... Ein needs a better way of dealing with ties. However, experience shows that changing the rules mid Nur-Ein-- especially after the songs have been posted--does not go over well. I am confident that we made the best decision. Now that Nur Ein III is over we can look to improving the rules. Also, I would like to commend you on your wisely chosen counterexample. I can think of two more obvious examples, but one is squarely in Godwin territory, and the other an embarrassing faux-pas. Yeah, but is it better to have come in 4th or 2nd out of those 25 competitors? I think 2nd. That's a good point, I hadn't really thought of it that waNur ...

I was out of town over the weekend, and these songs served as the soundtrack to my train ride home. Unbelievable. Never have I seen a challenge so thoroughly whomped...

In the event of a tie for winner in the final round as judged by the previous participants, the tied participants will be ranked by the judges as in previous rounds. In the event of a tie after that ... I love a good combinatronics problem, so just for fun I thought I'd sit down and figure out the chances of this happening. There are 4! = 24 possible ordinal rankings. With 5 judges that makes (4! + 5 - 1)! / 5!(4! - 1)! = 98280 unique combinations of different scores that the judges can submit... however, for the sake of simplicity and ease of calculation, I will just use the number of non-unique combinations (4!^5 = 7962624). If, for each of these combinations, we sum up the set of scores for each contestant... <<< Insert Tedious Mathematical Acrobatics Here >>> ... 1306320 of these combinations yield a two- or three- way tie for first place (a 4-way tie is impossible; a 3-way, improbable ( but hey, it can't hurt to ask her. Buh-dum! ) ). That's a roughly 1-in-6 chance of a tie. Now, not knowing how many disqualified contestants will be voting, it is impossible to figure out the exact chance of them producing a tie, but seeing as the chance goes down the more voters you add into the mix, I would guess that the probability of a tie in their voting round is more like 1-in-20. That means the chance of us needing to use a hypothetical 2nd tie-breaker is most likely less than 1 in a hundred... probably not worth worrying about. MATH! PS: Unless, of course, us 5 judges would just be voting on the two tied songs... in which case a second tie is clearly impossible. But that's not really a very interesting math problem. PPS: Wait, is that an Oxymoron?...

... Ein? Erik, you always crack me up. What I'm trying to say is yes, it would be wise to have a contingency for that situation (I vote Deathball ), but no, we probably will not have one until said situation arisesNur ...

... Ein more. Round 7 is going to be epic. Now that I'm off the hook as judge (unless, as mentioned, there's a tie or two) I should really get on those reviewNur ...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't it totally a force? If I'm swinging a paint can around, my arm exerts a centripetal force on the can, keeping it in its arc. The paint inside the can, however, wants to stay moving in a straight line, so it applies an equal but opposite centrifugal force against the bottom of the paint can. The force being applied is the centripetal force causing the linear velocity of the paint to accelerate to zero. Yes. And by Newton's Third Law of Motion, there must be an equal but opposite centrifugal force to balance this centripetal force...

... Ein' (probably to my shame, because I hadn't listened much to Ken before), Yeah, this week I kept finding I was listening to what I thought was Ken's song, only to find out it was Paco's, and vice versa! Oh wait, no I didn'tNur ...

Better late than never: The Blitz Reviews , in podcast format. Notes to self: don't make up the reviews on the spot. Don't try to sing along with any of the songs. Don't forget Jim's name...

... Ein!!!! :wink: Last edited by Billy's Little Trip on Wed Jun 04, 2008 12:15 pm, edited 2 times in total. Woah, wah' hoppen'Nur ...

My problem is with judges discussing the rules in terms of their own judging preferences outside of this forum with contestants. Ah, yes, that IS a problem. I'm not even a contestant and that troubles me. I will make sure your concerns are raised...

