Home
»
Forum
»
Musicians forum
»
Giving credits to your fellow musicians - fair enough or unnecessary?
Giving credits to your fellow musicians - fair enough or unnecessary?
Seite 2 von 2: 12
SUPPORTER
Posts: 92
Joined: 29.08.2022
SoulFingers wrote:
Yes, among other topics it means that too: removing instruments to replace them with the own one.
MySounds wrote:
I can think of at least one usecase I'd have no problems with: take drums, bass, guitar uploads in that sequence. If I now want to inject my own bass upload between drums and guitars, I would have to cut out the existing bass.
I can think of at least one usecase I'd have no problems with: take drums, bass, guitar uploads in that sequence. If I now want to inject my own bass upload between drums and guitars, I would have to cut out the existing bass.
Yes, among other topics it means that too: removing instruments to replace them with the own one.
I’m probably lost in translation here, but this kind of track remixing is, for me, the foundation of Wikiloops. I fail to understand why replacing a bass track with a different bass track, while keeping the additions before and after that bass track, would be wrong — as long as the result is posted in the same remix tree, obviously, and isn’t just uploaded as "my own work" without any attribution.
+3
SUPPORTER
Posts: 385
Joined: 19.03.2022
shiihs wrote:
I’m probably lost in translation here, but this kind of track remixing is, for me, the foundation of Wikiloops. I fail to understand why replacing a bass track with a different bass track, while keeping the additions before and after that bass track, would be wrong — as long as the result is posted in the same remix tree, obviously, and isn’t just uploaded as "my own work" without any attribution.
I’m probably lost in translation here, but this kind of track remixing is, for me, the foundation of Wikiloops. I fail to understand why replacing a bass track with a different bass track, while keeping the additions before and after that bass track, would be wrong — as long as the result is posted in the same remix tree, obviously, and isn’t just uploaded as "my own work" without any attribution.
I think the attribution is the main issue here.
+1
Fender AV II 63 TELE RW RED TRANS
Electric Guitar
2.249 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Shop besuchen
Mitglied
Posts: 96
Joined: 07.08.2021
Dick wrote:
I still do not think it is, the problematic part is the way this comes across communication-wise.
I still do not think it is, the problematic part is the way this comes across communication-wise.
Yes, I think that’s what causes a lot of irritation.
Dick wrote:
That sentence creates a weird resonance in me - I have to ask:
How can you possibly tell the difference? Maybe it is enjoyed whilst being consumed? Maybe it is enjoyed so much that people forget their manners and grab it without giving thanks, letting it look like mere consumption.
I have insight in the ratio of consumers (listeners and downloaders) vs. active members who give likes or write comments, and they do not meet your idea of respect among musicians, applying offline expectations only tilts the picture towards unbearable.
Online, you might as well be happy to be consumed... it does show interest in a way.
That sentence creates a weird resonance in me - I have to ask:
How can you possibly tell the difference? Maybe it is enjoyed whilst being consumed? Maybe it is enjoyed so much that people forget their manners and grab it without giving thanks, letting it look like mere consumption.
I have insight in the ratio of consumers (listeners and downloaders) vs. active members who give likes or write comments, and they do not meet your idea of respect among musicians, applying offline expectations only tilts the picture towards unbearable.
Online, you might as well be happy to be consumed... it does show interest in a way.
That’s a very good question. With ‚being consumed‘ I mean the lack of good manners indeed. Just being listened to isn’t a bad thing, not at all. Maybe my expectations are a bit too high since I usually would at least leave a thumb if I use a track of another member. That’s the way I am, just trying to be polite as an active member of the community.
SUPPORTER
Posts: 385
Joined: 19.03.2022
My takeaways from this thread:
- keep people informed about what you do with their tracks even if it takes a little extra effort,
- act as if you're a guest on Wikiloops and not the owner,
- don't do anything that might lead Dick to invest time on technical implementation stuff. I need him to focus on getting rid of the sequencer setting when choosing multiple instruments B)
- keep people informed about what you do with their tracks even if it takes a little extra effort,
- act as if you're a guest on Wikiloops and not the owner,
- don't do anything that might lead Dick to invest time on technical implementation stuff. I need him to focus on getting rid of the sequencer setting when choosing multiple instruments B)
+3
SUPPORTER
Posts: 116
Joined: 23.08.2021
Somewhat related but for me this falls in the manners and respect category:
I feel very strongly about submitting some form of a Thank You whenever a comment is left on one of my remixes.
