Nur Ein VII Round Four "Elizabeth the Great"

[Lunkhead]

Congrats frankie, bummer to the Chips.

Not that it matters to me at this point, but Nur Ein ranking is so weird. Maybe next year some math genius could try to come up with a formula that addresses the oddity of somebody who ranks 2nd or 3rd among all judges beating somebody who ranks first among 3 out of 5 judges? It always seems counterintuitive that one judge tanking a song can mean that the song loses. This seems especially problematic when the panel of judges is generally a very random selection of people who all have eclectic tastes yet often disagree wildly about the songs.

FYI, I'm not saying frankie didn't deserve the win, I liked his song and bgm's song both. Just mentioning that it always strikes me as weird when the results play out like they did this time (regardless of who the contestants are).

[roymond]

Betsy is short for Elizabeth. I did the best I could without turning the song into a gag about kids or history.

Zing!

[frankie big face]

Congrats frankie, bummer to the Chips.

Not that it matters to me at this point, but Nur Ein ranking is so weird. Maybe next year some math genius could try to come up with a formula that addresses the oddity of somebody who ranks 2nd or 3rd among all judges beating somebody who ranks first among 3 out of 5 judges? It always seems counterintuitive that one judge tanking a song can mean that the song loses. This seems especially problematic when the panel of judges is generally a very random selection of people who all have eclectic tastes yet often disagree wildly about the songs.

FYI, I'm not saying frankie didn't deserve the win, I liked his song and bgm's song both. Just mentioning that it always strikes me as weird when the results play out like they did this time (regardless of who the contestants are).

Yeah, the next thing you know, two people will be serving as ONE JUDGE. and also

[j$]

Hey, Lunkhead, who are you again? Oh yeah, A LOSER

These reviews were written yesterday, before the other judges started votin' - as ever, it's the only way I feel I can be honest 'cos I reckon that all of 'em are pretty damned clued up and I don't want to be influenced by their opinions. Also I had just played a cracker of a gig yet had to come home to the horror of starting again with recording due to laptop calamity. So WAIL. IAA (particularly this time out) C. AMC, as it happens. So I have added more seasoned post-results views where appropriate.

AAD – first 45 seconds of this are FABULOUS, right up to the solo-ing lead guitar. I fear the remaining 3.15 aren’t going to grip me. Oh here we go, tempo change! I sensed it, I sensed it - this is a good thing. Though I *wasn't* expecting it to go a bit "Franz Ferdinand is a robot" - a version of post-punk now. *flubber* [b][post-edit: What the f*ck did I mean by *flubber*? Nothing to do with Robin Williams. I think - This was two good songs welded together that felt like the welding diminished both. So it's a bit flabby][/b]

BGM – yeah, this sounds great but just isn’t catchy enough. The hook just isn’t strong enough. I mean, it’s spectacularly well done and all. And I really like the take on the lyric, but I couldn’t remember it an hour later (when I heard it an hour ago) and it’s just not sticking. Ah, it’s the arrangement – it’s too thin for the relative thinness of the melody. Good bridge (though the acoustic shouldn’t have been klutzing its way through it) The la la las should have come in earlier for this queen. [post-edit - I think I mean you have set the bar too high - this is definitely BGM, it just feels like a "b-side" or whatever kids today are calling 'em. You can't help but be good, but you can help a bit more imagination in your chordal approach. bee-oytch ]

CC – oh what an AWESOME opening. Actually FUCK ME THIS IS AWESOME. I hope it has a coda of the catchy bit again. Oh YEAH there it is. Oh it ran out too soon. Maybe there’s a little more structure needed to this but fuck it if I didn’t love it. I fear the curse of Cashpoint will strike again, though. [post edit: ah it did. Sorry. I did have you top until a last minute swing to Manhattan Glutton because it was more complete as a song. But points-wise I don't think it would have helped. Christ I hope not. You should still be in this.]

DJD – be glad you have immunity Cute, but this is trying *waayyyy* too hard to have a ‘take’ on the title, and be kooky. And it’s a very well done but not very memorable melody. No it’s really not working for me. And I missed the tempo increase / decrease /whatever which is a bad sign. [POST-EDIT: :Listening again, oh kay, I got it. Too camp for me, at the end of the day. And if it's too camp for ME ...]

