The Song Fight Bulletin Board

BenKrieger wrote:In other news, that final title looks awful. "Bravura?" It's like Top Chef and being made to cook with natto. Or Veggiemite.

'Vegemite' sp.

'Bllaarrrrggggh' sp.

Semi-finalists prior records, in brief.
______________________________
In order of Round zero Ranking

Krautkitten - Former Champion

Merisan - former finalist, four time semi-finalists (together, in parts, and in various groups)

Tydon Docks - participated in all nine Eins! This is his first time to the semis!

Ross Durand - participated in all nine Eins! Two-time finalist, three time semi-finalist

Ken Mahru - participated in all nine Eins! - two-time finalist, five time semi-finalist

If you need Vegemite in NYC - you can get it at the Tuck Shop near the corner of 1st and 1st. And they sell proper meat pies too.

I'm hosting the Nur Ein IX Round 6 Listening Party on UStream
Show starts at 9 pm EST.
Preshow is starting around 8:30ish. It's -4 UTC for those out of the States.
Drop on in if you have some time.
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nur-ein

The chat room is on UStream if you have an account, or on Chatzy
http://us19.chatzy.com/87724745758226

cool songs --- I think I'd have to go with Merisan & Ken for the final round if I were a judge. but last time the judges mostly disagreed with my picks ... so maybe that's not a good thing for Merisan & Ken.

chocolatechips wrote:I think I'd have to go with Merisan & Ken for the final round

Yep, me too.

I wrote some thoughts about th songs. Lot's of good here, somehow that meant my comments focussed on weaknesses. Trying to make myself feel better? Too used to grading papers? Just an ass? You decide.


Ken - unfortunately, not a huge fan of the ELO sound, but the sound here is very slick. Very tuneful, but the arrangement is a bit samey, actually kinda reminds me more of 80 Alan Parsons, a little sleepy. Challenge met well, but perhaps a bit too subtly? A very pleasant song! Some nice imagery in the lyrics, as well.

Krautkitten - unfortunately this seemed like the predictable take on the title to me. This is borne out by the fact that you share some of it with Merisan. As with Ken's track, I find the arrangement a bit static. Also as with Ken's track, very tuneful! I like the Mahler off stage trumpet stufff better than the piano bit, which seems less well integrated. Nice breakdown. Is this intentionally mono?

Merisan - the tweak of the sample is oddly disorienting. Great sounding, of course. I like that your sample is incorporated into the changes. Another tuneful sweet song. We have lot's of nostalgiac pop delight this round, I fear I will be the odd man out on that count. Good lyrical twist at the end. As nice as it is, it may be one chorus too long?

Tydon Docks - if you had not told me this was Tydon Docks...I still would have known. Some fun word play here, but somehow, I don't see this moving on. Roman Polanski? Too soon..... the use of the sample is bizarre and fun.

Me - it was fun writing in 5. I am especially proud of my descending guitars at the end, and the layered groove. I hope this works but not confident there are three songs I will beat this round.

Well, I think we all did our thing fairly well this round. Looking forward to seeing what happens. I think I would bet on Merisan moving on, and Tydon Docks being eliminated, but not as sure about the rest and keeping my fingers crossed.

Nur Ein!!!!!!

Ross, you should take your mind off of the pressure by listening to and reviewing the 3 fine Nein songs

I-veg - ok, the way ypu worked the rhythm of the word videoland with the opening chords of beethoven 5 is brilliant. Too bad none of us contestant did anything that good. As for the rest of the song.... It may be partly production quality, bit it come off as pretty b-grade. Not sure I totally get the lyrics.....

Nick soma - i have to admit there is a Louis, Louis factor here. It also goes beyond sampling to a co-write, that if I was judging, I would be debating disqualifying you. Multiple points of view, are we going to get a rapped bridge here? My ipad is doing some wierd things with the streaming, and I'm not sure I am getting the whole songs.

Cavedwellers - ah, classic video game quality sounds - nice arpeggios. I do feel like your vocals don't quite carry this - you need Howard Jones or something on this. I like your approach to the challenge lyrically. What is that quartet? Really interesting middle section with the saxes and all after the strings. Not sure it "works" but it works for me.

