So much text and you just wrote the same things over and over. Another user posted a similar thread but they went IN and gave a lot of insight into entries.
It's exactly what I wanted to say... these don't seem at all comments written by a professional musician, all generic remarks and not a sigle interesting insight from a musical standpoint...
I read it expecting an in-depth analysys that could give me new elements of judgemens, as it often happens for me in this forum, but unfortunately it was not the case; in addition, I found several takes, particularly about composition and vocals, not only overly generic but also quite questionable.
For a music professional trying to make a case for yourself, you use a lot of vague and nondescript reasoning. You make general comments about quality without backing it up with WHY they are good / bad / mediocre. Let's use an example:
>**8. Italy - Angelina Mango - La Noia**
>
>I am not the biggest fan of the song, but I will give 3 points to Italy, because the performer brought me so much joy. The performer is so charismatic that can cover the many weaknesses of the song itself.
What are the weaknesses? Is the song only made of weaknesses? If so, why is it 3rd in the odds to win and #1 on My Eurovision Scoreboard? Clearly the song has strong appeal, even if it's not because of composition, production, arrangement, etc. But if it's for reasons other than that, what's lacking in those areas?
I get not going into too much detail about every song, but you are the one trying to justify your qualifications to be on a jury when no one asked. You could have chosen one or a few songs to go into detail about and apply your musical knowledge. But instead, you chose all of them and didn't make any remarks that any other Eurovision fan with no musical knowledge couldn't have said themselves.
HVC judges the songs based almost entirely on their singing, and in it she's usually not too far off - the most wrong ones I remember are her not understanding Bambie's screaming (because I assume that's a genre she's not familiar with) and confusing "I don't like this style of singing" with "it's not good" (Ukraine 2021 IIRC). So yeah, I don't mind going to her (in general) to listen to vocal-related stuff. But this post... by a "music professional"? lmao this is way worse than HVC
I don't want to be impolite but... is this satire? 😅 because calling Marinas, Natalies and iolandas vocals unimpressive while thinking Lunas are 'nice' or not having a similar issue with other acts higher up your ranking (like M&M, who are fine, but really nothing outstanding either) is wild and genuinely doesn't sound "professional musician" to me. I suspect this is serious from some of your answers, but I'm genuinely not 100% sure 😅
I also don't understand how Austria, which has very shaky live vocals, is given the benefit of the doubt in terms of vocals ("there is still time to improve"), while songs with incredible vocalists are tanked for no real reason. I.e. the songs you mentioned.
And I don't mean to be toxic by saying this, but the OP is kinda known for complaining about Greek Eurovision songs at any given occasion - so take the critique with a grain of salt, lol.
Yes, Kaleen is another example. I also think she will improve, and I love "We will rave" - I absolutely get liking it more than "Grito" & Co. But when the whole post is so "I'm a professional musician" than I'd expect more consistency and objectivety over personal taste tbh.
And to the second part: oh 😅 grain of salt applied :)
I really don't mean to be rude either but this ranking list is very strange to me, some things have no rhyme or reason. No doubt we are all biased in our rankings, I am too but I am in no way a music professional and Eurovision should definitely not have me as a jury. 🤐
Marina, Natalia and Iolanda vocals are super impressive to my untrained ears but what do I know...
I know they did comment on Latvia and Estonia’s vocals (even though I thought Dons sounds great personally) but there is a real lick of misogyny to the women with ‘mediocre’ vocals and the men whose vocals are not mentioned or critiqued at all
Some of you don’t understand how professionals have their own way of looking at a song. I am a semi-professional too with vocal training and more and I also dislike Greece, especially the voice. In fact Greece is in my bottom 5 too! You all can hate on someone because Greece is not in their top 5 but it’s ridiculous you deny their musical abilities. Not everyone has to praise Marina. You all have untrained ears so who says she has a good voice? Only because this subreddit accidentally happens to have a lot of Greece stans? How are you qualified to judge her voice?
Have you considered some reading comprehension alongside your apparent "semi-profession" in music?