... Ein could be made better for the contestants, the response seems to be some variant of 1) stop worrying about the rules, or 2) you have no idea how impossibly hard it is to be a Nur Ein judge. I know your first category isn't referring to me (as my track record will show), but if anything I've said has come across as " being a Nur Ein judge is hard so stop complaining ", it wasn't meant that way. When I mention that the judges spent a lot of time trying to disambiguate the challenge, I'm not trying to dissuade people from making suggestions; quite the opposite, I mention it to assure that we are taking into consideration and trying to address the issues that have been raised about the challenges. The only impossible thing for me as a Nur Ein judge is knowing when to keep my mouth shut. :wink: As always, IANA6J ('I Am Not All Six Judges'Nur ...

But read my reply again. You said " if it took that much effort for the judges to agree "... well, the judges agreed on the challenge right off the bat. there is clearly NOT agreement on how the judges regard the challenge, so don't say there is I wouldn't call the Sam->Ken->JB->The Boards game of telephone "clear", especially seeing as Lunk isn't here to clarify his opinion. But you're right: if any of us did feel that there was a misunderstanding among the judges about what a potential challenge means, we should (and would) try to reach consensus or use a different challenge. EDIT: Furthermore, from now on I will work to ensure that all the judges agree on what the minimal requirement to fulfill a challenge is before we post it. you're just picking and choosing which points you want to acknowledge and ignoring others. Goddamn, this is the one SF-related thing I still looked forward to and it's becoming almost as frustrating as all the other SF-related things. Christ. :( Sorry frankie, I don't know what to say. I understand that you're frustrated, and I'm trying to be as level and forthcoming as possible. I realize we're both looking at this from different perspectives, and--as always--that is where the disconnect is happening... all I ask is that you assume good faith . And if anyone wants to call us whiners or faggots or 'handsome fellows' for discussing this, use PM. This is something that needs to be discussed, preferably out in the open....

... Ein contestants, but also you specifically, frankie. See, we care.) would not find it ambiguous. I understood your first post clearly, but thanks for adding some sarcasm to the mix. I'm not being sarcastic. We know that you personally (as well as Ross, Erik, and a few others) will closely scrutinize the judges' decisions and actions. That's a good thing. It keeps us accountable; it legitimizes the competition. But read my reply again. You said " if it took that much effort for the judges to agree "... well, the judges agreed on the challenge right off the bat. Like I said, the effort went not into seeking consensus, but into clarifying the wording to avoid this very debate. We thought we were successful; apparently we were not. For the record, I do not think the current wording is ambiguous in any way. For what it's worth, I also do not think we need to add a "make your challenge fulfillment perceivable by human ears" clause to every challengNur ...

... Ein contestants, but also you specifically, frankie. See, we care.) would not find it ambiguouNur ...

I don't remember having any confusion (okay, very little) or difficulty with the challenges last year. No guitars? Easy. Only guitars? Also easy. Changing time signatures? I get it. And when I say easy, I don't mean "easy to pull off," I mean "easy to understand." When you only have a few days to write and record the songs, it would be nice if you knew by say, the end of the first day, what the non-optional challenge actually means. It makes educated and proficient musicians feel like idiots when they have to constantly rethink themselves and ask questions about the challenge. I assure you, frankie, we're trying hard to come up with interesting challenges that can be easily understood. I think the original suggestion had 12 bpm difference as the absolute minimum between each tempo I don't really want to lay the whole process out on the line, but as long as we're talking about earlier suggestions, I might as well detail how this challenge evolved. It started out as "Tempo Change"... pretty fricken' simple, eh? But, we could already see that some people will just meet the challenge very trivially by doing a bar or two of half-time, so a third tempo was added. Then we realized someone might think going from 130bpm to 131bpm to 132bpm was a sweet way to meet the challenge, so the "minimum 12 bpm difference" was added. I think the word 'Significant' might have been dropped in there at some point, too. Eventually, it got chopped down to "three tempo changes" and posted, which ended up STILL being too ambiguous, so we clarified it to "three different tempos". I hope it's obvious that a song containing 5 different tempos contains 3 different tempos, but it may yet need to be clarified further to "a minimum of three different tempos" So we aren't just throwing these out there: a lot of brainstorming goes on to try to anticipate how the challenge might be misinterpreted. What Lunk may or may not have said was probably an expression of his preference, as opposed to official edict. So, as long as we're being candid, if you shoehorn in a half-time/double-time tempo change that doesn't really belong in the song, I will not be happy. You will have minimally met the challenge, but you will have failed to impress this judge. Similarly, if your three tempos are 130bpm, 131bpm, and 132bpm, I will not be able to tell that you met the challenge, and I will probably put you near the bottom of my list...

