OMGWTFWHEREARETHESONGSBBQ (Systematic Panic Reviews)

[Ross]

Systematic Panic

I will not be reviewing production.

K Twins – Right off the bat I don’t get how people dancing is a panic. I like your angle, of the reincarnation/alien whatever. I can sure think of some worse things on earth than a dance party and the US stock exchange dropping. – The song seems to not go far enough to me. The words/tune work OK, but I think the subjects of the verses are poor and there’s a structural issue of not arriving at a destination lyrically or musically.

Calfborg – I like your style. Great tension and release moment about half way through, getting into the guitar solo. I think structurally the instrumental break is a little long – and then the ending goes on a bit too long. I like the way the lyrics start, but I’m not sure how it becomes a (not very romantic) love song.

CC and the Creeps – Ah the computer take. Ok word work dealing with fitting the computer jargon. Other than that it kind of just doodles along. I’m sure computer geeks will like it, but it didn’t do a lot for me. The drastic changes of feel didn’t really seem totally appropriate to me. The keyboard clicking is cute. Pretty uneventful song. How much of this is lifted from the first hit when you google “systematic panic?” Isn’t that called plagiarism? (or are you Thierry Herbelot?)

Steve Durand – I like that you chose a control freak character for this, and how the terror message isn’t meant to be universal (I think) but from the point of view of this one guy (he must have been a nightmare before y2k). Good work dealing with the title. I don’t think I like the fragmented lyrics all that much - if the chorus contrasted or something that might liven it up – oh, the bridge does that a little. Nice instrumental break. The third verse feels like it drags a bit – for me this might be due to the tune not having a lot of momentum, which I think is from the fragmented thing. Other than that, good song.

Hello to Ruin - “Systemic Panic?” I don’t think I have much to say, your panic didn’t sound very systematic to me – “we’re all manic for panic?” hmm.. this doesn’t seem very well thought through to me.

Ricky Shallow & the Blown Loads – I like the over the top punk acid rock thing. Guy-yelling-with-rock-band. Where the song goes after the instrumental break is a mystery to me. The first half almost seems to hold together as a portrait of a maniacal creep but drifts into oblivion. You do seem panicked.

The Hell Yeahs – I basically like this I think I only have two complaints (a) the words seem more to me like systematic fear/manipulation than panic (a nit-pick). (b) the chorus tune being the exact same phrase all four times (with a delayed resolution on the fourth). I think popping one of those up a third could add a bit to a fairly static song. “I don’t think you wanna wanna” is great!

Motor Monkeys – Good tune for the genre. I like the single word series in the chorus. Second song about TV as a manipulator. Nice tension going into the chorus. “In the end they Fail” could benefit from a change to the tune – even If it is just up an octave. I think this is my leader so far.

Abecederian – I like your work with rhythm on the words. You don’t sound very panicked considering that you say you’re in a panic. Ideas are a bit disjointed, and the musical interludes are pretty, but not strong enough to fill the gaps. I like your angle on this, and the tune and lyrics are pretty good, but it doesn’t feel supported by the music to me.

Add – I have decided to be something of a title purist. I don’t buy that the title of this song isn’t “Tear it up.” Besides that I really like what you started with the loops of “never say” “tear it up” and was looking forward to hearing you build on that, but then you just let it go. After the break I don’t really get how the end of the song relates much to the part that precedes the instrumental.

John Benjamin Band – Great energy for the title. Nice tune. I don’t feel like the bridge deviates enough from the verse to serve as the shift most bridges supply. Other than that, pretty nice. [note: songs should succeed without a manual, if it makes me want to jump around and sing I’ll do that, if not…]

Ross Durand (me) – Pretty far from my usual idiom, but I feel fairly successful. The vocals were work for me – you should have heard how bad they were with my natural singing style (no you shouldn’t have). Ok, I like it. Some of the lyrics fell short of what I usually go for (You’re right on about that jb), but usually I have more than a week to write a song J

Daj Werkenhorse – This song strikes me as totally inane. I suppose Neo Geo enthusiasts might like it, but…. No relation to title except you say it once.

Sell Crazy – I don’t get this song. Musically I found it repetitive and uneventful. I actually can’t make out a few of the words, the girl took you to where? Court? Korn? Your minds gone from what? What am I trying to hide from? Might be an ok song if I could make out more of it.

Interesting fight.

[jb]

[note: songs should succeed without a manual, if it makes me want to jump around and sing I’ll do that, if not…]

note: it was a joke. *hands you a grip*

[Ross]

[note: songs should succeed without a manual, if it makes me want to jump around and sing I’ll do that, if not…]

note: it was a joke. *hands you a grip*

Of course it was. *accepts grip*.

Here's why I think I typed that thought as it passed through my head. In the four weeks I have been participating I have seen both the Ants (invisible) "Man Speaking German" and the Draft "Devils...," So, I guess I'm just tired of songs being explained - I figure, you put it out there, it is what it is. My Two cents. Should probably not have been directed at you for making a joke.

[Jefff]

Besides that I really like what you started with the loops of “never say” “tear it up” and was looking forward to hearing you build on that, but then you just let it go.