FBF – someone has a show to work on, don’t they? Very well done, but too ‘musical’ for my tastes - we've had this conversation! I love those BVs, mind. It’s oddly 10cc [post-edit: I mean an under-arranged ELO! Which is a good thing]– and I love the silly stylophone thing. But obviously, singing about kids means I tuned out about 45 seconds in [smiley redacted to beat limit] Weirdly this is EXACTLY what I wished Jon Eric sounded like, with his finished product. I think it’s the too clean tone on the piano for me that stops me truly engaging with me. [post-edit: I saw "company" recently for the first time and a) it truly is the shittest moment that Sondheim ever pissed out and b) this would fit in. Not musically, neccessarily, but you know ... Take from that, what you will ]

GJ – I don’t like when you are ‘enunciating’ vocally like this. It sounds false. Where is the bass? This needs a Nick Cave style dirty bass line kicking the shit out of all comers. This is a lovely melody, exploring that whole sailor song / folk nonsense from an interesting new angle. I am just not sure I *like* it very much. Around 2.30 breakdown I am super-bored. [post-edit: yep, nothing new to add. this is dangerously close to pompous for me. Though I really do like the "call and response" BVs - or do I mean contrapuntal? Either way they saved you from ending up further down towards my shit box, baby. Also should definitely ended c.2.45.]

MG – Oh, god, I’m going to enjoy a (nother) MG song? 1.00 still hasn’t gone bad Helmet … ah there we go … actually, still rocking, though those lyrics are clumsy in the fast parts. Yeah, this is pretty sweet. I don’t get how you can do this and “the architect” and yet piss out sub-standard 90s pastiches the rest of the time. But hey, I’m a douche. [post-edit: Hey, I'm still a douche! but this is still a good song! Actually i realise this is kind of what I wanted from BGM. Oof-a-loof.]

RD – Oh it’s gone a bit Steve Miller when it should be Warren Zevon, Chorus is very very adorably Madi, Singer/Songwriter aged 7, if you know what I mean. The problem is I want Warren Zevon and daughter not Steve Miller and daughter. [post-edit: actually I realise that the best parts are the switches from "father" to "daughter" - I kind of got that last night, but couldn't quite phrase it properly. Despite hearing more John Fogerty than I did yesterday, I do however stand by this wanting to be Warren Zevon but ending closer to Steve Miller. Ain't I the bitch?]

WSA – Great opening. Those harmonies (.30-.45) someone’s a little wobbly? This is catchy melody. I wonder whether it’s that synth that’s playing something slightly “contra-tonal” rather than someone being out of tune… nice noticeable but not distracting tempo change. I will also be forever married to England for better and for worse, as someone recently sang. Oh this is a lovely melodic riff with not much else to distract from that fact. post-edit: except a very nice abstract Bright Eyes style arrangement to hide that fact. But still, go kids! [post-edit: Nah, nothing else to add.]

[erik]

Congrats frankie, bummer to the Chips.

Not that it matters to me at this point, but Nur Ein ranking is so weird. Maybe next year some math genius could try to come up with a formula that addresses the oddity of somebody who ranks 2nd or 3rd among all judges beating somebody who ranks first among 3 out of 5 judges? It always seems counterintuitive that one judge tanking a song can mean that the song loses. This seems especially problematic when the panel of judges is generally a very random selection of people who all have eclectic tastes yet often disagree wildly about the songs.

The problem with what you're describing is that it's easy to say "3/5 of the judges thought Song A was better than Song B, so song A should have ranked higher than Song B", but when you've got more than 2 things to compare, it gets messy. Rock beats scissors, and scissors beats paper, right? So Rock should beat paper. Except it doesn't. Now try doing that with 25 things instead of just 3. Gross.

The thing with the Nur Ein scoring is that you have a low number of voters who have a wide range of scores to assign, especially in the earlier rounds. It's hard(er) to do fair(er) things with such a small number of voters (if there were like 100 judges there's alot of cool algorithms that could be thrown at the problem), but one thing you could do to minimize the effect you're describing is some sort of tiered scoring: For a round where there are 25 contestants, instead of giving them scores from 25 to 1, voters could assign one song 7 points, three songs 6 points, five songs 5 points, seven songs 4 points, five songs 3 points, three songs 2 points, and one song 1 point. This would have two effects: 1) the smaller range between the highest and lowest points means that the effect of one judge tanking a song will be reduced, and 2) removing a strict 25 to 1 ranking system would mean that you wouldn't be able to do strict comparisons every single time (like "3/5 of the judges preferred Song A to Song B") because of all the songs that could share the same score from one judge.

So like for this last round, an alternate scoring method would be: one 5, two 4's, two 3's, two 2's, and one 1. Scoring this way puts BGM tied for first place. Is that a better representation of the 5 judges? I dunno. But you have all this data: you could take the old rankings from any of the already finalized rounds and come up with a tiered scoring method and a round where someone reallyREALLY was affected by a single low score from a judge, and then apply the different scoring system to see if things would've turned out differently.

[Manhattan Glutton]

I don’t get how you can do this and “the architect” and yet piss out sub-standard 90s pastiches the rest of the time.