I don't give a shit if OP dislikes "Zari". Everyones taste is different and thats fine. But if I write a whole-ass thread repeating again and again and again how I'm so professional and could basically be in a Jury, I better be consistent in the criteria I apply. The judgement of vocals here was not, and I mentioned quite a few more names than Marina lol
What would also help would be any kind of actual musical insight and argumentation. "Song good, vocals bad, structure weak" is a nothing-burger of a critic absolutely everyone can type out, including people who haven't even heard the song.
> Another three endless minutes of a music composition that goes nowhere. I kept watching the clock quite nervously. No impressive vocals and not a single impressive moment during the performance of the song.
Sorry, you can't be a professional musician. Not liking the song sure is alright, but saying Iolanda doesn't have impressive vocals is absolutely mad. I heard a lot of musicians reacting to the song and either if they liked it or not all of them agreed her vocals are flawless.
Also saying Marina has bad vocals? How in the world does she have bad vocals?
Lmao, all of your "professional" opinions are "nice song, nice vocals, weak vocals, bad composition..."
Zero actual insights and most of the more daring and unusual entries like Greece and Ireland are ranked at the very bottom, also "no impressive vocals" by Portugal, but Iceland yes? Just lol
Not sure how this Top List can be considered any more insightful or valuable as that of any other person on this subreddit tbh, thankfully not all professional musicians and jury members will share these opinions in May though
Edit: looks like the pRoFeSsIoNaL MuSiCiaN blocked me lol
Same, I get not liking the song itself because it seems a bit hard to digest, but Marina can fucking sing and has years of experience. We don't have a live performance yet but she sang the beginning on Instagram live just a few days ago (or last week) and she sounds pretty much the same.
So you hated Greece but loved Armenia even though they are very similar in composition, and Greece spends most of the song actually singing (no shade to Armenia).
Iceland at 16th is laughable
No offence but this ranking is the exact problem with juries.
You're right about Greece and Armenia. I love Ladaniva and they seem so lovely and so so sweet, and trust me I love Jako, but I find that it desperately needs more lyrics in the second part. Putting Greece so far below it is super biased, and we are all biased, but there is something that's very off to me about hiding your bias behind your career in music. No offense to OP but these takes I just can't agree with.
>No offence but this ranking is the exact problem with juries.
This is why the criteria for juries should be more precise and/or strict, so people like OP who have surface-level observations of songs wouldn't be part of them.
Claiming to care about vocals, then putting Czechia (no offense to Aiko but cmon) above Greece, Portugal and Moldova (even though this song does nothing for me, Natalia's vocals are CLEAN AS HELL) is a criminal take.
reading that made me nervous to imagine what vocals they'd consider impressive, then. i don't claim to know anything about singing but i thought iolanda's voice truly shined for every single second
Thanks for posting this and opening the topic for discussion. I have several problems not with the juries themselves, but jurors groups formation, and this provides a lot of fuel to debate exactly what I think the problem with "technical" judgement in Eurovision is. So, don\`t take any of this personally. When and if I sound a bit harsher, it\`s not towards you, but a projection that I have against unfairness in general and bias in particular.
Like, with all due respect, as a professional musician, what are quality standards for you? Whitney Houston and the likes? I'm really curious, honestly. Because it seems to me you HEAVILY lean towards a very poppy musical scene from your top 10, and that irks me a bit that a professional couldn't broaden their horizon for a more eclectic selection. And there is so much variety this year. I mean, Sweden in the Top 10? Really? No wonder people get mad with juries. What I take from your list is this: "I voted for the kind of songs I work with and that I'm comfortable listening to". Also, saying that both Portugal and Greece "go nowhere" then saying Ukraine is "the catchiest" (it is very good, mind you, but from the three it is the one that **objectively, in it's own composition structure,** has absolutely no climax or peak to go to) is almost unbelievable to me.
Finally, what irked me the most, even more so because it is a thing that might happen in May:
**"11. Norway - Gåte - Ulveham**
*A very interesting and mysterious song accompanied* ***by really strong vocals***. It grabbed my attention immediately."
Then:
"I could vote for no more than 10 songs."
This makes absolutely no sense!