Cavedwellers - ah, classic video game quality sounds - nice arpeggios. I do feel like your vocals don't quite carry this - you need Howard Jones or something on this. I like your approach to the challenge lyrically. What is that quartet? Really interesting middle section with the saxes and all after the strings. Not sure it "works" but it works for me.

Hey thanks for the review! (pays to ask). That is Bartok String Quartet No. 5 part 1. I agree about my vocals. If we were in it, I'd have Lee doing the bulk of the singing, but I let him off the hook since it was his birthday and we were out anyway. I feel the same as you do about the challenge. I had 6 other approaches that were not working. This approach I finally liked. Thanks for the lyric nod! that's huge coming from you! You know at 10:30 am this morning, I didn't have a single lyric. I just kept improvising until I liked them. I suppose that is writing. I'm just saying I write into the microphone 1st.

I've been listening all day. Ross still has my favorite. The Berkeleys are next. I really like both Ben and C-Rays songs too. Excellent semi-finals all the way around!

Ross wrote: Tydon Docks - if you had not told me this was Tydon Docks...I still would have lnown

BTW - i realize this could have come off as an attempt to be demeaning, but i did not intend it that way. i think the statement is true of every song this round, and I love that. Good to have met you in person, and happy to recognize ypur songwriting signature.

Sounds like a Tydon Docks v Ken final to me.

Bring it on Kenny. I'll kick your skinny arse back to Berkley.

Ross wrote:

Ross wrote: Tydon Docks - if you had not told me this was Tydon Docks...I still would have lnown

BTW - i realize this could have come off as an attempt to be demeaning, but i did not intend it that way. i think the statement is true of every song this round, and I love that. Good to have met you in person, and happy to recognize ypur songwriting signature.

You didn't seriously think you could have offended me, did you?

Ross wrote:It also goes beyond sampling to a co-write, that if I was judging, I would be debating disqualifying you.

Excuse me, but what are you talking about? I always thought that when using a sample, it's OK to build your whole song around it and not just using that sample once in the song. Like, you know, "Bitter Sweet Symphony"? Would you debate disqualifying that song, too?

Also, if I just took the second half of my song, then apart from the instrumental parts between verses (which I inserted ONLY in order to use Beethoven's theme in the second half as well), there wouldn't be more than maybe a slight moonlight shadow (insert hollow laughter here) left in my song. Compare the chord progression of the Moonlight Sonata's opening bars* and of my verses: Bm, Bm7, G, C, F# vs. Bm, G, D, A, G, F#. Not that similar, I think.

* Beethoven's original work is in the key of C#m, of course.

This is how I would rank them:

1. Ken - I like this

2. Merisan - Wonderful vocals. Nice pop song - though the synth is a bit cheesy

3. Krautkitten - Not as interesting as your other entries - but well executed

4. Ross Durand - I thought of taking this lyrical approach, but changed my mind. I like the lyrics - but don't like the mellow guitar feel - it should sound more sinister. When the change comes with the sample - it is a good idea - but I don't think it quite works

noma wrote:

Ross wrote:It also goes beyond sampling to a co-write, that if I was judging, I would be debating disqualifying you.

Excuse me, but what are you talking about? I always thought that when using a sample, it's OK to build your whole song around it and not just using that sample once in the song. Like, you know, "Bitter Sweet Symphony"? Would you debate disqualifying that song, too?

Also, if I just took the second half of my song, then apart from the instrumental parts between verses (which I inserted ONLY in order to use Beethoven's theme in the second half as well), there wouldn't be more than maybe a slight moonlight shadow (insert hollow laughter here) left in my song. Compare the chord progression of the Moonlight Sonata's opening bars* and of my verses: Bm, Bm7, G, C, F# vs. Bm, G, D, A, G, F#. Not that similar, I think.

* Beethoven's original work is in the key of C#m, of course.

A few things:
1.) Ross isn't a judge this year, and you're already eliminated, so no need to get all worked up.
2.) I find it laughable to assert that, when the challenge is "sample classical music," you'd be under threat of disqualification for sampling it too much.
3.) Caravan Ray did almost exactly what Ross is accusing you of, but to an even greater extent, and nobody is talking about disqualifying him.
4.) In my opinion, your use of the challenge worked well, though I thought the transition between the two sections was a little awkward. I'll provide more detail in my real reviews tomorrow.
5.) Richard Ashcroft actually got sued (and lost) because "Bitter Sweet Symphony" used the sample "too heavily." (I mean, it was a total B.S. case, but it happened.)
6.) Also, the sample in "Bitter Sweet Symphony" isn't classical music; it was from an orchestral arrangement of a Rolling Stones song. So yes, that would be a disqualification.
7.) NUR EIN!!!!!!

