There are a lot of mentalities in discussing charts but 'objective'/'subjective' doesn't define every view. Here are some terms that can navigate charting views more easily:
Rhythmic objectivism is the perspective the majority of chartmakers have, so by definition you probably have this perspective. It's the idea that your rhythms should be exactly as they are in the song, or match the song as closely as possible.
Rhythmic subjectivism is the perspective that you are allowed to have notes in your file that don't exactly match the song's notes; this doesn't harm the quality of the file.
Holism (in charting) is the perspective that your file's ups/downs should follow the song's ups/downs as a whole. You should keep in mind the song's intensity and how your file is varying from, or matching that intensity.
Objective holism is the perspective that you should try to capture these ups/downs, but only with minimal variation from the notes that are actually in the song. This is a rhythmically subjective position, but only kind of.
Subjective holism is the perspective that you're not limited by the notes that are actually in the song in capturing the ups/downs of the song. This allows for a great deal of rhythmic subjectivity.
Rhythmic nihilism is a different mentality some people have where neither the ups/downs nor the exact rhythms matter.
Physicalism (in charting) is the perspective where the chart prioritizes the physical movements of the player in relation to, or independent of, the song. This may be in line with, or opposed to, any of the above terms. The Legend of Max (the DDR chart) is good example of this.
Quantizing is matching your rhythms to the nearest rhythm on a continuum of whatever quantity you've set (16ths/24ths/32nds) -- essentially as if you had used the "quantize" feature on Stepmania. This term already exists, but I've listed it here because I'm gonna elaborate on some other views.
a scenario:
Say you have a song which has an electronic rhythm of (mostly) 16ths. You've mapped this out and you're stepping vocals to it. A great deal of the vocals will fall on the 16ths, but some won't.
For the ones that won't, you're going to create an awkward flam/gallop/grace note thing where the rhythms are way more intense than the song; the most memorable moment of the file may be an insignificant part of the verse where the rapper/vocalist gets ther vocals really wrong and creates a burst of awkward rhythms.
So instead, you quantize it -- you match the closest note on whatever continuum you're using. Since the song is mostly 16ths and the rapper/vocalist is *trying* to rap in 16ths, you'd just shift the 32nds to 16ths. The player won't notice much difference, because they're already tapping to 16ths anyway. Their mind will be attuned to the electronic 16ths.
Classifying this person as 'subjective' wouldn't do it because there's a lot of disagreement that could come about how subjective you're going to make it. Saying they're using 'subjective' charting mentalities is right, to a degree -- but they're not inventing notes to capture the mood of the song, just slightly varying from it. I'd describe a chart like this as an objective holist one.
By contrast, a chart I made to this song has a gigantic 16th run in the climax of the song. There aren't actually 16ths in that part. But they're there because to do anything else would just not match the intensity of that climax, so that's a subjective holist chart.
I recognize that some of these terms come off as pretentious, but I don't know any better way to describe the different mentalities that people have for how you should match button presses to music. So there you go.
Rhythmic objectivism is the perspective the majority of chartmakers have, so by definition you probably have this perspective. It's the idea that your rhythms should be exactly as they are in the song, or match the song as closely as possible.
Rhythmic subjectivism is the perspective that you are allowed to have notes in your file that don't exactly match the song's notes; this doesn't harm the quality of the file.
Holism (in charting) is the perspective that your file's ups/downs should follow the song's ups/downs as a whole. You should keep in mind the song's intensity and how your file is varying from, or matching that intensity.
Objective holism is the perspective that you should try to capture these ups/downs, but only with minimal variation from the notes that are actually in the song. This is a rhythmically subjective position, but only kind of.
Subjective holism is the perspective that you're not limited by the notes that are actually in the song in capturing the ups/downs of the song. This allows for a great deal of rhythmic subjectivity.
Rhythmic nihilism is a different mentality some people have where neither the ups/downs nor the exact rhythms matter.
Physicalism (in charting) is the perspective where the chart prioritizes the physical movements of the player in relation to, or independent of, the song. This may be in line with, or opposed to, any of the above terms. The Legend of Max (the DDR chart) is good example of this.
Quantizing is matching your rhythms to the nearest rhythm on a continuum of whatever quantity you've set (16ths/24ths/32nds) -- essentially as if you had used the "quantize" feature on Stepmania. This term already exists, but I've listed it here because I'm gonna elaborate on some other views.
a scenario:
Say you have a song which has an electronic rhythm of (mostly) 16ths. You've mapped this out and you're stepping vocals to it. A great deal of the vocals will fall on the 16ths, but some won't.
For the ones that won't, you're going to create an awkward flam/gallop/grace note thing where the rhythms are way more intense than the song; the most memorable moment of the file may be an insignificant part of the verse where the rapper/vocalist gets ther vocals really wrong and creates a burst of awkward rhythms.
So instead, you quantize it -- you match the closest note on whatever continuum you're using. Since the song is mostly 16ths and the rapper/vocalist is *trying* to rap in 16ths, you'd just shift the 32nds to 16ths. The player won't notice much difference, because they're already tapping to 16ths anyway. Their mind will be attuned to the electronic 16ths.
Classifying this person as 'subjective' wouldn't do it because there's a lot of disagreement that could come about how subjective you're going to make it. Saying they're using 'subjective' charting mentalities is right, to a degree -- but they're not inventing notes to capture the mood of the song, just slightly varying from it. I'd describe a chart like this as an objective holist one.
By contrast, a chart I made to this song has a gigantic 16th run in the climax of the song. There aren't actually 16ths in that part. But they're there because to do anything else would just not match the intensity of that climax, so that's a subjective holist chart.
I recognize that some of these terms come off as pretentious, but I don't know any better way to describe the different mentalities that people have for how you should match button presses to music. So there you go.
Comment