You do know the breakdown I'm talking about in the Weezer song where it is a cappella and basically doo wop yeah? You mentioned "In the Garage", but I think the song you mean is "Holiday". Holiday would be fine, although I'd hope for more than a ~15-second two-person "ensemble". Similarly, I'd be down with barbershop... although if I were a more pedantic person I would point out that there is a distinction between a barbershop quartet and a barbershop choir . But, if you're thinking about the challenge at all, I feel confident that you guys will satisfy it. What I don't want to see is someone recording a song with doubled or harmony vocals just as a matter of course, and then thinking the can coast by on technically satisfying the challenge. EDIT: Fix'd link....

Could you give examples of this challenge in popular music? Would "In the Garage" by Weezer qualify? Definitely not, in my books. There are a few lines in that song where two Rivers (aka a "group" of vocalists) are singing in harmony, so it could be argued that it satisfies the challenge in a very trivial way. Much the same way that almost any song technically must contain a crescendo in it somewhere. But, if you've read my reviews, you know how I feel about this least-effort-possible approach to the challenge. A song that I feel would own this challenge is Radiohead's Paranoid Android. For more extreme examples, look to nearly anything by Blind Gaurdian or Bang Camero. Even Add's song last week (which has a digi-choir for about 2 seconds) would probably fly, although that's cutting it close. As always, IMO and IANA6J (I Am Not All Six Judges)...

Adam^2 - I'd like to hear this with a real bass. it was a real bass guitar. Oh. Your bass sounds weird. Maybe it's the half-time feel or the tone, but I was sure it was a pitched-down guitar. The drums are stock samples from Apple's Logic Studio Pro. Guitar tone also straight out of Logic. Bass tone--another Apple stock amp modeler. Whoa. That program was worth every penny...