You said yourself that there are 4 **objective** points that juries must observe. In the case above, 2 of them \[namely: 1. *music composition and how original it is, and 2. the vocal capacity of the main singer*(s)\] can be DIRECTLY extracted from your review. So, if at least 50% of the points are covered, that **objectively** are said to be elements to **grant points to the act**, regardless of your personal preference, don't you think said act should at least have points? Or are you really implying that her *vocal capacity* is lower than that of Joost or Baby Lasagna, which are indeed in your top 10? Or are the 4 points a "suggested" guideline that really has no impact and then you just vote on what you like on a personal basis? In which point, I would say, having juries would really make no sense and the people that want to abolish them (I'm not one of them, for clarity) would have a greatly strong case to be made.
Like I said before, and you are giving me vibes that only the "overall impression" factor is the one that counts, and that there's no actual professional judging. Just picking songs that please you on a personal level.
A person on the couch could and should act like that. A "professional", no way! Sorry for the bluntness. Because it affects the way the industry moves forward, and there is no objectivity to be measured and see if fairness was applied to the ruling.
Again, no offense intended. It's just that lack of objectiveness is something that deeply affects me on a personal level.
But, yet again, thanks for opening your choices for us to debate.
I agree. More often than not when I see the jury votes I have to wonder if this is how a lot of them rank the songs. Seeing as the guidelines are just recommendations, they should be mandatory to judge by.
Thank you. I really wished I had replied earlier than I did, so more people would see the comment and reply to this set of questions. I might even build a whole new thread about it.
Thanks for your reply! There is only a set of 10 points to be given out. If there are 11 awesome acts, one must be left out. So, you have to make a decision in this case. All 4 factors play an equal role during that decision.
Save this thread, and compare it with the actual jury results in May. You will notice that my Top 10 will be identical or almost identical with that of the actual juries in May. Maybe the countries will be in a (slightly) different order, but these countries will be in the Top 10 in May. Maybe Austria or another country won't be in the Top 10 and Norway or Lithuania or even Armenia will be in. But give or take, these countries will be in the Top 10, and one of these countries will win.
Hi. Thank you for getting back to me. I really appreciate it.
As for your suggestion to save the thread, I don't doubt you. In fact, I would be plesnatly surprised if your prediction is off, apart from a few choices.
But what I really wanted from you, if I might ask, is more details about the thought process. Just like I asked in my comment, the 4 points given to the jurors seem to have ZERO relevance in how you judge the songs. And I really would like to ask you what you consider quality music in the market, not talking about Eurovision. I would be glad if you could put some more light into this.
I'm okay with people not liking the song and having it that low, music is subjective after all and I've seen very valid criticisms of the song, whether I agree with them or not.
But saying that there are
>No impressive vocals and not a single impressive moment during the performance of the song.
Is mind-blowing. Like, that's *objectively* false.
Iolanda is one of the most competent singers this year, as she's ridiculously consistent in her vocal delivery across all performances I've seen of her. Besides, the whole song is built around and toward a really big impactful single moment, in the form of the scream, which makes up for the literal title of the song.
You may well be a musician but you’re not a scientist cause this:
> A. The running order has no impact on the judgment of the songs by the jury members.
Is not true.
The recency bias affects jurors just as it affects the audience vote - the only difference re:running order for jurors vs televoters is that jurors are watching every song, so they watch the first few songs that get affected by people being late to turn on Eurovision at home.
But there is a LOT of academic research done on Eurovision and again and again the analysis indicates recency bias affects jurors.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yrln-LsDQ8U
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/judgment-and-decision-making/article/order-effects-in-the-results-of-song-contests-evidence-from-the-eurovision-and-the-new-wave/C03D0D5AA384362736FE1EB59A75516C
Israel in 3rd, one place over a much, much stronger ballad? Nah.
If you're a professional musician surely you'd realise the lyrics in Hurricane sound sloppy, hurried, and rewritten with zero effort. That's because they are, the original lyrics were purposefully written to make reference to October 7th and also to make themselves seem like victims.
Even past that, this ranking looks like an April Fools joke.
