RFC - Review Shakeup
-
- KVRian
- 1145 posts since 16 Aug, 2004
Ben, you mention your thinking of uping the review word count to 10,000, is there much chance of it happening soon? Ive just done a review and its over the count, I can only fit in about 60%. If your intending to up the count soon ill just put the review on hold untill its done.
Otherwise Ill have to put my editing cap on
Otherwise Ill have to put my editing cap on
-
- KVRist
- 423 posts since 30 Jun, 2003 from cinci, oh
How about unrated text-only with pro/con reviews (as suggested); but with the following twist...
A committee of one or more respected individuals read each review and assign a rating number to the text. That way, the ratings would be reliable and self consistant. They would take into account not only the written words, pros / cons, but also the individual writing them.
A committee of one or more respected individuals read each review and assign a rating number to the text. That way, the ratings would be reliable and self consistant. They would take into account not only the written words, pros / cons, but also the individual writing them.
-
- KVRist
- 430 posts since 21 Feb, 2005 from Berlin/Germany
What about a dedicated review committee? Objective and somehow competent reviewers could make the difference. User reviews are mostly not taken serious.
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 13 Oct, 2004 from Durham, NC USA
Just my $0.02. Sorry, I just found this thread so I didn't read all 7 pages.
Keep ratings, but allow "Not Applicable" and/or "Don't Know" colums. These would not affect averages. I don't like giving a rating when I couldn't possibly know, or when it doesn't apply. (Currently, I just use the average of my other ratings.)
Don't raise the minimum. Good writers can say a lot using few words. This isn't high school grammar class!
Keep ratings, but allow "Not Applicable" and/or "Don't Know" colums. These would not affect averages. I don't like giving a rating when I couldn't possibly know, or when it doesn't apply. (Currently, I just use the average of my other ratings.)
Don't raise the minimum. Good writers can say a lot using few words. This isn't high school grammar class!
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 13 Oct, 2004 from Durham, NC USA
Ah, just saw emdot_ambient's post. I agree with what he says about ratings, and also about some indication about how competent/experienced a user you are.
But rather than listing how long you've used it, let's give an indication of what kind of user we are for this software, something like:
- inexperienced user
- occasional user
- experienced user
- expert user
- reverse engineered it and built a clone
(OK, the last one is just a feeble attempt at humor.)
Part of my idea here is not just how familiar the reviewer is with the particular item, but of the class of similar items. For example, when reviewing a Hammond clone, the highest box should be reserved for folks who not only carefully demoed the clone, but who also is an experienced Hammond player.
But rather than listing how long you've used it, let's give an indication of what kind of user we are for this software, something like:
- inexperienced user
- occasional user
- experienced user
- expert user
- reverse engineered it and built a clone
(OK, the last one is just a feeble attempt at humor.)
Part of my idea here is not just how familiar the reviewer is with the particular item, but of the class of similar items. For example, when reviewing a Hammond clone, the highest box should be reserved for folks who not only carefully demoed the clone, but who also is an experienced Hammond player.
-
- KVRer
- 3 posts since 24 Jan, 2003 from constantly dislocated....
I think ratings as such are largely overrated.
Let's be honest, how many members do we have around here ? And what criteria can one use to consider any of those 'credible' enough to do any rating. Even a good synth designer/programmer is NOT necessarily a good musician or even sound designer and tastes will always vary. We can go as far back as the moog versus arp discussions of old. Not that I mind having a rating section, but it will always be extremely biased and only in some rare occasions fun to read. Even magazines get kicked a lot around here. Who actually are those people reviewing and what references do they have to be considered 'expert' enough to even have an opinion to take into account. A practical example .. the good old casio's wouldn't ever have rated high by anybody's standards, but Quincy Jones used them quite a lot in the past. In the end all these reviews fade to grey.
Let's be honest, how many members do we have around here ? And what criteria can one use to consider any of those 'credible' enough to do any rating. Even a good synth designer/programmer is NOT necessarily a good musician or even sound designer and tastes will always vary. We can go as far back as the moog versus arp discussions of old. Not that I mind having a rating section, but it will always be extremely biased and only in some rare occasions fun to read. Even magazines get kicked a lot around here. Who actually are those people reviewing and what references do they have to be considered 'expert' enough to even have an opinion to take into account. A practical example .. the good old casio's wouldn't ever have rated high by anybody's standards, but Quincy Jones used them quite a lot in the past. In the end all these reviews fade to grey.
Signature ? What signature ?
-
- KVRist
- 336 posts since 7 Nov, 2004 from New Zealand
I'd like to see more tits & ass...
-
- KVRian
- 874 posts since 4 Dec, 2004 from Alabama
Didn't have time to read all but I would like a way to check for reviews by date or just the newest reviews.
-
- KVRist
- 172 posts since 6 Feb, 2004 from Southampton, England
Why not give everyone the ability to vote for their favourite 3 plugins in each of a few categories: Free effects, commercial effects, Free instruments, commercial instruments. At any time you could modify which plugins your votes are for.
This would retain the ability to sort plugins by popularity, and avoid some of the drawbacks of the rating system.
This would retain the ability to sort plugins by popularity, and avoid some of the drawbacks of the rating system.
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 13 Oct, 2004 from Durham, NC USA
Hey, that's a good idea. It should allow more than 3, though -- maybe 5. (Some of us have a nice stable of free plugins!)
Last edited by learjeff on Thu May 05, 2005 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- KVRAF
- 8997 posts since 1 Aug, 2003
great idea!markheath wrote:Why not give everyone the ability to vote for their favourite 3 plugins in each of a few categories: Free effects, commercial effects, Free instruments, commercial instruments. At any time you could modify which plugins your votes are for.
This would retain the ability to sort plugins by popularity, and avoid some of the drawbacks of the rating system.
-
- KVRer
- 5 posts since 25 Jan, 2005
Just a thought... I think the ratings are helpful to us newbies who may not even completely understand all that the reviewer has to say, but is looking for some direction in getting started.
-
Musikman4christ Musikman4christ https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=16020
- KVRer
- 17 posts since 8 Mar, 2004 from USA
I like this idea.DevonB wrote:Seriously, one more category that would be nice is
Most Underrated VST/DX?
Lot of us have favorites that NO ONE talkes about, and it might get some more chatter around some of the more obsure plugins.
Devon
Peace,
Musikman
---------------
I will Praise the Lord all my Life !!
Musikman
---------------
I will Praise the Lord all my Life !!
-
William Sharkey William Sharkey https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76851
- KVRist
- 64 posts since 2 Aug, 2005 from usa, pa, near philladelphia
Another reason to go software.WhiteNoise wrote:The synths we jizzed over a couple years ago
-
- KVRAF
- 6496 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from Frederick, MD
True, it's difficult to jizz if it's soft.William Sharkey wrote:Another reason to go software.WhiteNoise wrote:The synths we jizzed over a couple years ago