... Ein 3 song so far. If I am being pandered to, I like it. I'm totally in awe of those drums. Double kicks, thundering toms. Are they real? Programmed? Either way, I'm impressed. I have no idea how you achieved this staggering volume while still retaining a punchy drum sound. Killer guitar tone. The oppressive echo on the vocal obscures the verse lyrics completely, although after reading them I'm not sure I'm missing too much. Love the Ann Coulter stanza, though. Cool wide bass sound in the breakdown, great sounding flute. Love the rewind joke, it totally makes the song for me, and ties for the cleverest use of the challenge in the fight. I feel like I should be the one providing the talk-back voice. Why are the vocals so loud in the last verse? Tex - This is the quintessential Tex Beaumont song. Fantastic humable melody, driving drums, funny and filthy lyrics, spaghetti-western/surf-rock backing woo-oohs, handclaps, detailed basslines, catchy little guitar licks, that epic double-breakdown/buildup, and last-but-not-least, vibraslap. I can't say enough good things about this song. The only thing I wish is that you had played up the backwards-demonic vocals aspect, to tie the challenge in better with the lyrics; you may actually have tried to do this, but those backwards vocals just aren't demonic enough. Glenn & more Glenn - I'm a sucker for backwards drums. Clever use of a long vocal reverb to convey desolation. Ooh, circular panning at the end. It's nice to hear some cool new production tricks from you, Glenn. Man, you've got Twilight Zone on the brain these days; love this episode. The first-person amnesiac-mystery lyrics remind me of your Greenwood Cemetery album. This song is full of some seriously heavy riffs; it's a shame that the guitar tone is so ludicrous, an indistinct wall of fizzy noise. I'm impressed by your backwards-enunciation, which fooled at least one reviewer. Needs more Rachael. ROCK! Ross - Those headphones were worth every penny: this mix wraps around my ears like warm caramel. Especially nice, after last week's mix. Love your voice in this song. I found these lyrics a little too unsubtle, however I suppose one needs to make the satire obvious with this kind of subject matter. The backwards solo is the best in the fight (a co-worker stopped me to ask if I was listening to Kenny Rogers' Just Dropped In ), and that backwards storm-leaving sound works well with the lyrics. You drop some specific preacher names I'm not familiar with, but given recent-ish events in America I assume the storm in question was a literal one. Cool song, well thought-out, and a great use of the title. BLT - Some cool sounds here, especially the backwards ambiences and what sounds like filtersweeps (but probably aren't). Intro guitar riffing reminds me of The Bazaar , by The Tea Party. The later guitar solo does not sound as cool. Some really sketchy vocals (by Nur Ein standards) in the last half. The catchy chorus really boosted this song. Adam^2 - What a pleasant surprise. The tired sounding vocals fit quite well with this song. I'd like to hear this with a real bass. The reggae-ish guitar rhythm, coupled with the cool reverse guitars and fairly catchy chorus melody make this a keeper. Starfinger - I started off not liking this song, but once I payed attention to the lyrics it just grew and grew on me. "Science is willing when the flesh is weak" is a great line. A very believable and sadly-funny character study of an unscrupulous plastic surgeon. I'm assuming this must be what happened to Michael Jackson. The vocals are pretty sketchy in places, specifically when you're singing at the top of your range, and also around the word "pro". A couple instruments come in that sound really neat, then suddenly appear to morph into your voice... don't really know how you did that, but I like it. Use of the challenge is pretty cursory; seeing as you have a line about reversing the processes, I figured you'd tie the backwards stuff in there somehow. TWSA - handclaps, dance drums, songs about a robot takeover (wait, I just realized I don't know what this song is about)... I've made the Tokyo Police Club comparison before, right? I like one of your vocalists a lot more than the other. Sorry, other-vocalist. The chorus is totally great, with fantastic backing vocals. Aside from the chorus and the guitar solo, nothing really grabs me melodically. Still, it's never boring. Lots of nice change-ups. JBB - Cool sounds immediately. This may be the most heavy-handed 2-buss compression I've ever heard. Sounds like you're pulling down at least 6db with a pretty fast release. Pumpy. A manly guitar tone like that could really use a nice loud snare to complement it. Catchy melodies and the top-notch singing I've come to expect from you throughout. I wish there was more work put into the arrangement to help differentiate the verse from the chorus. You copped half the bridge melody from your Kick Start (both lines in each song end with "... to recover"); was this intentional? I spent a short while trying to figure out if this was a lyrical connection between the two. You didn't really do much with the challenge, but then again you didn't have to. Cock - See my Adam Adamant review (except the reggae part). The pianos and strings in the chorus work really nicely. The verse vocals are pretty terrible, but the chorus is solid. Why am I hearing "and it's not s natural" in every chorus? I really wish you would do something--anything--other than a plodding, never-pausing bass groove coupled with a 4/4 beat. I think all your Nur Ein songs so far have followed this formula. Oh... I just realized you won't be in the next round... damn, raw deal, dude. 15-16 - The most adventurous track I've heard from you since Let's Get Naked. Love the verse, hate the chorus. I guess I was waiting for some