Some time back, months I'm sure, something changed and now the only way to make sure that I've done my thank-you's is to open the actual song URLs and check. Pretty sure my thank you comments were visible in my feed before. I hope I'm explaining this in a way that's understood. I understand the ongoing quest for less system resource consumption but perhaps this change might lead to less interaction, which is in conflict with WL core principles.
Another way to say this is that, in Newsfeed view, it used to display in a fully expanded format, including my Thank You's. Perhaps you all know a better way to do what I want.
Yes, I'm old school. My momma used to make sure I sent Thank You letters. Actually, my wife still sends 'em. I digress.
I feel very strongly about submitting some form of a Thank You whenever a comment is left on one of my remixes.
Some time back, months I'm sure, something changed and now the only way to make sure that I've done my thank-you's is to open the actual song URLs and check. Pretty sure my thank you comments were visible in my feed before. I hope I'm explaining this in a way that's understood. I understand the ongoing quest for less system resource consumption but perhaps this change might lead to less interaction, which is in conflict with WL core principles.
Another way to say this is that, in Newsfeed view, it used to display in a fully expanded format, including my Thank You's. Perhaps you all know a better way to do what I want.
Yes, I'm old school. My momma used to make sure I sent Thank You letters. Actually, my wife still sends 'em. I digress.
+5
SUPPORTER
Posts: 385
Joined: 19.03.2022
@Bradford
I`m probably one of the worst offenders and you`re absolutely right, even a simple Thank You for a comment shouldn`t be too difficult, especially as I am grateful for each and every comment and interaction. So ... THANK YOU for reminding me ;)
I`m probably one of the worst offenders and you`re absolutely right, even a simple Thank You for a comment shouldn`t be too difficult, especially as I am grateful for each and every comment and interaction. So ... THANK YOU for reminding me ;)
Mitglied
Posts: 587
Joined: 04.07.2020
Bradford wrote:
Somewhat related but for me this falls in the manners and respect category:
I feel very strongly about submitting some form of a Thank You whenever a comment is left on one of my remixes.
Some time back, months I'm sure, something changed and now the only way to make sure that I've done my thank-you's is to open the actual song URLs and check. Pretty sure my thank you comments were visible in my feed before. I hope I'm explaining this in a way that's understood. I understand the ongoing quest for less system resource consumption but perhaps this change might lead to less interaction, which is in conflict with WL core principles.
Another way to say this is that, in Newsfeed view, it used to display in a fully expanded format, including my Thank You's. Perhaps you all know a better way to do what I want.
Yes, I'm old school. My momma used to make sure I sent Thank You letters. Actually, my wife still sends 'em. I digress.
Somewhat related but for me this falls in the manners and respect category:
I feel very strongly about submitting some form of a Thank You whenever a comment is left on one of my remixes.
Some time back, months I'm sure, something changed and now the only way to make sure that I've done my thank-you's is to open the actual song URLs and check. Pretty sure my thank you comments were visible in my feed before. I hope I'm explaining this in a way that's understood. I understand the ongoing quest for less system resource consumption but perhaps this change might lead to less interaction, which is in conflict with WL core principles.
Another way to say this is that, in Newsfeed view, it used to display in a fully expanded format, including my Thank You's. Perhaps you all know a better way to do what I want.
Yes, I'm old school. My momma used to make sure I sent Thank You letters. Actually, my wife still sends 'em. I digress.
I echo this newsfeed view Bradford, something changed, usually requires an additional step to open the track in a separate window to check replies/activity/etc. I liked the previous newsfeed format where all replies and views could be viewed inline w/o additional clicks to open a new window. As it sits now, it seems you can miss interactions in it's current state.
