All right, the others have started posting, so I might as well join in.
Time to step up the game a bit. Higher standards now, and a slightly more fine-grained rating system so I have less ties I have to break.
Ross Durand: Hmm, vocal performance is a bit sloppy... plus you're hitting the top range of your vocal technique. Musically this doesn't really excite me. In the lyrics thread you claim you have a chorus in this song, but it's hard to make one out just from listening. Not a good sign. As for the lyrics... well. Generally I have nothing against not knowing the full context, but in this case it leaves me wondering why I should care. Perhaps it's just that I don't care about the subject matter in general, but it really seems to me like the treatment is just not very entertaining/thought-provoking/inspiring/moving (take your pick).
Billy's Little Trip: Great sound. Vocals are not terribly great (yeah I know you have excuses) but I guess they qualify as "okay". Mostly. In this song, there's something that bugs me about them more than the pitchiness: they sound "weak", meaning that you're not using your voice to maximum effect. Sort of doesn't work very well for a song like this. I don't personally like the composition here but I shall not take it out on you. On a (hopefully) more objective note, however, the chorus mostly fails to set itself apart from the verses. It does that
a bit, sure, but I think it would have been much more effective had the chorus taken up more of the soundscape, if that makes any sense. Lyrics are decent. The story is nothing to sneeze at; I wish you had spent more time developing it though. It seems like you're telling it at 4x speed. There are two ways around that: either make the song longer or focus more on individual scenes and mention the transitions between them only in passing.
The Worldly Self Assurance: Sloppy playing in the intro is not the best way to set the scene, you know.
Somehow, I like very much how different this is. Great arrangement. Timing is a bit iffy in some places. Good lyrics, but the title feels like a bit of an afterthought. It definitely fits the story, but I don't think you did a good job of working the phrase in there. All in all, however, great writing and good performance. I can't even find anything substantial to criticise about the vocals. I hope you're happy that you spoiled my life's purpose now.
Abott and Hines: I like that you tried to save yourselves (yourself?), so I shall be merciful (sort of). For example, you get some mercy points because the challenge is sort of in there. You also get points for not trying to draw it out. As a songlet this is quite okay, though of course I can't rate it as highly as a full song. Reverb on the background vocals sounds yucky, though. In the end you still get more than 50% on my rating scale.
Paco del Stinko: Oh cool, Paco's trademark interesting chord progression. Very nice BG vox. Cool riff. Okay lyrics... several phrases seem a bit clumsy ("her captivation was strong"), but you make up for it with solid storytelling. Vocals are suffering from the usual problem: they are unexciting. You make up for it by twisting your voice in several interesting directions, but the foundation, the full sound of your voice, is missing. Best (= most convincing) take on the challenge/title so far.
Frankie Big Face: You might have overdone it a bit on the bitrate. Might I recommend variable bitrate compression? For example, if you use LAME as your MP3 encoder, VBR level 2 is what I use (results in ~192 kbps files, but with higher bitrates used for more complex parts of the song), and even with 1 or 0 you probably still get a smaller file with quality comparable to the 320 kbps madness you have here. Aaanyway. Actual dynamics here, nice! Wonderfully atmospheric, the whole thing. Wonderful, wonderful writing. Vocals are vry slightly buried in the mix sometimes. Vocals are a bit nasal. I'm grasping at straws here, though. This is really great in all ways. Singers, listen up! This is how to make a performance interesting.
John Kloberdanz: That guitar distortion sounds brutal. I don't know if it's the distortion's fault, but the guitar sounds thin and that doesn't fit very well here. I won't blame you for the artificial-sounding drums, even though they hurt the whole thing, too, but you don't always have the equipment you would have wanted, right? I think a little bit of overall added gain would have been a good idea here. As it is, the guitar somewhat overshadows the vocals. You never, never want to do that... especially not if the guitar doesn't sound all that great. Composition is solid but fairly boring. Lyrics seem to be good, but the negation on the title bugs me. I've rarely seen that actually work.