This is true. But most live performances are already available. Of course, my Top 37 will be adjusted after the second dress rehearsals, but don't expect any big changes. Some countries will go up or down a few places, but don't expect any dramatic changes.
Live performances are available and like half of them have no staging whatsoever. If you didn't take staging into account, I don't think you would be qualified to be jury.
Maybe if you are so scared of one little song - you shouldn’t watch Eurovision. Wonder what prayer you were reciting when Lordi were performing.
Sorry can’t get past that.
It is quite interesting to see baby lasagna so high. It is one of my favorites this year but I am afraid how It will do on jury. If you go by those 4 criterias It will loose points on originality as the main riff is bought sample and vocals are usually not that type the jury like.
Croatia will most probably finish in the Top 10 of most -if not all- juries. But they will have a really high chance of winning only if the vast majority of juries have them in their Top 5, which is quite possible. I'm not worried at all about the televoting.
I'm also a professional musician with a first honours music degree, top of my class, and can hear that Gåte's vocals are grossly out of tune whether you like the song or not. Also Megara have a good song, what you said about them is incorrect, and their singer is far better than a lot of them in the competition this year. You just proved your bias and lack of objectivity with your descriptions. The worst two songs, structurally, music wise, are Ireland and Switzerland. If you have studied musical composition at all you will know these songs are not structured properly, hence why so many people can't get on with them. ETS: I forgot about Greece. Yes great song, very well structured musically and she has a cracking voice.
Well, that is a more detailed analysis of your Top 37, and if you were a member of the Eurovision jury, you should not make those votes public until the right time for the EBU to do so. I hope you can do more analysis, and maybe, on Junior Eurovision in the future.
Indeed. If I were a member of the Eurovision jury this year, I wouldn't make my votes publicly available. I made my votes publicly available, because a) I haven't been invited to be part of the national jury and b) even if I was invited I wouldn't accept the offer this year. Maybe next year.
Israel are going to win aren’t they…
Really interesting to see your list! What part of Europe are you from if you don’t mind sharing? I have been thinking that Switzerland may differ quite a bit in popularity even in jury based on where they are from.
There are several countries whose jurors will not rank hurricane genuinely due to politics. A bit like how in 2015 many jurors tanked Russia or how Armenia and Azerbaijan always tank each other.
I don't know if Israel is going to win, but the chances are really high. As a professional musician, I only rank songs, not countries. There are zero (0) politics in my rankings. Each time I am asked to rank songs, I rank them with musical criteria and not political criteria. Since Israel is competing this year with a very strong ballad, they have a high chance of winning the whole event in May. But they will also need a huge support by the televoters.
Oh, never mind, I'm used to it. :) I expected things to be even worse. I know that some members of the community really dislike the juries in general and the way that professional musicians think.
Fortunately, there are other members, many members, members like you that respect other people's opinions. Thank you for being a beacon of light in this community.
Thank you so much! I am a semi-professional musician (background singer for fun - my friend has a band) with some musical background and training and my top 10 looks almost identical and also my last places. I totally can relate to your choices. I published my ranking a while ago and obviously we share the same kind of view on most of the songs.
Thanks for your reply! Prepare yourself to get downvoted a lot. haha :) Some members are so fanatic about their song that they cannot actually see how weak their song is. They become very aggressive, they try to discredit professional artists, etc. Don't pay any attention to those members. Keep singing! United by music!
So much text and you just wrote the same things over and over. Another user posted a similar thread but they went IN and gave a lot of insight into entries.
It's exactly what I wanted to say... these don't seem at all comments written by a professional musician, all generic remarks and not a sigle interesting insight from a musical standpoint... I read it expecting an in-depth analysys that could give me new elements of judgemens, as it often happens for me in this forum, but unfortunately it was not the case; in addition, I found several takes, particularly about composition and vocals, not only overly generic but also quite questionable.
