I’ve read Victor’s e-book, and I know that quality is not an accident at CCMixter. Things like the recommend button, Dig, and the Ed Picks are all designed to keep the site from being mediocre to visitors.

But none of these things explain something I found recently. I spent some time listening to Looperman, and it is an experience more typical of what I usually find at music sites. There is some really good stuff there, but boy do you have to hunt to find it: they’re buried in a a sea of pretty average and less than average loops.

If you listen to both the remixes and samples added here, the quality ratio is very high. Most samples added are listenable, and I would say about half of them are really good: clearly recorded and highly useful bits. And as for remixes, the Ed Picks barely scratch the surface of the site’s good music. It seems to me just about one out of every two remixes I catch is something more satisfying to listen to than what you might hear on a formula pop or alt-rock station. (It may lack the polish of such material, but tends to make up for it in creativity and in intellectual stimulation in pella lyrics.)

Why are we getting so much good stuff? Are people who might post Looperman-grade stuff scared off by what they hear on the site, or what? Not that I’m complaining at all, but I’m sure there must be a reason for it.

Good question, altough I think looperman has enough qualtiy, you just have to know where to find it. The diffrence between the two for me is here I get more ‘acoustic-type’ and at LM more ‘electronic-type’, I mean that it sounds like that.

The reason for the high quality here, what I think, is the way this site is set up. It’s only about the samples/remixes, it looks even a bit boring. There’s no ‘bullshit’ forum that attracks people that only full around. The only way you can join the community is with quality, otherwise people will ignore you. Ad good stuff and good replys and you get some response. I think that scares some people that are not really serious away.
Another key thing are the playlists and podcasts filled with the best songs of this site. You say it doesn’t explain the quality but I think it has effect, for me it does. A bit like you get what you give (or hear).
For example the last secret mixter I had to remix sackjo22, wich made me a bit ‘scared’ because of her level quality. But in the end after a few trys I made one of my best tracks.

One thing I dont like about Looperman is all the demands they have with uploads and no remix rules. Only 128k music, small samples/stems but no ‘samples used from’ option. I feel more free over here and to be honest I only upload samples here because I know when it’s used.

where can I find that e-book?

Thanks for starting this discussion Admiral! I believe there are a number of reasons why quality music can be found at ccM starting with the community which is inherently supportive and encourages artistic growth and development. There are a lot of talented people in the world. I believe that, at least for some of those that land here, the creative exchange and the opportunity for feedback at ccM is nourishing, positive reinforcement so one wants to keep doing more. The members of this community have varied musical interests, so that artists with different styles and approaches still find supporters. During the 18 months or so that I have been involved with ccM, not only have I observed growth technically and artistically among the mixters, but personally as well. At one time, if you asked me what a remix was, I wouldn’t have be able to tell you; now the thought of doing my secret mixter remix is absolutely thrilling! I think we have historically been lucky to get “professional” artists involved by contributing samples that enrich our sample pool, and which establish a technical benchmark to be achieved. (It would certainly be nice to get some more!) And while we have a lot of “non-professional” artists contributing — folks with day jobs,school schedules, families — clearly, we are no less serious about music making than the pros. Sure there is plenty of drek that is hard to listen to, but there is also an impressive amount of wonderful music, sonic textures, bits and pieces and compositions to continue to discover. I would love to see the quality of music/samples continue to improve as folks become more technologically adept. By sharing our “how I did it” stories, using the forums, and freely sharing information, I am confident that can, and is, happening. While I am not so intimately involved with other musical communities, I am convinced there is something very special about ccM. The way in which our community comes together for creative collaborative events is extraordinary! I for one am so very glad, and grateful, that I found my way here!

I can’t comment much about the relative quality compared to other sites, because I haven’t done much meaningful snooping around elsewhere in a very long time.

But quite frankly I find a huge range of quality in all 3 main areas of ccM: instrumental samples, a cappellas (pells), and remixes.

For remixes, fortunately the recommends () help to sort out some of the better from some of the hard to listen to.

To find good pells, it’s probably easiest to start with the “featured” one’s, and then peruse those artists’ remaining uploads, even if those weren’t specifically “featured”.

Finding good instrumental samples may be the hardest, probably because they just don’t get that much editorial and ratings attention. And arguably they are a little less important because there’s such a wealth of commercial sample libraries available for people inclined to spend some money on that sort of thing.

However it will be interesting to see how ccM evolves in the presence of many more remixing sites than ever before, and the increased positive press and attention that the Creative Commons organization is giving to sites like indaba, who appear to be quite well financed compared to ccM.

dear bob, i agree that the Ed Picks don’t begin to scratch the surface of the quality music at ccM. last week i met with Intel Ventures, and they asked, so where do you find the music you listen to? i said, ccMixter of course! i noticed they wrote down the link :)

i can’t speak for everyone, just myself. but one of the main reasons i make extra effort, to be certain my pellas and remixes are the best to my ability, is because of the interactive aspect. if i know someone else is going to be using an aspect of my creative recording, i want to give them the best i’ve got. perhaps it is this sentiment that drives the quality for others as well?

peace.

yeah, having been around since pretty much day 1, I think part of the reason why the quality is high is based on a number of factors. As Colab pointed out, there’s no “ulterior motive” here really, other than a bit of friendly ego-stroking. We do remixes because people put up great samples, and it’s reciprocated by people who put up some great source after they’ve heard what can be done with it. Yin and yang, ebb and flow, it’s really “community driven” in the truest (and most unselfish) sense.

And Victor ( fourstones) does deserve alot of the credit, not only for building a framework and architecture for the community and guiding the principles from the very beginning, but also for being a complete hard ass reviewer who probably scared alot of the early submitters away.

I know he’s not around much anymore, and alot of folks I’d credit with helping to build the community have moved on, but just like I mentioned earlier with ebb and flow, now we have people like Emily, Susan, Jason, Mikael, Per, and many other fine stewards who carry the torch moving forward.

And there’s still the funky bunch like me and Lang stickin around. We ain’t going anywhere.

Quote: quality is not an accident at CCMixter

this.

I wanted ccM to have a “culture of quality” where artists felt a need to up there game on every upload. This was, in fact, not an accident and very much by design.

Since the beginning of ccM i talked with just about every person that runs a major music site out there and you might be surprised to find how few of them made quality a focus of their mission. They simply assume that wisdom of the crowd would kick in and stopped thinking about quality after that.

Wisdom of the crowds is a great solution when the problem is as focused as a lack of wisdom (e.g. bug free source code.) In those cases it’s OK if 99% of the submissions suck as long you get the One Right Answer.

By contrast, I made quality a key mission from day one because I wanted the percentage of uploads that were listenable to be very high.

The means to achieve this does not involve a lot of voodoo. Just have the best catalogue of a cappellas on the web. If you want to keep the quality of music high here at ccM, then make sure to keep a steady stream of amazing pells.

All the other stuff mentioned here about friendly, supportive atmosphere makes it a neato, groovy place to hang out but doesn’t actually affect the quality of the music. As MCJITB mentioned above, a lot of lessor quality musicians were “scared away” when I used to give honest, critical reviews.

Great vocals attract great producers which in turn attract great singers in an upward spiral. Seed the vocals and the rest will follow.

btw thanks for all the kind words in this thread. my head, she has swelled.

Peace,
VS

How do you people manage to get such great songs uploaded so sone after the secret mixter???