| 1) The rating system
is not applied to all reviews.
The rating system is generally applied for
more recent reviews and when
the rating system might better clarify
the level of sophistication and development
of the reviewed music for the rating categories
applied to that specific review. |
| |
| 2) The rating system
does not always apply the same categories to
reviews. The categories might be changed
for any specific review to better illustrate some
aspect of the music reviewed for that specific review.
|
| |
| 3) The numeric values
for the rating system are based on a 1 to 10
rating, 10 being a perfect score.
A score of 9.5 is typically the highest
rating given, corresponding to an "A+", master level score,
as perfection is viewed as unattainable...
unless proven otherwise!
|
| |
| 4) The ratings are graded on a curve.
Each integer increment is intended to represent a
(quantum) level of proficiency such that going from 5 to 6
represents a jump in level of proficiency.
The rating system is a sort of exponential curve.
|
| |
| 5) Though the ratings are intended
to be applied objectively, there is some subjectivity
involved and the ratings are more of gut estimates
rather than anything that has been evaluated with
any sort of intensively debated committee or complex algorithm!
Ratings are intended to give readers of the reviews
some level of expectation and are not targeted
at the musicians involved in the production of the music. |
| |
| 6) The levels are generally defined as follows:
Level 1 is defined as deficient or virtually nonexistent skill.
Levels 2 and 3 are associated with amateur skill levels.
Level 4 is the basic level expected of professional caliber musicians.
Level 5 is the basic level expected of progressive or advanced musicians
engaged in penning their own compositions, arrangements, and scores.
Therefore, the rating system generally will not
be aplied to music with scores below 5 because that music is then
considered either amateur level or not distinctive enough
to be within contention for consideration for rating.
Levels 6 and 7 indicate successive levels of above average
development in the area specified.
Any score of 7 or above is considered to be noteworthy and exceptional.
Scores between 8 and 10 indicate gradations of mastery of the skill
or area and are typically associated (a comparison) with contending and established masters.
Scores of 8 and above should be considered the range spanned
by world class talent and this span leaves some room
for comparison at this level.
|
| |
| 7) Enjoyable music does not necessarily
require high scores across the board.
It is indeed rare to see any musical
effort that has scores above 8 across the board.
That type of high score is associated only with
world class instrumentalists.
Music with accessibility of level 5 is considered worthwhile.
Anything beyond 5 for accessibility and lyricism should be
indicative of increasing enjoyability!
Those that crave complex harmonization and other elements
will be more interested than others in those types of areas that are scored.
|
| |
| 8) Reiterating, the rating
system is not intended to snub anybody and
should not be taken that way.
It is intended as a guide for readers of the
reviews to gain a sense of quality for the areas rated,
where ratings have been applied,
as well as providing constructive feedback
to musicians for potential areas of improvement.
As these ratings are based upon a system of relative quality,
the ratings for different styles and genres may be
somewhat relative to the standards of those styles and genres
and the qualities of the generally recognized masters therein.
|
| |
| 9) The common areas of scoring
are described as follows:
|
| |
| Composition:
How well the music is composed, the quality of the
arrangements, sections, musical structure, counterpoint, themes,
progressions, motifs, etc.
|
| |
| Execution:
How well the music is executed, the quality of the performance.
Scores of 8 and above are indicative of virtuoso performances.
|
| |
| Improvisation:
The relative abundance and quality of the improvisation.
|
| |
| Originality:
How original the music is. There are different areas
where the music could be original, such as stylistic
originality, compositional originality, improvisational
originality, lexical originality, etc.
This category gives a qualitative indication of
these combined areas of originality relative to
other progressive efforts. A high score could
be indicative of originality in one or more of these areas.
|
| |
| Relative Accessibility:
How easy is it for the listener to relate to the music.
Listeners are limited by their exposure and experience
in what they have already listened to be able to relate
to new music.
The ratings given assume a listener with a basic level
of exposure to instrumental music.
This rating is an indication if the average listener
will understand and like the music.
|
| |
| Lyricism:
How lyrical is the music.
Lyricism is a key quality of music that makes the music
seem like a conversation that the listener is engaged with the
musician(s), if only as a passive listener.
Lyricism typical involves sets of phrasings that are analogous
to word phrasings that comprise lexicons (languages) that are
accented with animation that distinguishes them as dialects referred
to as vernaculars.
Lyricism is the flow of music that makes it seem like a conversation.
Lyricism typically involves melodic themes that are organized using counterpoint.
|
| |
| Harmonization:
How well developed the harmonic dimension of the music is.
Harmonization involves the use of all potential colors from the
tonal palette available to the composer(s) / improviser(s).
The European chromatic scale contains twelve chromatic tones.
Harmonization is the measure of how much the musicians
use, explore, and transition between different combinations of
harmonic combinations of multiple tones, as well as the complexity
of the harmonic sequences.
Some more exotic music utilizes tones outside of the European chromatic
scale, such as music with Indian, Middle-Eastern, and African influences.
Such tones fall in between the notes used by European (classical) composers.
|
| |
| Rhythm:
Rhythm is the measure of how rhythmic the music is.
Rhythm involves the use of beats and sustained sounding of musical sounds
to voice the way the music is sounded in the progression of time.
Rhythm involves both percussive instruments, such as drums, and
rhythmic instruments such as guitars, bass, etc..
|
| |
| Timing:
Timing is the measure of the complexity and quality of timing used within the music.
timing involves the use of time signatures, such as 4/4, 3/4, and 5/4
that count the number of beats per bar.
Jazz and other highly developed music typically may use multiple, odd,
or unusual time signatures within compositions or arrangements.
Some African, Middle-Eastern, and Indian music uses very unusual time signatures,
the music may not even adhere to a consistent time signature, and
the music may even be in a constant state of dynamic change for the timing.
The timing rating also may indicate the quality of any other aspects of timing
such as borrowed time, double stops, and other devices associated with timing
within the music.
|
| |
| Technical Complexity:
How technically complex the music is.
This is a measure of the combination of the complexity and intricacy of
the composition, arrangement, improvisation,
and the execution / performance of the music.
|
| |
| Production:
This is a measure of how well produced the music is.
Music that is well produced will be free of any
defects from production, recording, errors in performance,
or any other undesirable sounds that affect the quality of
the music in a detrimental way.
|
| |