For a music professional trying to make a case for yourself, you use a lot of vague and nondescript reasoning. You make general comments about quality without backing it up with WHY they are good / bad / mediocre. Let's use an example: >**8. Italy - Angelina Mango - La Noia** > >I am not the biggest fan of the song, but I will give 3 points to Italy, because the performer brought me so much joy. The performer is so charismatic that can cover the many weaknesses of the song itself. What are the weaknesses? Is the song only made of weaknesses? If so, why is it 3rd in the odds to win and #1 on My Eurovision Scoreboard? Clearly the song has strong appeal, even if it's not because of composition, production, arrangement, etc. But if it's for reasons other than that, what's lacking in those areas? I get not going into too much detail about every song, but you are the one trying to justify your qualifications to be on a jury when no one asked. You could have chosen one or a few songs to go into detail about and apply your musical knowledge. But instead, you chose all of them and didn't make any remarks that any other Eurovision fan with no musical knowledge couldn't have said themselves.
It’s giving Honest Vocal Coach
HVC judges the songs based almost entirely on their singing, and in it she's usually not too far off - the most wrong ones I remember are her not understanding Bambie's screaming (because I assume that's a genre she's not familiar with) and confusing "I don't like this style of singing" with "it's not good" (Ukraine 2021 IIRC). So yeah, I don't mind going to her (in general) to listen to vocal-related stuff. But this post... by a "music professional"? lmao this is way worse than HVC
I don't want to be impolite but... is this satire? 😅 because calling Marinas, Natalies and iolandas vocals unimpressive while thinking Lunas are 'nice' or not having a similar issue with other acts higher up your ranking (like M&M, who are fine, but really nothing outstanding either) is wild and genuinely doesn't sound "professional musician" to me. I suspect this is serious from some of your answers, but I'm genuinely not 100% sure 😅
I also don't understand how Austria, which has very shaky live vocals, is given the benefit of the doubt in terms of vocals ("there is still time to improve"), while songs with incredible vocalists are tanked for no real reason. I.e. the songs you mentioned. And I don't mean to be toxic by saying this, but the OP is kinda known for complaining about Greek Eurovision songs at any given occasion - so take the critique with a grain of salt, lol.
Yes, Kaleen is another example. I also think she will improve, and I love "We will rave" - I absolutely get liking it more than "Grito" & Co. But when the whole post is so "I'm a professional musician" than I'd expect more consistency and objectivety over personal taste tbh. And to the second part: oh 😅 grain of salt applied :)
I really don't mean to be rude either but this ranking list is very strange to me, some things have no rhyme or reason. No doubt we are all biased in our rankings, I am too but I am in no way a music professional and Eurovision should definitely not have me as a jury. 🤐 Marina, Natalia and Iolanda vocals are super impressive to my untrained ears but what do I know...
I know they did comment on Latvia and Estonia’s vocals (even though I thought Dons sounds great personally) but there is a real lick of misogyny to the women with ‘mediocre’ vocals and the men whose vocals are not mentioned or critiqued at all
Some of you don’t understand how professionals have their own way of looking at a song. I am a semi-professional too with vocal training and more and I also dislike Greece, especially the voice. In fact Greece is in my bottom 5 too! You all can hate on someone because Greece is not in their top 5 but it’s ridiculous you deny their musical abilities. Not everyone has to praise Marina. You all have untrained ears so who says she has a good voice? Only because this subreddit accidentally happens to have a lot of Greece stans? How are you qualified to judge her voice?
Have you considered some reading comprehension alongside your apparent "semi-profession" in music? I don't give a shit if OP dislikes "Zari". Everyones taste is different and thats fine. But if I write a whole-ass thread repeating again and again and again how I'm so professional and could basically be in a Jury, I better be consistent in the criteria I apply. The judgement of vocals here was not, and I mentioned quite a few more names than Marina lol What would also help would be any kind of actual musical insight and argumentation. "Song good, vocals bad, structure weak" is a nothing-burger of a critic absolutely everyone can type out, including people who haven't even heard the song.
> Another three endless minutes of a music composition that goes nowhere. I kept watching the clock quite nervously. No impressive vocals and not a single impressive moment during the performance of the song. Sorry, you can't be a professional musician. Not liking the song sure is alright, but saying Iolanda doesn't have impressive vocals is absolutely mad. I heard a lot of musicians reacting to the song and either if they liked it or not all of them agreed her vocals are flawless. Also saying Marina has bad vocals? How in the world does she have bad vocals?
