Second Life Live Music ReviewWritten by Enniv Zarf (RL: Paul Kwo)
Metaverse Music
Pato Milo
Bay Vista
3 stars out of 5 stars
Alright, it's late night and I'm in need of doing a review. What do I do?
I get this IM from Second Life Music group that said:
"Pato Milo Live @ Rainforest 10PM : Yahhhh You Latenight Partiers,,,You know whats up...Get Your pixels on over here to party in the rain with SLs most rockin Duckie!! rowboat attached!"
This sounds like fun. I know I'm known all about getting into the quality of the music and the singing. But I am absolutely alright with entertainers if they are here to entertain. But they better be darn well entertaining.
Pato isn't all that fantastic when it comes to singing. He has a pleasant voice though, and I like listening to his voice quality. He just doesn't sing very well. But he does like to give his banter between songs, rambling about really nothing important. Which is fine since he’s pitching himself more of a party guy and an entertainer.
My favorite part of Pato's act...
...is his Banjo. I was told it is a 6 strings banjo that is played like a guitar. But I have nothing against that as long as he delivers the sound, and as long as it's not a computer playing a MIDI instrument. Yes, another performer Winters Kanto was caught with this caught by one of his venue host. In fact he IMed me in the middle of this concert. I will definitely write up a post about this.
But since Pato is playing the Banjo himself, it really doesn't matter to me. Some people call it a cheater's Banjo, but would I call someone who's playing keyboard synths of non-piano sounds a cheater? It takes just as much skill to play that well. I love Pato's Banjo. Whenever that's out, I feel like Pato's on.
That was about it though for me. He wasn't a bad entertainer, but he wasn't good either. I wasn't really that interested in what he was saying or singing or doing, but I didn't mind him being there either. It was more like background noise to add to the atmosphere while I chatted with my friends and did my things. Sometimes I would look up and enjoy the brief moments of interest. But that's about it. There were moments here and there that were kind of interesting. But honestly nothing was really memorable. There are other entertainers in Second Life that is just memorable and catchy (“Sex and beer” comes to mind) and I just can't get enough of. Pato isn't one of them.
But he is relatable. I think that's his catch, I can relate to him. He feels real. So I don't mind at all having him there just to be real. It has this quality of being in a real life coffee shop in NYC or some other major metropolitan area. There's some guy doing his thing there. Nothing great; nothing horrific. He’s just there to add to the ambience. That is what Pato is to me. Nothing wrong with that, just nothing special. He's just there but real.
I don't know if I will say he should change it or do something different if this is his thing. I don't have any problems with him being there. But if he wants to be more then just being there, he needs to move to a more extreme place. He's not deadpan enough to be deadpan. He's also not crazy enough to be wild. He's not funny enough to make me pee in my pants. I'm just not sure where he really wants to go with his act and I'm not sure he is sure either.
Well the notice read party with rockin' duckies. I guess I got that. But it's not the wild crazy musician parties, it's more of a chill and mellow out with your friend type of party.
By the way, I had to write this review the next day cause while I was at the concert I got like 4 IM’s all trying to talk to me about different issues. So I just jotted down some notes as I sat and chatted.
um, dude....
ReplyDeleteAs a music listener who is fortunate enough to attend many more wide and varied SL shows than most residents, I recently attended the show of a certain pianist who sings, and in light of the above comments am reminded of the age old saying "people in glass houses..."
ReplyDeleteIf I am ever arrogant enough to consider my own opinions to be worthy of note, as a listener I would ensure that I gave my undivided attention to whomever I was about to comment on. Commitment to what one does starts with priorities.. but this is not about me is it?
Dude, if you are dyslexic, lay off the cough medicine.
ReplyDeleteActually I should have made it a little more clear. The IM's were about Pato most of the time. I sometimes talk to people to know a little more about the artist. It was about him being an entertainer and what else he does. I was informed by some people that he's a hit or miss. I wanted to know if this was a miss type of a performance or is this his hit. I still can't be sure.
ReplyDeleteThere was an IM about Winters, but that was an info thing and it was the other other person typing to me telling me the info.
But maybe that isn't the best way to go either. I got heat both ways. If I don't ask, I get people upset. If I ask, I get people upset.
