Feedback..How do you take it?

Luckily we are different. I need about 5-15 listenings to appreciate the small nuances, even i a remix.

---

Yes. Luckily. A thumbs up and comment are for compliments and there is always something nice to say. Even if it's just for time and effort spent. Efficiency need not be sacrificed for quality.

More to the point, I suppose: I'm just a hobbyist. I don't have the same professional standards a pro like you does.

---

I have given the issue of feedback a lot both thought and reading. Something isn't just right here. On one side research clearly indicates that positive feedback IS more efficient than negative. On the other hand, as i stated before, there is much more information embedded in constructive negative feedback.
So i had some ideas would like to receive feedback(!) on.

1) I think there is a huge gap between how the sender intends the feedback to work and how the receiver perceives it. I strongly believe that most feedback given (inside a coherent group) is meant to be constructive in the meaning that the intention of the sender is to help the receiver to improve. As i understand, this is often not the way feedback is perceived.(Im leaving feedback between different groups/cultures and non constructive feedback out of this.) This indicates to me that there is a need of a protocol on how to communicate feedback. Or at least a improvement on the one we have. I would guess that the common protocol originates in the educational system where it is mostly based on tradition and not on research.

2) Speaking for myself, i am my own worst critic. And i think that holds true for most of us. Its just the way our brains work. There are indications that the ratio between positive and negative thoughts is 20(+)/80(-). So if we combine this with the previous statement it would be fair to make an assumption like this:

Negative feedback, although constructive, reinforces our own internal criticism and is thus perceived as offensive or derogatory or similar regardless of the senders intentions. Positive feedback on the other hand challenges our internal critic and helps us persist on our quest.



No, I am not a pro. On the contrary, I'm a autodidact and i have chosen to be an amateur by all my heart. Meaning that I do what do for the love of it, not as a profession or even with the intention of getting any kind of economic compensation. This frees me totally from the demands normally associated with economics, but it does free me from the obligation of doing my very best. That includes trying to interpret criticism in a constructive way.

---

I spent the afternoon working in the garden , 6 hours. An d I was thinking about this thread that I read in the morning. I know many don't agree with me on many things and I apologize in advance if I say something inappropriate or insulting, that is not my intention. Just old me thinking aloud.

I can honestly say that I love getting feedback on my songs, obviously I enjoy if someone comments positively on the sound or a lick, or the song, that is a really nice and warm feeling. But what I enjoy almost as much is if someone points out the things that are wrong, or could be improved. Those people here I work on songs with know that, I love when they give me pointers on mixing, volume, whatever.

The thing is, here in Wikiloops you don't get that, as any remark that is not 100 positive is simply not wanted. We have had this discussion before on other threads, and I don't want to start that again, but I personally miss the corrections and insight and advice that better and more accomplished players here could give me. I know that I am nowhere near as good as the majority of the regular guitarists here, and I don't have a problem with it at all. It is what it is, but if I don't get shown how can I get better??

I am 51 years old, and have taught a lot of people at work or in sports all sorts of things, and one of the things that helps them to progress in whatever they are doing is if someone points out what they could improve...

So I would love it if it were more acceptable to give honest feedback - obviously I don't mean putting people down, but being positive.

I saw a song here the other day which to my ears there was something fundamentally wrong with the add. And still he got feedback "fantastic" "great add" - to me that is ..wrong. I know people want to be nice to each other, but...Is it hypocracy? Is it lazyness to spend a few moments listening again and then writing a few words more rather than "great"? And I have to admit, after a shocking incident with someone who is no longer with us, I started to think 5 times before I said anything other than what everybody else does.

Another example: I uploaded a song of mine somewhere else, and one of the guys there asked me if it is on purpose that the vocals had the complete mid range missing or similar, and I checked it and he was right and I fixed it. I doubt that here anybody would have said something. It would have been "great" cool" or nothing...

Which brought me to think that maybe I am just an old fashioned old fart, I grew up in farming, you know with down to earth people who say what they think. When we were kids, for instance, we would go out and play and have dangers and risk, and sometimes someone got hurt, but mostly we survived. If you had an argument with a kid, you maybe sorted it out with fists and then it was over.
The way society is at the moment, kids cannot do anything without their parents watching over them, driving them anywhere, if it rains they cannot come to football practice, and if the lazy kid gets a bad report at school, it's the teachers fault. If the kid is slow and does not like training, it's he coaches fault. It never is the lazy kid. It never is us, always someone elses fault. So what I want to say, maybe modern society does not want to hear bad things anymore? We just want to hear good things. Maybe our egos are too fragile now to deal with disappointments, because mom made sure there aren't any. It wasn't our fault.

You have politically correctness in our society that does not letting you say the obvious, and anybody who does not hold your views is more or less dehumanized.

I don't know. It is perfectly normal and easy to critique something without being nasty or hurtful?? I am sure I can, and I am sure all the wonderful people here can too.