+3
SUPPORTER
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30.12.2010
shiihs wrote:
I’m probably lost in translation here
I’m probably lost in translation here
Yes, that seemed to be the case. We are not discussing the wikiloops standard case of two bassists creating different remixes of the same track - these branch-offs are absolutely fine. I posted some scenarios on what I called "cross-mixing" whilst you were typing your post, I hope these help dissolve the misunderstanding.
SoulFingers wrote:
With ‚being consumed‘ I mean the lack of good manners indeed. Just being listened to isn’t a bad thing, not at all. Maybe my expectations are a bit too high since I usually would at least leave a thumb if I use a track of another member. That’s the way I am, just trying to be polite as an active member of the community.
With ‚being consumed‘ I mean the lack of good manners indeed. Just being listened to isn’t a bad thing, not at all. Maybe my expectations are a bit too high since I usually would at least leave a thumb if I use a track of another member. That’s the way I am, just trying to be polite as an active member of the community.
As you may imagine (now that the "live" panel is visible to you), I was kinda worried the large amount of "listener" activity that is visible now might trigger the "look at those ill-mannered consumers!" emotion. It does reveal (amongs other things) that there is a lot of otherwise echo-less listening activity on this site.
That's why I'm hoping to be able to distinguish which impressions users have, but that's another threads topic :)
To follow up on mySounds attempt to state take-aways, here are mine:
1. I will move on to working on the extended user blocking feature. I do not see that as a tool to educate or punish people, I see it as a missing tool to have so we don't step on each others toes.
2. I would like to come back to the mentoring and manners aspects discussed here - I would prefer role-modelling and smart nudging towards manners, and I do have some ideas on that which I'll pass by your eyes first
3. I'll check what happened to the comment display on newsfeeds - but guys, please, open separate threads for such feedback in the future :)
+3
Ernie Ball 2221 Regular Slinky Gitarrensaiten
Saitensatz für E-Gitarre
5,90 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Shop besuchen
SUPPORTER
Posts: 16
Joined: 15.03.2021
What would the best approach be if you had a track that you lost the original link too, and only had the backing track, possibly the artist? to get the "display the two-dimensional remix tree to" visualization?
Dick wrote:
Hey all, and thanks SoulFingers for addressing this issue the way you did.
There is a lot to say to this, and I'll take the opportunity to state both the official wikiloops rules side of things, but also to play the ball back at you folks who have an opinion on this, as there are a few questions I would like to raise.
Before I start, let me say that I absolutely feel the irritation caused by the mentioned remixes, so, even though I'll play the devils advocate here, don't get that wrong. I think SoulFingers is expressing something quite a lot of members have felt irritated by.
You may wonder: Why is that type of remix not against the rules in the first place? Short answer: Because taking single tracks off of some branch of remixes and re-assembling them can make sense if you are working together to create a seriously great sounding collab. People have used the wikiloops stepped uploads to arrange songs, to then revisit the idea and do a final mix of the various takes. This is a valid scenario, and assumed that the musicians involved are deliberately collaborating with their pack of friends, everybody is happy & aware when the final mix comes up. This is why there is no hard no-no, we didn't want to limit creative use-cases like this one.
However:
The wikiloops public license explicitly requires to state who is involved in the making of the the audio, so, the notion-less variant of cross-mixing described by SoulFingers does not meet this requirement, and is thus not covered by the rules.
Keep that in mind for now, we'll continue down the rabbit hole.
The possible technical solution at hand
People have requested wikiloops should offer a declaration-interface in the upload flow that would allow to add "cross links".
That would work like this:
In the upload form, one would find an additional field where one would be able to enter track IDs of tracks one is merging into ones "cross mix" (think "I also mixed in single tracks from track #12345 and #12346").
Ideally, that would lead to automatic notifications towards these referenced tracks uploaders, and could theoretically display the now involved musicians names and avatars on the final tracks screen - which would then display a mix of authors of the referenced cross-mixed tracks, the current uploader and the musicians involved in the track the upload is connected to. This would automatically solve both the licenses requirement and the missing notifications.
Downsides: There would be no way to display the two-dimensional remix tree to visualize how this track came together, as there is no clear parent->children branching to this track.
