazing and I wish I could be there to hear the completed songs.) When I decided to upload that particular song to Artist Weekly I asked my 16 year old daughter to add the tags for me, being a pain to do myself. She knows about copyrights etc. and in her youthful wisdom came up with this 'cool' idea, that being the 'DSPOC' thing. The main problem was, she entered it into the artist name field rather than the copyright field. I had no idea she even did this until I read your post about it. When you can't see there are many things you don't bother with, don't look at it ... it takes enough concentration to do what you're doing without trying to take in 'extras.' When I read the post I thought, 'what the hell is he talking about?' and it took me quite a while to figure it out. I did know who entered the copyright info so ... that's when my daughter told me about the 'cool' thing she did. (She thought it was brilliant.) I didn't even know the song title and artist name were displayed in the song review window (the player text that is). I only see what I'm looking at, that's it. Once I discovered what the 'problem' was, you can imagine why I did not want to get into a big explanation about it, so I ignored it. The song is mine Jack, from start to finish, every painstaking note of it. If it is so good that it caused you to doubt it, I am flattered. I will always wonder however, why you would think that someone would enter a song from a keyboard or whatever that thousands upon thousands of people must own and expect to get away with it? I'm 49 years old, have been involved in music all my life and am certainly not the type to steal anything, let alone a song that would be perfectly obvious to many. Perhaps I was a little sensitive about your comment, but if you could see what I have to go through to complete a song such as that, you might be also. I have been very long winded here, but hopefully somewhere in this mess you will find what you are looking for. I don't need you to admit anything Jack, so do what you will, think what you might, the facts cannot be changed.
Dont worry about it Don. The glass is ALWAYS halph empty for Jack. It seems that even when he has something positive to say, it ALWAYS comes with a BACKHAND. Frustration I would guess.
Still trying to squeeze out of it. Unbelievable, buy very typical. These forums aren't here for this purpose so I'm not going to go any further, but you jump right in there Jack - Go for it with all the frustrated gusto you can muster. Just remember, everyone else can see you quite clearly. Have a ball.
I don't give a rats ass what these things are here for, at least I didn't pull some blind man act to weezle out of an obvious mis-leading of the facts.
"Oh I can't see, there fore you cannot judge me for my actions"
What the **** would you know about "typical" me anyway boss?
When I review items on my computer monitor I take note of every little thing that I can use to better benefit what it is that I am hearing.
If a name is given, I search for the name, right then while listening or what ever it is that I am doing. If it is a band name, I search to see if there is a website that I can become more familier with the band in question.
IF THERE IS A REGISTERED COPYRIGHT, I will search that out to match it to whoever it is that recommends it. Had I not SEEN reference to a REGISTERED copyright, I most likely would have left that work alone unblimished.
But YOU said it has a REGISTERED copyright, which it does NOT. Since this, at that time, new poster LIED ONCE it was no leap to think they would LIE AGAIN. And I took it easy on you and have been diligent in trying to get you to STAY where this topic started, and YOU have twisted and turned like an earthworm.
Had that NOT been present we would NOT be here NOW! But you REFUSE to step up and take blame for even the littlest of mistakes on
your part.
Your RANT about plagerism would be NONEXISTANT had you took responsibility for your errors. See how this is going?
I am certain you will develop another way to CONTINUE to shun your neglect in this case and side-step doing the right thing, which would have been to apologize to ME, which you have YET to gather the intestinal fortitude to do.
I know your kind boss you folks that stand on the shoulders of others to make yourself look bigger.
Sure it's an honest mistake, but you keep pointing a finger at me like I owe YOU!
I know your kind boss you folks that stand on the shoulders of others to make yourself look bigger.
That is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. theres been posts all over the place from you trying to make yourself look better by knocking other people down. You need to look in the mirror buddy.