Thanks. I will take that as a compliment on my skill and range. While I quite enjoy my song, have you noticed the "sub-standard 90s pastiches" tend to fare better on average? In fact, I could even potentially win with one of them if judge 1 wasn't such a douche.

[frankie big face]

FBF – someone has a show to work on, don’t they? Very well done, but too ‘musical’ for my tastes - we've had this conversation! I love those BVs, mind. It’s oddly 10cc [post-edit: I mean an under-arranged ELO! Which is a good thing]– and I love the silly stylophone thing. But obviously, singing about kids means I tuned out about 45 seconds in [smiley redacted to beat limit] Weirdly this is EXACTLY what I wished Jon Eric sounded like, with his finished product. I think it’s the too clean tone on the piano for me that stops me truly engaging with me. [post-edit: I saw "company" recently for the first time and a) it truly is the shittest moment that Sondheim ever pissed out and b) this would fit in. Not musically, neccessarily, but you know ... Take from that, what you will ]

Geez, I don't know where to start. Company is an amazing show and I'm very surprised you don't like it. I'll take under-arranged ELO. I don't sing about kids often (and this is about one kid, not kids), but if I remember correctly, you enjoyed my "Evan is Getting His Teeth." So I guess I can't expect two in a row. Anyway, thanks for the honest feedback. And I'm not working on a show so .

[Niveous]

The problem with what you're describing is that it's easy to say "3/5 of the judges thought Song A was better than Song B, so song A should have ranked higher than Song B", but when you've got more than 2 things to compare, it gets messy. Rock beats scissors, and scissors beats paper, right? So Rock should beat paper. Except it doesn't. Now try doing that with 25 things instead of just 3. Gross.

The thing with the Nur Ein scoring is that you have a low number of voters who have a wide range of scores to assign, especially in the earlier rounds. It's hard(er) to do fair(er) things with such a small number of voters (if there were like 100 judges there's alot of cool algorithms that could be thrown at the problem), but one thing you could do to minimize the effect you're describing is some sort of tiered scoring: For a round where there are 25 contestants, instead of giving them scores from 25 to 1, voters could assign one song 7 points, three songs 6 points, five songs 5 points, seven songs 4 points, five songs 3 points, three songs 2 points, and one song 1 point. This would have two effects: 1) the smaller range between the highest and lowest points means that the effect of one judge tanking a song will be reduced, and 2) removing a strict 25 to 1 ranking system would mean that you wouldn't be able to do strict comparisons every single time (like "3/5 of the judges preferred Song A to Song B") because of all the songs that could share the same score from one judge.

So like for this last round, an alternate scoring method would be: one 5, two 4's, two 3's, two 2's, and one 1. Scoring this way puts BGM tied for first place. Is that a better representation of the 5 judges? I dunno. But you have all this data: you could take the old rankings from any of the already finalized rounds and come up with a tiered scoring method and a round where someone reallyREALLY was affected by a single low score from a judge, and then apply the different scoring system to see if things would've turned out differently.

Though this opens up a huge can of worms, I will say that a tiered scoring system is something to think about. Good ideas, Erik.

[j$]

Geez, I don't know where to start. Company is an amazing show and I'm very surprised you don't like it.

No, it really *isn't* - it's an excuse for a single gay man to belittle his straight couple friends for like, *wanting more* - and yet, without the courage to write the main character as a gay man. I mean *bobbbeeee, bobbbbeeee, bobbbeeee* is just not a very catchy refrain. And also, *what* is with that ending? Look at all the ridiculous straight couples waiting for their vacarious thrill to turn up when the audience knows he's not gonna? (sub-sub-private-friends-clause: Dez though Bobby was DEAD.) It's *hateful* is what it is. Still, what do I know about musicals, right?

I'll take under-arranged ELO.

So will I. it's meant as a compliment. All the things I like about ELO (melody, ear for a harmony) without the stuff I don't (pomposity, attempts to be the Beatles)

I don't sing about kids often (and this is about one kid, not kids), but if I remember correctly, you enjoyed my "Evan is Getting His Teeth." So I guess I can't expect two in a row.

I did, and I do. I.e. enjoy this one very much. It's not a lyrical issue, it's a tonal / arrangement thing. I stand by my Jon Eric should sound like this point, but since he's off licking his wounds, it's a bit of a wasted insight.

I'm not working on a show so .

Darling, you're *always* working on a show :p

[j$]

I don’t get how you can do this and “the architect” and yet piss out sub-standard 90s pastiches the rest of the time.

Thanks. I will take that as a compliment on my skill and range. While I quite enjoy my song, have you noticed the "sub-standard 90s pastiches" tend to fare better on average? In fact, I could even potentially win with one of them if judge 1 wasn't such a douche.