ReplyDeleteEither way, whenever I say anything negative I will get people upset. Whenever I say anything that's not a "he's amazing" I get slammed.
Why doesn't anyone slam me here publicly when I wrote something a little too nice about Strummer, but talk about me and that post outside?
If you would indulge me a moment, allow me to offer a critique of your critique, (and that may help to shed some light on the negative responses).
ReplyDeleteQuite often your reviews will contain criticism of a performance, or call out the flaws with an artist’s ability, and you’ve stated that is what this is about - and I get it. The problem with that attitude is - as with all art forms music appreciation is subjective. While you are entitled to your opinion, you need to remember that not everyone will share it, and phrase your statements accordingly. Suggestions: Instead of “his singing wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t good.” you could try, “while his performance didn’t appeal to me personally, it was obvious from the audience reaction that he has built a good following with his style”. Focus more on the positive than the negative – “his show had high energy”, “he had a good rapport with his crowd”, etc.
Consider this – people who read your reviews may really like and enjoy the artist you are reviewing, and if they see you pick the artist they like apart they may feel that you are implying that there is something wrong with their musical tastes. They may even decide that a) you don’t know what you’re talking about, b) you’re not really objective enough to be giving anybody a review, and c) you’re arrogant. On occasion I’ve even been bothered by a few of the things you have written about some of the artists, like calling serious artists comedic or gimmicky. I’ve seen you criticize the singing of some of the loveliest voices out there and pick apart the playing of musicians that have been at it longer than you have. On the flip side, I’ve seen you sing the praises of some relatively average musicians. It frequently leads me to believe you have some sort of personal agenda with your reviews, and I don’t like it. It also damages your credibility.
As far as making points about technique – the average listener doesn’t know what intonation is, and doesn’t care. Nobody is really impressed to know that you went to school long enough to know the difference between arpeggio and staccato, and none of that matters when your reader is just trying to find out if somebody plays music they will like. You need to learn to identify your audience a little better, and I can promise you that you’re audience is NOT the musicians (i.e. the ones who will understand these references), it is the listeners – and they don’t want to be talked down to.
Finally – keep your personal business out of the blog. If you want to chat about your casting call, your live performances, how everyone is always IMing you because you are just too awesome and badass for words – start a different blog. Here it’s ridiculous and annoying (like commercials), and completely inappropriate to the topic at hand. It does not make you look good.
So, that’s it.
Thanks for offering your pov. Which is also a pov of your own too. It is definitely interesting to read.
ReplyDeleteYou have made a lot of good points about highlighting the good about the crowd etc is a fascinating point of view, but I do not believe in saying the crowd loved him so we all should. Does that mean a great artist who had a crowd of 5 should be less praised while an average artist should get more praise cause he got a bigger following? Doesn't that totally defeat the point of this review? But I have to say there is some point in your idea of saying a little more positive things. I did try, honest I did. Just not enough to your liking. To me the mentioning of the banjo was my positive thought. But my feeling overall is the feeling of the article overall. It would be a lie if I overly praised someone that I didn't like. I got into trouble with one that I was trying to be positive in an earlier review. After I published it thinking I was being more positive, guess what, a few people came to me and scratched their heads wondering why did I say that! I think you also hinted on this even in your own comment.
Sure art is subjective. Even the greatest artists in the world have people who hate them and think they are awful. 20% of your audience will hate you no matter what you do, that's what I learned.
And there are objectivity in art. In fact when you said no body cares about intonation, that is so not true. I have so many people coming to me telling me they are so glad I finally pointed out things like that because no one ever said anything yet. Everyone always only praised, and never criticized. Seriously comparing the music in general here in Second Life and the amount of intonation problems versus what I hear on a music sharing site like TheSixtyOne.com, it's rather shameful. I can totally understand why so many people I have met my 2 years in Second Life tell me they don't go to Live Music events in SL because these singers can't sing. It's almost like watching the first round of American Idol sometimes. These singers who are mediocre go up on stage and everyone screams AWESOME in open chat. But in IM, they are secretly laughing at their mediocre performance. Trust me, it goes on. I've been IMed many a times by multiple people about people who's performing on stage.