Merisan: The combination of melody and chords in the second/fourth line really bugs me. Apart from that, great composition/arrangement as usual. Thoroughly unexciting lead vocal performance. I actually like the other vocals better, the performance style works much better for them. Great light-hearted (mostly) lyrics. Interesting that nobody else has chosen a similar take on the title/challenge so far. Very enjoyable, if not for the lack of spirit/emphasis in the vocals.
Jon Eric: The main problem here is poor timing in the vocals. For me, timing in rap has to be impeccable. And then you make it even worse in the chorus. The short break there doesn't really recover very well. As far as writing goes, this song is great. The main problem (the
other main problem, I mean) here is the lack of "edge", for lack of a better word, in the vocals... both spoken and sung parts. By edge, I mean that thing that they try to add to mediocre/bad vocal performances by using exciters. The thing that makes vocals able to cut through other sounds like butter. You're not the only one suffering from this problem in this round, but I think with rap it's particularly important. The performance of the "it's you" part is a bit over the top, but good on you for trying.
Luke Henley: I might have liked this, but several things work against the song here. Most importantly, the vocals sound almost bored, and the effect gets even stronger when the backup vocals kick in (and, by the way, the standard thirds nearly all the way through those are pretty boring, too). Also, the song goes on for longer than it can hold my interest. The somewhat sloppy singing doesn't make things better. Also, just because you have the second vox track to the right doesn't mean it's a good thing to have most of the song exclusively to the left. Great lyrics, but I can't help but think that they totally subvert the title, and for no apparent reason.
Boffo Yux Dudes: Horrible plosives. Lyrics are very hard to make out, probably mostly due to unconvincing vocal performance (trying to speak more deeply than your voice allows doesn't make you sound good... on the contrary) and unconvincing mix. I find this whole thing terribly boring. You try to save it by having semi-passionate elements in the way you speak, but it falls short for previously stated reasons. Lyrics are meandering, link to title is extremely tenuous.
Manhattan Glutton: I like the lyrical approach and I like the composition, but there's one tendency here that I don't like at all. It shines through in the indiscriminate use of exclamation marks in the lyrics and also in the mix/performance. You have polished and equalised (not in the technical sense) this to the point where no texture is left. The only individuality you left is the nasal vocals, and let's face it, that's not really an awesome distinguishing characteristic. To put it differently: this song is not a living being, it's a statue. Sculpted out by a computer, perfectly following the blueprint. Yawn.
Glen Raphael: Great arrangement and good mix (sax is a bit low in it, though), but the vocals... can you say, sore thumb? I think the reverb is to blame, and perhaps the mic/EQ to some degree. That's not to say that you should get rid of reverb, but perhaps choose a different plugin/impulse and/or different settings. Lyrics/challenge/title are okay. All in all, nice, but doesn't come together as well as it could have. I think I'm starting to sound like a broken record by now, but the vocals aren't terribly exciting. I'd have expected a bit of fire in them, considering the topic, but there is none to find. Composition is good... song doesn't feel too short or too long.
WreckdoM: Vocal doubling isn't very tight. Vocals are seriously buried in several places. Singing in chorus is terrible. Interesting composition, great lyrics and approach (props for not using the title in the lyrics and still making it work extremely well). I'm not sure the weird synth in the background helps this song. Overall this doesn't come together very well. If the chorus wasn't so terribly pitchy, I might at least like the vocals.
DJ Ranger Den: One of the best vocal performances this round. I love this. Can't think of anything else to say about this. Except you might want to add just a hint of reverb to the vocals, so that the mix sounds more cohesive. And perhaps unmute the piano a bit; it's hard to get a good-sounding mix if your main accompanying instrument is trying to hide in the shadows.
Bram Tant: Give your vocals a bit more presence, both in the mix and in your technique. Though I guess the vocals are not terribly good, so perhaps it's for the best the way it is. You have stumbled upon an easy way to make a song boring: put the focus on the vocals and make the vocals boring. Whispery singing should dominate the song, for example, if you want to be boring (especially the bad kind of whispery where you just tone down your voice a lot, letting all the substance leak out). I have no complaints about the guitar and stuff, but this is not much better than an instrumental. Lyrics are a bit crude, but I guess that can have its own kind of charm.
Scoring range on the new scale (which goes up to 40 rather than 20 as before): lowest 21, highest 40.