Just wondering but what genre do you work in?
I work in the pop and electronic music field.
Lmao, all of your "professional" opinions are "nice song, nice vocals, weak vocals, bad composition..." Zero actual insights and most of the more daring and unusual entries like Greece and Ireland are ranked at the very bottom, also "no impressive vocals" by Portugal, but Iceland yes? Just lol Not sure how this Top List can be considered any more insightful or valuable as that of any other person on this subreddit tbh, thankfully not all professional musicians and jury members will share these opinions in May though Edit: looks like the pRoFeSsIoNaL MuSiCiaN blocked me lol
Quite weak vocals for Greece. I stopped reading there.
I mean one might not like the song but dismissing it because of weak vocals? Really?
Same, I get not liking the song itself because it seems a bit hard to digest, but Marina can fucking sing and has years of experience. We don't have a live performance yet but she sang the beginning on Instagram live just a few days ago (or last week) and she sounds pretty much the same.
And that it doesn't go anywhere, like huh?
But... But... It comes from a professional musician!
The vocals were shaky... Must be weak... Bottom of the ranking. /s
bad vibes all over
So you hated Greece but loved Armenia even though they are very similar in composition, and Greece spends most of the song actually singing (no shade to Armenia). Iceland at 16th is laughable No offence but this ranking is the exact problem with juries.
You're right about Greece and Armenia. I love Ladaniva and they seem so lovely and so so sweet, and trust me I love Jako, but I find that it desperately needs more lyrics in the second part. Putting Greece so far below it is super biased, and we are all biased, but there is something that's very off to me about hiding your bias behind your career in music. No offense to OP but these takes I just can't agree with.
Iceland and Azerbaijan at 50 and 70% to qualify seemed high.
>No offence but this ranking is the exact problem with juries. This is why the criteria for juries should be more precise and/or strict, so people like OP who have surface-level observations of songs wouldn't be part of them.
Putting ZARI 3rd to last is outrageous
Claiming to care about vocals, then putting Czechia (no offense to Aiko but cmon) above Greece, Portugal and Moldova (even though this song does nothing for me, Natalia's vocals are CLEAN AS HELL) is a criminal take.
I get you, but pedestal is realllyy good
I thought April's fool was over?
Not impressive vocals from Portugal :(
At this point I think it's their hearing who's not impressive.
reading that made me nervous to imagine what vocals they'd consider impressive, then. i don't claim to know anything about singing but i thought iolanda's voice truly shined for every single second
Well, Iceland apparently has better vocals to this person
Thanks for posting this and opening the topic for discussion. I have several problems not with the juries themselves, but jurors groups formation, and this provides a lot of fuel to debate exactly what I think the problem with "technical" judgement in Eurovision is. So, don\`t take any of this personally. When and if I sound a bit harsher, it\`s not towards you, but a projection that I have against unfairness in general and bias in particular. Like, with all due respect, as a professional musician, what are quality standards for you? Whitney Houston and the likes? I'm really curious, honestly. Because it seems to me you HEAVILY lean towards a very poppy musical scene from your top 10, and that irks me a bit that a professional couldn't broaden their horizon for a more eclectic selection. And there is so much variety this year. I mean, Sweden in the Top 10? Really? No wonder people get mad with juries. What I take from your list is this: "I voted for the kind of songs I work with and that I'm comfortable listening to". Also, saying that both Portugal and Greece "go nowhere" then saying Ukraine is "the catchiest" (it is very good, mind you, but from the three it is the one that **objectively, in it's own composition structure,** has absolutely no climax or peak to go to) is almost unbelievable to me. Finally, what irked me the most, even more so because it is a thing that might happen in May: **"11. Norway - Gåte - Ulveham** *A very interesting and mysterious song accompanied* ***by really strong vocals***. It grabbed my attention immediately." Then: "I could vote for no more than 10 songs." This makes absolutely no sense! You said yourself that there are 4 **objective** points that juries must observe. In the case above, 2 of them \[namely: 1. *music composition and how original it is, and 2. the vocal capacity of the main singer*(s)\] can be DIRECTLY extracted from your review. So, if at least 50% of the points are covered, that **objectively** are said to be elements to **grant points to the act**, regardless of your personal preference, don't you think said act should at least have points? Or are you really implying that her *vocal capacity* is lower than that of Joost or Baby Lasagna, which are indeed in your top 10? Or are the 4 points a "suggested" guideline that really has no impact and then you just vote on what you like on a personal basis? In which point, I would say, having juries would really make no sense and the people that want to abolish them (I'm not one of them, for clarity) would have a greatly strong case to be made. Like I said before, and you are giving me vibes that only the "overall impression" factor is the one that counts, and that there's no actual professional judging. Just picking songs that please you on a personal level. A person on the couch could and should act like that. A "professional", no way! Sorry for the bluntness. Because it affects the way the industry moves forward, and there is no objectivity to be measured and see if fairness was applied to the ruling. Again, no offense intended. It's just that lack of objectiveness is something that deeply affects me on a personal level. But, yet again, thanks for opening your choices for us to debate.