I accepted the fact that here in Wikiloops it is how it is, and don't get me wrong, I love it here and can't think of not having a place to listen to music every day. But I do wish there was a bit more help from those who could offer advice. That's all. Peace and music, Wikibrothers and sister ;)

---

I was being snarky and for that I apologize. You seem to be a very thoughtful person, Nilton, and you seem to be constantly full of thought! I appreciate your insights; they are very welcome.

---

Good morning folks - I just found the time to look into this thread again, and I'd like to add some thought here.

In reply to Nilton:
I've had the opportunity to learn quite a lot of communication theory when studying social work some ten years ago, and your thoughts reminded me of that. You are covering a few points which I'd like to add to - I'll spare looking up the scientists who researched these things, but I can reassure you there is a load of research on these matters.

As for feedback efficency - you are most correct about the difference between "senders intention" and "receivers understanding", which is almost always the cause for misunderstandings or feedback gone wrong.
We were taught one very nice example for this, with a couple sitting in a car on a red traffic light. He is driving, and then she says:
"Look, the traffic light turned green!"
Depending on his inner state, the reaction to this very simple feedback could be totally different, from "Thanks for pointing this out to me, I was absent minded" to "Do you think I'm too stupid to drive?!" - any feedback always includes a (more or less) objective statement ( "light is green" ), but also a non-objective social aspect that often is not expressed in words at all ( "...and I am telling you this because [you are too stupid to drive] [I felt you might be happy if I assisted you in traffic]" ).

The second known and well researched fact is the difference that lies in making a solid judgement against stating ones own impression (and mentioning that it only is ones own impression). Saying "Your guitar is always too loud" will create a different reaction than saying "To me, the guitar could have been less loud", even tho the objective statement is identical.
Words like "always", "never" etc combined with a non-personalized statement are communication killers that will lead to the receiver moving into defensive mode 99% of all time, while indicating awareness of the subjective perception by saying "to me..." will reduce this side effect dramaticly.
I am not making a statement for political correctness gone wrong, what I am quoting here are things I learned in the context of how to give efficient feedback in a therapeutical or counselling context.
The ideal way of giving constructive feedback (from the theorys point of view) looks like this, and is actually called the "sandwich method":
1st slice of sandwich: Start giving feedback by saying something nice. This will comunnicate that you are not evil-meaning, and that you are not out to bash the receiver.

2nd, the center slice: Contiunue by stating the thing you feel needs improvement. (Look, I can't even write "needs to be improved" here, lol). Mention that it is YOU who feels there is need for improvement, and avoid making statements that sound as if you were the global reference of truth or were representing the rest of the world - you are most likely not in that position.

3rd slice: End by stating something nice to re-assure the receiver that, even tho you felt there was something not all good in the previous sentence, you are still able to value something about the receiver.

This may sound veeeeery complicated to do, but following this concept gives you a very high chance to deliver the constructive criticism in a way that the receiver can take without taking offense. If you are used to observing your communication a little, you'll find yourself writing feedback this way easily. A quick example out of the top of my head:

"Hey there XY, I just spend a few minutes checking out your track, and I do like the way this is coming together. To be honest, I think your guitar could be a bit less loud in the mix, it "sticks out" too much, especially in the calm part. Really enjoyed your solo at the end, that's were the volume is just right"
And there we have: positive start and ending, reference that this is my individual opinion exressed and not a global judgement, critical content... you must not believe me, but feedback like that will lead to a positive perception in my experience.
I believe my social work educators would be proud of me... lol.

Before I end, two quotes from Nilton and TG and some thought on that:
Nilton: [i]There are indications that the ratio between positive and negative thoughts is 20(+)/80(-)[/i] - I believe that is very different from individual to individual, not sure if there can be such a global statement. 80/20 sounds like some quite unhappy person to me tbh.

TG: [i]The thing is, here in Wikiloops you don't get that, as any remark that is not 100 positive is simply not wanted. [/i]
I have read similar statements before, and I always wonder "Where did they get that from?" I am not aware of any statement on wikiloops saying that "remarks that are not 100 positive are not wanted". There is no such statement, and neither have we (the mods) intervended on constructive criticism, we may intervene on bashing and negative criticism, but thats about it.
Looking at TGs post, I do recognize he is actually using the sandwich structure there quite beautifully, and probably without knowing about the theory at all, which does indeed make it easy to stay focused on the criticism offered. That's the way it works, and thats why such a post is less likely to cause a destructive discussion.
I do agree on most the things TG talks about concerning the change in society, and I must confess I have felt the same irritation about some overly positive comments below obviously badly recorded tracks.

---

This is what your brain is designed to do, keep you alive and inline and constantly warn you of dangers in your physical and social environment. It has very little to do with happiness/unhappiness. But going down this path we could fill a whole library...

---