And to say because the average listeners don't care about techniques and therefore I shouldn't talk about it or criticize it is erroneous for a reviewer to do. What a reviewer is supposed to do is to offer a more formal educated point of view. Now by education I mean that of a schooling and/or extensive training/performing experience. If all I do is offer some average listener point of view, then I don't see the weight in what I am offering. It's about telling the audience, both the musicians and the public what I think. And by public, I'm not talking about the fans of the artist. I am writing this for everyone, especially new comers of Second Life Live Music scene, to show them that there are certain elements of critical thoughts that goes on. I am not here to change the minds of fans. That will never happen. I am here to give people who are looking for new music one perspective of Second Life Music that offers more then just praise. Sure they may or may not care if a singer sings in tune, or they may not agree with me. But at least I offer more then great voice, amazing musician on every single post like in group notices.
And I do understand there is certain elements of subjectivity in music and style and performance, but in the world of art reviews, that is how it goes. I am looking for more reviewers to show different perspectives. This is mine. I just wished more people will be brave enough to say what they are thinking.
You brought up a great point saying that I critized what you think are some of the loveliest voices and praised what you thought were not. Though I don't think I praised many voices here in SL, all those I have praised I have others who share my point of view. There are of course those who doesn't. If I said something that you don't agree with lose your respect for me, then I think we are on totally different pages. The point is to be honest and truthful in what we feel and think even if we disagree. A reviewer doesn't gain respect by writing something where every agrees with. They gain them by providing their own point of view in a manner that is well supported even when others do not agree.
One thing I think people forget is that the review are of that one performance of an artist. What I heard that day may not what you usually hear. And so that's why I offer second looks either way. I may have heard a slightly better performance then you are used to and praised someone more. I may also have heard something a little worse then normal and gave them a lesser review. I think I also should make more of a point to make sure people know this review is about this one performance.
I do try to model my understanding of reviews after the concept of reviews in RL. Every reviewer says what they thought, whether it was boring, or dumb or missed the point, or that they thought it's great, smart, intelligent. And when you have 2 critics on the same show (like ebert and roeper) and they disagree, does that mean one is less respectable because you don't agree with them? Sure fans get offended or think they have an agenda, but they don't. I don't have any agenda with anyone here. I love Second Life and thinks it's a great place to be, but make no mistakes about it, it's not the real music industry. Call me arrogant or what you will but this is still Second Life. When half the people performing has no real life info, when most of them don't have real management in real life as a performer in a major city, what kind of an agenda would I have? Do you really think I wrote a negative review about someone thinking I can steal some fans from someone? Or move fans from one person to another? At most I would move maybe 100 or 200. Those are insignificant in the real world of music when they are talking about numbers in hundreds of thousands to tens of millions.
I got in this whole reviewing before I know most of these people. But I know, people will think I have an agenda and there is nothing I can do about it. That is in the nature of this type of things. I only know that after a while, people will realize it's one reviewer's point of view. I don't go thinking a reviewer is disrespectful because he said something I don't agree with. I would however have no respect for a reviewer who only praise. In fact there was one who did that in real life. It turns out he was a fake and paid for by Sony to do that.
There are people who share my point of view, and there are people who don't. As long as I back up my thoughts with supporting arguments, I am doing what I am supposed to do. The job of a reviewer is not for the audience to agree with him. That's what a magazine article would do. They want the audience to love the article so all they ever write about is the good stuff and totally dishonest. I can do that here if I wanted to, just write a bunch of praises to everyone. But I can tell you if I did that, I lose a lot of respect as a reviewer, though probably have a lot more "friends." But they are all fake too, cause behind my back they'd be saying he's an idiot and praises everyone. At least you are all talking about me here out in the open, and I thank you for that! I rather hear it from you so if it's something I think I'm doing wrong I will work on it. I do take everything everyone say seriously. And even your post here even though in general I disagree, but I am weighing it. It will still have an influence on my thoughts as I think this is a solid comment.
So in the end, I respectfully disagree with your stance in general (though some things here and there I am definitely going to think more serious about), but I respect that you took a stance and offered your thoughts here.