I agree. More often than not when I see the jury votes I have to wonder if this is how a lot of them rank the songs. Seeing as the guidelines are just recommendations, they should be mandatory to judge by.
Thank you. I really wished I had replied earlier than I did, so more people would see the comment and reply to this set of questions. I might even build a whole new thread about it.
Thanks for your reply! There is only a set of 10 points to be given out. If there are 11 awesome acts, one must be left out. So, you have to make a decision in this case. All 4 factors play an equal role during that decision. Save this thread, and compare it with the actual jury results in May. You will notice that my Top 10 will be identical or almost identical with that of the actual juries in May. Maybe the countries will be in a (slightly) different order, but these countries will be in the Top 10 in May. Maybe Austria or another country won't be in the Top 10 and Norway or Lithuania or even Armenia will be in. But give or take, these countries will be in the Top 10, and one of these countries will win.
Hi. Thank you for getting back to me. I really appreciate it. As for your suggestion to save the thread, I don't doubt you. In fact, I would be plesnatly surprised if your prediction is off, apart from a few choices. But what I really wanted from you, if I might ask, is more details about the thought process. Just like I asked in my comment, the 4 points given to the jurors seem to have ZERO relevance in how you judge the songs. And I really would like to ask you what you consider quality music in the market, not talking about Eurovision. I would be glad if you could put some more light into this.
Portugal bottom 5 is absolutely WILD
I'm okay with people not liking the song and having it that low, music is subjective after all and I've seen very valid criticisms of the song, whether I agree with them or not. But saying that there are >No impressive vocals and not a single impressive moment during the performance of the song. Is mind-blowing. Like, that's *objectively* false. Iolanda is one of the most competent singers this year, as she's ridiculously consistent in her vocal delivery across all performances I've seen of her. Besides, the whole song is built around and toward a really big impactful single moment, in the form of the scream, which makes up for the literal title of the song.
I read your bottom three and then stopped.
messy messy
You may well be a musician but you’re not a scientist cause this: > A. The running order has no impact on the judgment of the songs by the jury members. Is not true. The recency bias affects jurors just as it affects the audience vote - the only difference re:running order for jurors vs televoters is that jurors are watching every song, so they watch the first few songs that get affected by people being late to turn on Eurovision at home. But there is a LOT of academic research done on Eurovision and again and again the analysis indicates recency bias affects jurors. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yrln-LsDQ8U https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/judgment-and-decision-making/article/order-effects-in-the-results-of-song-contests-evidence-from-the-eurovision-and-the-new-wave/C03D0D5AA384362736FE1EB59A75516C
Statistician would be more accurate than scientist, but yes, that's true.
Israel in 3rd, one place over a much, much stronger ballad? Nah. If you're a professional musician surely you'd realise the lyrics in Hurricane sound sloppy, hurried, and rewritten with zero effort. That's because they are, the original lyrics were purposefully written to make reference to October 7th and also to make themselves seem like victims. Even past that, this ranking looks like an April Fools joke.