This would be the technically perfect version. More on that when summing up.
Third stop: Let's talk about user irritation for a bit - this is where I'll play the devils advocate part now.
Musicians are highly sensitive to irritation, it really does not take much to trigger the wildest emotions when it comes to "how did someone treat my musical output".
If your music is an expression of your inner self (which it is to many, and which is why making music is so beautiful), then who'd be surprised you'd react emotionally whenever your music gets "stolen", taken out of context or repurposed in a way you did not see coming.
The bad news here is:
This is wikiloops, and you will never know which type of remix you will get, and yes, some will leave you speechless in the not-so-good way.
We are deliberately sharing our music for others to have fun with it, and sometimes the others definition of fun is outside of what we can enjoy.
It hurts, I know, but it's part of the deal. You invest six hours recording and smoothening to get a two minute remix by someone who may not have cared or understood what you were laying the grounds for.
I've received remixes where people failed to notice where the rhythmical "one" was, hard to endure listening to that and not feel offended. I know the pain.
But- we've chosen this risk when uploading, and let's be brutally honest:
We are talking about being irritated by a fellow wikiloops user posting on wikiloops. I hate to say it, but we should all be aware that there is more unattributed/irritating use of wikiloops tracks outside of wikiloops that we are simply not aware of.
Don't even start to think about on how many YouTube videos our tracks end up, where people "forgot" to add the required link to the original track on wikiloops.
If you are not comfortable with that, best don't post any audio anywhere online where it is public, that's the hard truth here.
Why do I mention this here? Because I feel we should talk about a solution to the (justified) irritation. There is a cause -> symptom relationship at play here, and any solution should make sure the symptoms go away, right?
A few words on the particular cause of irritation we are talking about today:
Those familiar with the community will not have a hard time recognizing the user(s) who are known to be fond of cross-mixing. I highly appreciate we are not name calling here in this thread, but I hope we also agree that this is a phenomenon that is not wide-spread, but centered about a tiny group of people.
It is not a big problem by numbers on the cause side, but the irritation it causes is significant, so, we better do something.
What can be done?
1st: Maybe someone could try to reach out and let these members know, and propose a better way to share cross mixes? We are all grown ups, sometimes talking helps.
2nd: Someone irritated could also play the hard way and report such tracks as rule violations (red flag button), simply based on the fact that not all involved musicians are stated. That would be technically fair as well, if there really is no notion of the involved folks anywhere in the title, description or comment section. That will most likely escalate the problem onto my desk to deal with, I am just stating it as an option.
3rd: You could go into self-reflection and ask yourself - why do I bother to a point where I feel it disturbs my otherwise good wikiloops experience. You are in full control of what you get notified about, and what appears on your news feed. If anything irritating shows up there, block the irritating user and you will never see any notifications about the irritating agent again - also a viable way worth mentioning. The only loophole left is you looking at the "latest jams" list and noticing "one of those" uploads there. Is that beyond tolerable? That's a question I'd actually like to read answers to.
Why don't we extend this discussion to "how to minimize irritation", as that is the symptom. We can agree on our point of view on what is right or wrong, can make calls for better manners or do whatever - truth is, all that will help little if those causing the irritation do not notice this thread, don't care or continue to do what they do for good or bad reasons.
Sure, we can ban members who effectively hurt wikiloops (think off spam or other clear violations), but limiting creativity and judging levels of irritation to then determine who "belongs here" and who doesn't is a very dangerous path.
So, why don't we go for the technical solution outlined above?
My con arguments are: Besides the effort of implementing something like that on the code end, I have very strong doubts if that would be used. If people were willing to put in that effort, they might as well state the track IDs and involved musicians in the description text, and even that seems to be asked too much from what we observe.
Adding yet another option to the upload form complicates things for new members, who should best get to understand the standard upload case first before tripping about this nerdy extra option, which is really a rare case. Convince me otherwise if you will, but this "feature" is a "wontDo" item on my list, I have developed enough things that then were ignored, this is a highly likely candidate IMHO.
I also do not believe the cross-mixed-but-not-mentioned irritated users would really appreciate getting notified about these types of mixes, as they do not really feel like someone is out for collaboration.
