Re comp judging, we seem to be swimming in confusion - because it's a singing comp and not, say, a cricket match. There's no logical, set way to 'keep score' or even tally up a winner.
Seems to me the comp must be judged purely on singing - which includes performance skills and overall audience reaction (not just loud friends) - or it's a farce. But then we raise the question of what is 'good' singing. Hitting the notes? A machine can do that every time.
I'm a Neil Young/Bob Dylan/Muddy Waters/Nick Cave/Ian Curtis/etc fan from way back, and I'm not into the 'classical' standards of singing at all. How stuff gets sung depends on the style of music, the feelings inherent in the song, and the singer's interpretation of them. Interpretation is the big word here. People who are born with vocal talent and strive to copy the originals - who can hit the notes - aren't interpreting the song in their own way and I would argue that their performance is all the lesser for it. I've been profoundly moved at karaoke by an intellectually handicapped singer who's as flat and rough on the ear as grade 3 sandpaper, but who gets up and does My Way with stunning intensity. Some people just laugh at how 'dreadful' he is and turn away, but others appreciate it for what it is and are moved. In a sense, this guy is more what singing is about than any of us because he launches himself into it, voice, mind and soul. He almost needs a wee lie down afterwards.
So where does that leave an 'expert' judge? I like this definition of expert: an 'ex' is a has-been and a 'spurt' is a drip under pressure. I've heard one well-published music expert/critic say over my car radio that Van Morrison can't sing. I nearly drove off the road. I'd bought CDs recommended by this idiot!
We are chasing the wind trying to establish judging criteria. The best we can hope for is an 'honest' opinion from someone who loves music and the whole 'rock' thing but doesn't think there is really such a thing as an expert in the subject.
Thankfully, I have never judged a singing comp, but I have judged quite a few photography comps and it's exactly the same problem: criteria. Where does technique end and inspiration take over? I used to open all the envelopes and glance at the pics for a few seconds each, then put them in Yes, Maybe and No piles according to immediate gut reaction (bad luck for the more subtle practitioners, but there were hundreds of 'em). Then I'd hone down the entries to a dozen or so of the best, form my own opinions, ask a couple of colleagues, and get it down to the final three. Then we'd wait until the cleaner came in that evening and get him rate them 1, 2, 3. He had been a refugee from Chile and had never owned a camera, but he took the task very seriously. I was editor of a photography magazine, but I don't think it qualified me much to judge other people's pictures. but someone had to do it.
People can only do their best. Those who give way to less admirable motivations - friends, bribes, pressure from the venue regarding who drank the most, etc - make the whole scene stink. But what can be done?
Submitted by Steve of Camperdown on 22-09-2005

Meet karaoke hosts and singers in the Where2sing.com forums . . .

Where2sing.com