No problem. It wasn't intended that way Yes I have, but not with me. What can I say, if the bag fits ... (though judge 1 is not always Judge 1)

[j$]

the oddity of somebody who ranks 2nd or 3rd among all judges beating somebody who ranks first among 3 out of 5 judges? It always seems counterintuitive that one judge tanking a song can mean that the song loses.

Ummm, yeah, hello the subjective existence? I think the Nur Ein scoring system is the simplest truth - if you can't accept that an across-the-board *good* is always gonna be more successful than a 66% *great* then maybe you need to reconsider your valuation system, not Nur Ein's validity. *ZING?* x j$

[Manhattan Glutton]

Here are two solutions to the ranking problem:
1. Olympic style scoring, then average for the rank. Right now if two songs tie in awesomeness, one has to be ranked lower. So if judges could pick a value 1 to 5 for each song, that would be more accurate.
2. Average the rankings and then drop the two judges that deviate the most from the average and use the new average. Because if you get a judge like, say, Caravan Ray, his idea of "good music" shouldn't count at all.

Frankly, I don't care about fixing the ranking issue. I'm not here to win. I'm here to make music.

[j$]

Frankly, I don't care about fixing the ranking issue. I'm not here to win. I'm here to make music.

I am sure you're just saying that, but you really are my hero this week

[glennny]

there's nothing wrong with the scoring. nothing to fix.

If anything I'd give the judges so many points to distribute as they may, they might give multiple artists the same amount, they might give all points to one artist, they might give zeros. Sometimes some songs deserve to be more clearly victorious. Like Frankies song : sings like Bowie, chord pattern by Randy Newman, backing vocals by America = Best freaking song ever!

[j$]

Oh, now that's a really good idea! Give me CAKE!

[Ross]

Except in the earliest rounds, where immunity is at stake, who wins doesn't really matter. What matters is who gets eliminated. Occasionaly one very low rating can drop someone into that range with otherwise middling numbers. Perhaps the judges should just each provide two lists of three - their top three, and their bottom three. This should easily provide a winner and a set of losers. It also would prevent the judges from the agony of parsing 12th place from 13th place.

But really, Nur Ein! Has been in place for seven years, we all know what we sign up for from the outset and I think the scoring system has generally caused very little controversy aside of the occasional anomoly. Overall I hope we are not seriously considering a change in scoring systems.

[Manhattan Glutton]

I am sure you're just saying that, but you really are my hero this week

I went through my Jon Eric-esque breakdown a couple years ago where it was like "WHAT DO I DO TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY?" You don't make everyone happy. You make yourself happy. Just being in the competition, constantly making music makes me happy. And if I won, I wouldn't be able to play next year, which means I wouldn't be as happy. Yes, it's frustrating to get polarized results from the judges, but that's just the way things are.

[glennny]

you say that because you have the 2nd most Nur Ein appearances


In all seriousness, it really doesn't need changing. I agree with you Ross.

[Caravan Ray]

Because if you get a judge like, say, Caravan Ray, his idea of "good music" shouldn't count at all.

Can I be a judge again next year please Niveous?

[chocolatechips]

CC – oh what an AWESOME opening. Actually FUCK ME THIS IS AWESOME. I hope it has a coda of the catchy bit again. Oh YEAH there it is. Oh it ran out too soon. Maybe there’s a little more structure needed to this but fuck it if I didn’t love it. I fear the curse of Cashpoint will strike again, though.

Ha, I don't mind the Cashpoint Curse - This is the best review I've got the whole thing so... I'm not worried the rest of the judges hated it As long as one person gets what you are doing, I figure that's a success on some level. I mean... I'm obviously not going for mass appeal here. So this is about as good a response as I could hope for (especially considering how I rushed the ending and the mixing.. and well the whole thing really.)

Thanks!

[glennny]

Don't ask
Win this thing and take your judging spot!

[frankie big face]

I agree with everything everyone is saying!

Look, I like to win. Who doesn't? But mostly, I like writing songs in an environment that gets me excited. That used to be SongFight proper and, for some reason, it isn't anymore. I don't know why. But this I get excited about every year. I know the scoring system is bananas especially if you get a real mixed bag of judges (I think these are probably the five most like-minded judges you could find round these parts, frankly), but who cares? In the end, the mob rules anyway and all those people whose songs you criticized in your reviews come back to vote against you.

@J$ - I have things to say about your evaluation of Company, but I worry that saying them on a message board won't quite work. I'll save them for the next time I see you in the flesh. And also, maybe you need to see it performed by Americans, dammit! In New York City, dammit!!! Stick to Gilbert and Sullivan in your back yard.

@Glennny - Did you really like my song or was that the most disgusting hybrid musician you could think of to lovingly insult me? David Newman America.

P.S. I'm sitting in my office, having just conducted nine middle schoolers through a concert of Mozart, Bach and Grieg. I have a funny life.