Getting remixes by someone who does not share your musical taste or approach can get quite annoying, and one doesn't want to miss notifications on other remixes either, so, it is not uncommon and absolutely okay to disable notifications by user, using the newsfeed-block option (gears icon in the top right corner of on any newsfeed entry). THAT is the most powerful tool to protect your wikiloops experience, hoping we could change the eventual odd person is ... less effective, to say the least.
Soooo. Bottom line:
I feel someone should invite the friends of cross-mixes to this thread here. Assumed any recent cross mixes were edited and the missing mentions of participants were added to the description text, thus removing the license breach, I'd opt for "let's leave it at that".
If that does not happen and the license breach situation is not solved, ask me to go ahead and wipe this content, and it will happen - be it by actually removing it, or by setting some sort of "shadow ban" status on these tracks which would prevent them from appearing in search results on wikiloops (yes, that option exists, too).
Looking forward to your responses & opinions!
Hey all, and thanks SoulFingers for addressing this issue the way you did.
There is a lot to say to this, and I'll take the opportunity to state both the official wikiloops rules side of things, but also to play the ball back at you folks who have an opinion on this, as there are a few questions I would like to raise.
Before I start, let me say that I absolutely feel the irritation caused by the mentioned remixes, so, even though I'll play the devils advocate here, don't get that wrong. I think SoulFingers is expressing something quite a lot of members have felt irritated by.
You may wonder: Why is that type of remix not against the rules in the first place? Short answer: Because taking single tracks off of some branch of remixes and re-assembling them can make sense if you are working together to create a seriously great sounding collab. People have used the wikiloops stepped uploads to arrange songs, to then revisit the idea and do a final mix of the various takes. This is a valid scenario, and assumed that the musicians involved are deliberately collaborating with their pack of friends, everybody is happy & aware when the final mix comes up. This is why there is no hard no-no, we didn't want to limit creative use-cases like this one.
However:
The wikiloops public license explicitly requires to state who is involved in the making of the the audio, so, the notion-less variant of cross-mixing described by SoulFingers does not meet this requirement, and is thus not covered by the rules.
Keep that in mind for now, we'll continue down the rabbit hole.
The possible technical solution at hand
People have requested wikiloops should offer a declaration-interface in the upload flow that would allow to add "cross links".
That would work like this:
In the upload form, one would find an additional field where one would be able to enter track IDs of tracks one is merging into ones "cross mix" (think "I also mixed in single tracks from track #12345 and #12346").
Ideally, that would lead to automatic notifications towards these referenced tracks uploaders, and could theoretically display the now involved musicians names and avatars on the final tracks screen - which would then display a mix of authors of the referenced cross-mixed tracks, the current uploader and the musicians involved in the track the upload is connected to. This would automatically solve both the licenses requirement and the missing notifications.
Downsides: There would be no way to display the two-dimensional remix tree to visualize how this track came together, as there is no clear parent->children branching to this track.
This would be the technically perfect version. More on that when summing up.
Third stop: Let's talk about user irritation for a bit - this is where I'll play the devils advocate part now.
Musicians are highly sensitive to irritation, it really does not take much to trigger the wildest emotions when it comes to "how did someone treat my musical output".
If your music is an expression of your inner self (which it is to many, and which is why making music is so beautiful), then who'd be surprised you'd react emotionally whenever your music gets "stolen", taken out of context or repurposed in a way you did not see coming.
The bad news here is:
This is wikiloops, and you will never know which type of remix you will get, and yes, some will leave you speechless in the not-so-good way.
We are deliberately sharing our music for others to have fun with it, and sometimes the others definition of fun is outside of what we can enjoy.
It hurts, I know, but it's part of the deal. You invest six hours recording and smoothening to get a two minute remix by someone who may not have cared or understood what you were laying the grounds for.
I've received remixes where people failed to notice where the rhythmical "one" was, hard to endure listening to that and not feel offended. I know the pain.
But- we've chosen this risk when uploading, and let's be brutally honest:
We are talking about being irritated by a fellow wikiloops user posting on wikiloops. I hate to say it, but we should all be aware that there is more unattributed/irritating use of wikiloops tracks outside of wikiloops that we are simply not aware of.