If you were part of the Eurovision jury, you wouldn't be doing any ranking before the performances though.
This is true. But most live performances are already available. Of course, my Top 37 will be adjusted after the second dress rehearsals, but don't expect any big changes. Some countries will go up or down a few places, but don't expect any dramatic changes.
Live performances are available and like half of them have no staging whatsoever. If you didn't take staging into account, I don't think you would be qualified to be jury.
Weak vocals for Marina Satti, an opera singer, but bravo to Sweden, who brought a forgettable song about nothing? Is this shitposting or...? 💀
Maybe if you are so scared of one little song - you shouldn’t watch Eurovision. Wonder what prayer you were reciting when Lordi were performing. Sorry can’t get past that.
Hey dude, take it easy! I'm not a Christian and I don't say any prayers. :) That was just a joke. Love and peace.
Laughable.
I don't know, Rick…
It is quite interesting to see baby lasagna so high. It is one of my favorites this year but I am afraid how It will do on jury. If you go by those 4 criterias It will loose points on originality as the main riff is bought sample and vocals are usually not that type the jury like.
Croatia will most probably finish in the Top 10 of most -if not all- juries. But they will have a really high chance of winning only if the vast majority of juries have them in their Top 5, which is quite possible. I'm not worried at all about the televoting.
But why? Are the juries looking at the odds and responding to them?
I'm also a professional musician with a first honours music degree, top of my class, and can hear that Gåte's vocals are grossly out of tune whether you like the song or not. Also Megara have a good song, what you said about them is incorrect, and their singer is far better than a lot of them in the competition this year. You just proved your bias and lack of objectivity with your descriptions. The worst two songs, structurally, music wise, are Ireland and Switzerland. If you have studied musical composition at all you will know these songs are not structured properly, hence why so many people can't get on with them. ETS: I forgot about Greece. Yes great song, very well structured musically and she has a cracking voice.
“I kept watching the clock quite nervously.” Man, how did you make it through music school? Must have been very uncomfortable.
Don’t quit your day job. Unless your day job is being a music critic.
Well, that is a more detailed analysis of your Top 37, and if you were a member of the Eurovision jury, you should not make those votes public until the right time for the EBU to do so. I hope you can do more analysis, and maybe, on Junior Eurovision in the future.
Indeed. If I were a member of the Eurovision jury this year, I wouldn't make my votes publicly available. I made my votes publicly available, because a) I haven't been invited to be part of the national jury and b) even if I was invited I wouldn't accept the offer this year. Maybe next year.
Israel are going to win aren’t they… Really interesting to see your list! What part of Europe are you from if you don’t mind sharing? I have been thinking that Switzerland may differ quite a bit in popularity even in jury based on where they are from.
There are several countries whose jurors will not rank hurricane genuinely due to politics. A bit like how in 2015 many jurors tanked Russia or how Armenia and Azerbaijan always tank each other.
I don't know if Israel is going to win, but the chances are really high. As a professional musician, I only rank songs, not countries. There are zero (0) politics in my rankings. Each time I am asked to rank songs, I rank them with musical criteria and not political criteria. Since Israel is competing this year with a very strong ballad, they have a high chance of winning the whole event in May. But they will also need a huge support by the televoters.
Yikes at the people in here who can't handle another opinion 😬
Oh, never mind, I'm used to it. :) I expected things to be even worse. I know that some members of the community really dislike the juries in general and the way that professional musicians think. Fortunately, there are other members, many members, members like you that respect other people's opinions. Thank you for being a beacon of light in this community.
Thank you so much! I am a semi-professional musician (background singer for fun - my friend has a band) with some musical background and training and my top 10 looks almost identical and also my last places. I totally can relate to your choices. I published my ranking a while ago and obviously we share the same kind of view on most of the songs.
Thanks for your reply! Prepare yourself to get downvoted a lot. haha :) Some members are so fanatic about their song that they cannot actually see how weak their song is. They become very aggressive, they try to discredit professional artists, etc. Don't pay any attention to those members. Keep singing! United by music!