cool, fleshed-out, sung hook... but instead it sounds pretty much like the verse, except with embarrassing pitched-down vocals and some annoying groaning added in. Love the "found-sound" percussion (ice-cubes?). I like your flow in the verse. The backwards guitars-or-whatever don't do much for me. I believe you when you say this song turned out exactly how you wanted it. Sad to see you go so early. Reist - This song earned you last place!? WTF? I mean, it's ain't great , but LAST? No justice. There's less interesting stuff going on in this song than your last two. Guitars and drums are spectacular as usual. Cool breakdown. As you yourself noted, the vocals are weaker than you're capable of. Melodically speaking, I like whatever's going on in the last 30 seconds of the song the most, and I wish there had been more of that earlier. As for the challenge, it sounds like you learned how to pronounce a few words backwards and then recorded that, which is a trivial but admittedly creative way to address the challenge, especially considering your recording restrictions. I wish it had a more obvious connection to the song. Like last year, I was very surprised you didn't make it farther in the competition. Ken - The intro's guitar feedback, glockenspiels and panned drum machine made me go "ok, this is going to be the coolest song ever"; unfortunately, the song immediately drops all those elements after the first 10 seconds. Meh. I want to hear THAT song. I like how you seem to have built the song around that lead backwards loop. What the heck is wrong with this mix? Your vocals are WAY out in front, and while they sound full, the music in the background sounds thin and brittle. The synthesizer that comes in on the right feels like a dentist's drill right in my brain. The verses get a little repetitive, but the chorus and bridge are a real treat. The deliberate enunciation and slant rhymes make the vocal feel a bit unnatural. Short but sweet. BK - Am I enough of a jerk to just write "See my Kick Start review"? Apparently! For me the coolest part was when the reverse guitars came in and made a bunch of weird dissonant chords. Paco - That verse riff is pretty ugly. I like the chorus, which feels like it's actually a pre-chorus buildup to the real hook that never comes. Drums are great, again, although in the intro they make me say "You gotta' keep 'em separated!". Challenge feels tacked on. JT - Funkmetal, eh? That guitar tone is over-the-top. I like it. Very cool playing. It's a shame that this song is basically 95% that one guitar riff (or, slight variations on it) over and over again. Those drums need to be much punchier and more in-your-face. That backwards solo ain't doin' anything for me. Maybe I'm not hearing them right, but the nebulous lyrics offer me nothing to grip onto: all I know is the song is about someone who did some stuff. EDIT: Just read the lyrics. OK, once you're familiar with the subject (which, for me, took reading through a couple wikipedia articles) the lyrics actually do a great job of talking about this specific 'unnatural disaster' in a way that leaves the lyric open to interpretation. Still, to those who are unversed in Indian Industrial Accidents, it just sounds like a bunch of tired, generic lines. In retrospect, you might have gotten a little screwed by me not getting the lyrics. Octothorpe - I'm getting more of a Rock Lobster vibe from this song than usual. The verse is nice, but I really don't like the chorus. Firstly, each one leads in with an irritating sound effect. I don't care for the hook melody, so I quadruply don't care for it when the bass and both keyboards are playing the exact some melody octaves appart. Even though it's justifiable considering the story, "that one should use the word 'disaster'" feels very kludged into the chorus. That all said, Octothope has scored a hat-trick: once again they have the cleverest integration of the challenge. Backwards vocals as alien gobbledygook: genius. Add - Maybe it's just me, but this song puts me straight to sleep. Fantastic vocals, and a pleasant enough melody. The delivery kind of reminds me of Destroyer's Rubies (which is too bad: I can't stand Destroyer's Rubies). As far as I can tell this song is mostly two chords over and over again for 5 minutes, with very little to break that up. The backwards keys and choir synth that comes in for, like, 2 seconds are awesome... I want more! Like 15-16's song, the pitched-down vocals are silly sounding. The lyrics have some very cool imagery, but lyrics are pretty low on my list of interests. The Mormon in me (he's very small: my family stopped going to church when I was young) wonders why you chose the samples that you did. This song is like the energizer bunny. King Art - Top of my list last week, at the bottom this week... quite the reversal. I ain't going to mince words: this song is so boring. You must repeat that short little two-chord motif nearly 100 times; by my third spin of the song it had nearly driven me completely mad, like Torgo's Theme . The long, long phrases with sparse rhymes hidden 20 seconds appart make the verses feel like some weird sort of rambling free-verse. I like the little bass flourishes. The backwards stuff makes lyrical sense, but I have to second the chipmunk sentiment... also, the reversed parts are really jarring. Sorry Art. Oh god, bedtimNur ...

Andrew - what about spending a couple hundred on a squire P-bass? Yes. EDIT: I'd try some different vocal processing before I bought a new mic, if I were you. Experimenting with the compressors/eqs you already have is free; a new mic is not...

Nice, Spud. The expanded drum part really livens up the song, and I'm glad to hear Bud... er, I mean Crash, although now I realize your manic imitation had a certain charm to it...

Woah, was there a second challenge to RTFO...