Don't even start to think about on how many YouTube videos our tracks end up, where people "forgot" to add the required link to the original track on wikiloops.
If you are not comfortable with that, best don't post any audio anywhere online where it is public, that's the hard truth here.
Why do I mention this here? Because I feel we should talk about a solution to the (justified) irritation. There is a cause -> symptom relationship at play here, and any solution should make sure the symptoms go away, right?
A few words on the particular cause of irritation we are talking about today:
Those familiar with the community will not have a hard time recognizing the user(s) who are known to be fond of cross-mixing. I highly appreciate we are not name calling here in this thread, but I hope we also agree that this is a phenomenon that is not wide-spread, but centered about a tiny group of people.
It is not a big problem by numbers on the cause side, but the irritation it causes is significant, so, we better do something.
What can be done?
1st: Maybe someone could try to reach out and let these members know, and propose a better way to share cross mixes? We are all grown ups, sometimes talking helps.
2nd: Someone irritated could also play the hard way and report such tracks as rule violations (red flag button), simply based on the fact that not all involved musicians are stated. That would be technically fair as well, if there really is no notion of the involved folks anywhere in the title, description or comment section. That will most likely escalate the problem onto my desk to deal with, I am just stating it as an option.
3rd: You could go into self-reflection and ask yourself - why do I bother to a point where I feel it disturbs my otherwise good wikiloops experience. You are in full control of what you get notified about, and what appears on your news feed. If anything irritating shows up there, block the irritating user and you will never see any notifications about the irritating agent again - also a viable way worth mentioning. The only loophole left is you looking at the "latest jams" list and noticing "one of those" uploads there. Is that beyond tolerable? That's a question I'd actually like to read answers to.
Why don't we extend this discussion to "how to minimize irritation", as that is the symptom. We can agree on our point of view on what is right or wrong, can make calls for better manners or do whatever - truth is, all that will help little if those causing the irritation do not notice this thread, don't care or continue to do what they do for good or bad reasons.
Sure, we can ban members who effectively hurt wikiloops (think off spam or other clear violations), but limiting creativity and judging levels of irritation to then determine who "belongs here" and who doesn't is a very dangerous path.
So, why don't we go for the technical solution outlined above?
My con arguments are: Besides the effort of implementing something like that on the code end, I have very strong doubts if that would be used. If people were willing to put in that effort, they might as well state the track IDs and involved musicians in the description text, and even that seems to be asked too much from what we observe.
Adding yet another option to the upload form complicates things for new members, who should best get to understand the standard upload case first before tripping about this nerdy extra option, which is really a rare case. Convince me otherwise if you will, but this "feature" is a "wontDo" item on my list, I have developed enough things that then were ignored, this is a highly likely candidate IMHO.
I also do not believe the cross-mixed-but-not-mentioned irritated users would really appreciate getting notified about these types of mixes, as they do not really feel like someone is out for collaboration.
Getting remixes by someone who does not share your musical taste or approach can get quite annoying, and one doesn't want to miss notifications on other remixes either, so, it is not uncommon and absolutely okay to disable notifications by user, using the newsfeed-block option (gears icon in the top right corner of on any newsfeed entry). THAT is the most powerful tool to protect your wikiloops experience, hoping we could change the eventual odd person is ... less effective, to say the least.
Soooo. Bottom line:
I feel someone should invite the friends of cross-mixes to this thread here. Assumed any recent cross mixes were edited and the missing mentions of participants were added to the description text, thus removing the license breach, I'd opt for "let's leave it at that".
If that does not happen and the license breach situation is not solved, ask me to go ahead and wipe this content, and it will happen - be it by actually removing it, or by setting some sort of "shadow ban" status on these tracks which would prevent them from appearing in search results on wikiloops (yes, that option exists, too).
Looking forward to your responses & opinions!
+1
Seite 2 von 2: 12
wikiloops online jamsessions wird präsentiert mit freundlichem
Support von:
Backing tracks makes practicing guitar fun. Wikiloops makes it easy.
dyskokyd