What I'm talking about is that a 46 second snippet that includes the entire first section of a piece of music doesn't seem to fit my understanding of what a sample is. Taking a short section, a few seconds long, and looping it and building an entire song around that is one thing, but 46 seconds? That just seems too long to me, and then the function it plays is different, too. Just the opinion of one guy, of course.

As far as Bitter Sweet Symphony, I really didn't know much about the history of that until I looked it up, but interesting you should mention it.

"Originally, The Verve had negotiated a licence to use a sample from the Oldham recording, but it was successfully argued that the Verve had used "too much" of the sample.[16][17] Despite having original lyrics, the music of "Bitter Sweet Symphony" was sampled from the Oldham track, which led to a lawsuit with ABKCO Records, Allen Klein's company that owns the rights to the Rolling Stones material of the 1960s. The matter was eventually settled, with copyright of the song reverting to ABKCO. Songwriting credits were changed to Jagger/Richards/Ashcroft, with 100% of royalties going to the Rolling Stones."

Ross wrote:What I'm talking about is that a 46 second snippet that includes the entire first section of a piece of music doesn't seem to fit my understanding of what a sample is. Taking a short section, a few seconds long, and looping it and building an entire song around that is one thing, but 46 seconds? That just seems too long to me, and then the function it plays is different, too. Just the opinion of one guy, of course.

Yeah, I can basically understand that. I thought you were talking about dismissing the whole song because of that first section. Actually, I was not so sure whether or not to lift the whole introduction for my song because of the very same reason you gave here. However, as it still felt more like an introduction to the main part when I was finished with the song, even at a length of over one and a half minutes, I went with it anyway.
Sorry for over-reacting.

Generic wrote:Also, the sample in "Bitter Sweet Symphony" isn't classical music; it was from an orchestral arrangement of a Rolling Stones song. So yes, that would be a disqualification.

I'm aware of that. My point was not the classical-ness of the piece sampled but the extent to which it was being sampled.
(I disagree with what the law said on that issue, like I believe most of you do, especially seeing that 100% of royalties now go to Jagger and Richards for a song written mainly by Ashcroft. Allen Klein is a greedy asshole. EDIT: He was, since he is dead now. I should probably not speak ill of the dead, but for Mr. Klein I'll gladly make an exception.)

Hello, I'd like to buy an argument please".......

On the subject of what is classical music. I contend that film scores can indeed be classical music. I think Jon said John Williams Star Wars would not count. I beg to differ. The only difference between JW scoring for the film Star Wars and Tchaikovsky scoring for the Nutcracker ballet is the time and medium scored for. I say they are both classical in nature.

I liked Nicks tune a lot. I didn't like the gigantic chunk of moonlight sonata, but then it really rocked. It's an interesting question : what is the maximum length of a sample before it becomes no longer a sample. What do you call it when Coolio sings gangsta paradise over Stevie's Pastime paradise? It's not really a parody, there's probably a word for that. Anyway singing over moonlight sonata, is akin to the jazz atrocity known as vocalese.

Caravan Ray wrote: You didn't seriously think you could have offended me, did you?

No, but it does occasionally cross my mind that I could offend someone - which I'd prefer not to do.

noma wrote:(I disagree with what the law said on that issue, like I believe most of you do, especially seeing that 100% of royalties now go to Jagger and Richards for a song written mainly by Ashcroft. Allen Klein is a greedy asshole. EDIT: He was, since he is dead now. I should probably not speak ill of the dead, but for Mr. Klein I'll gladly make an exception.)

Yes, I definitely agree - that's absolutely bonkers. I can see maybe cutting them in a little bit but even that is a stretch since The Verve had already secured rights to use the sample ... but to give them 100% ? that's crazy. Ashcroft wrote the melody and the lyrics how could he get 0% of the royalties? madness.