I had that exact thought about an hour before the song was due :)

[WeaselSlayer]

Daj Werkenhorse - Hahahaha, fuck yes. NeoGeo kicks ass. You guys throw down all kinds of hardcore.

Ross Durand - I like the reverby vocals. This is fun, but I wish the drums were real. It's not your fault though, so I can't fault you for it. The chorus is rad. Bend that string, gawd damn. I dig the lyrics too.

Add - I like how this builds on itself. It's like an intricate factory machine, but without losing heart. It does kind of lose the urgency about halfway through, but whoah here we go. The harmony brings it back really nicely. I like this a lot. The a cappela is fucking priceless.

John Benjamin Band - I'd probably like this better if you weren't so excited about your own song. I mean, everyone should have pride for their work, but internalize some of it. Anyway, I basically think this is American europap and I don't like the vocals. And on my headphones this annoyed me.

Ricky Shallow and the Blown Loads - This project is a tribute to no-wave. We are not punks. We dress very nicely and listen to James Chance and the Contortions as well as recent acts like Old Time Relijun. Also, the lyrics are supposed to be stupid. Sociopaths aren't attractive. I love the way this sounds like shit. I'm sorry if you didn't like it, and I'm glad if you did.

Hello to Ruin - Omg wanna go to therapy with me. This is totally rad because people don't like it.

Steve Durand - You put the heart in heartlessness. Machines can be awkwardly-Sega-Genesis beautiful. Thank you for reminding us of that.

Abecedarian - The intro has some really cool dissonance going on. This is really fucking good. Kind of theatrical folk, if that makes any sense. This is one of the prettiest things I've heard on songfight. I wish there were more swelling harmonies.

Sell Crazy - Bombastic. I dig the guitar tone. This is really tight, and I like it though I don't think it's really my style. But hey, songfight is about breaking down barriers of taste yeah? The vocals really make this for me.

The Hell Yeahs - Rockarockarockarockarocka. This is cool in a sort of goofy way. I think there could be a little more energy, or maybe I'd just like to hear a little less sludge. Anyway, fabulous fucking job anyway.

Motor Monkeys - I like the sound of these drums. Also, the synth works really well. Also, the chorus is really great. Also, I like this. The guitar bass breakdown bridge is perfect for this song. As are the frantic everything near the end.

The K Twins - I'm a sucker for industrial music. Ooh, then you hit the Bowie-esque vocal part and it's REALLY good. I'm way into this. And the way the last chord is so full of doom makes this really really stick.

CC and the Creeps - This is goofy, but I'm having fun with it. The drums sound real good. It's not really staying with me or I'm not staying with it, though, but is good. The change-up is well-done, but I'm still just kind of on the fence on this one, it doesn't grab me that much.

Calfborg - Do you have something in your mouth? If so, keep it in there, you carry your voice in a very cool way. This is really great stuff, kind of goofy kind of doom-tinged, a lot of awesome. It's a little like Xiu Xiu, but way more playful. This song is at its best when A) the voice cracks into desperation or B) the two voices do that wicked unison thing. The guitar coming in all fucked is great. As is the ending.

[jb]

I guess I'm just tired of songs being explained - I figure, you put it out there, it is what it is. My Two cents. Should probably not have been directed at you for making a joke.

I get it, and no worries. It's interesting, your opinion and WeaseSlayer's kind of match up. WeaselSlayer would like the song better if I didn't like it so much. You'd prefer if I didn't talk about it so much. Considering WeaselSlayer's entry this week, I'd have been flabbergasted if he liked my song at all one bit. And I'd have been further flabbergasted had he agreed with my opinion of his song at all. *shrug* My song is totally American Europap like he said. And just like Europap, it is the way it is on purpose. I have a whole bunch of this kind of thing on my iPod. I'm pretty sure you either like it or you don't, 'cause it's not attempting to be anything other than obvious.

I think you have a point about the bridge, BTW, but it's a conscious decision on my part not to be too terribly different through that part, because I have the "pause" coming up and then the giant guitar coming in. I might have thrown a string pad on top to make it sound different, but I was afraid of making the bridge too "big" and ruining the ending. Perhaps I should have replaced the arpeggio patch with something. In any case, I'm still pleased with it. Sorry WeaselSlayer. Wait, I'm gonna say it again, out loud. I think my song kicks ass. How about that, you non-punk?

Oh dear, here I am talking about the song again, and still being enthusiastic about it. I apologize. For god's sake, let's not discuss. Let's just puke up some opinions and then receive some flames and have another fight next week. Sometimes I think we (me included) want reviews only to see people write nice things about us, and if there are criticisms we just disagree with them and if the criticism is phrased poorly we snap back. (I'm fully expecting even less discussion and more flames from this last paragraph. Or maybe no comments at all.)

Sorry, I know I'm being snappish. I suppose I'm just a little tired of reviews-in-a-vacuum without any back-and-forth, and certainly without any give-and-take or other hyphenated amalgamations that would indicate we consider anyone else to have a valid opinion, or something to contribute other than "I liked it" or "meh" or "I hated it".

bitchbitchbitch

jb

[Ross]

jb wrote:

You'd prefer if I didn't talk about it so much. ....For god's sake, let's not discuss. Let's just puke up some opinions and then receive some flames and have another fight next week. ... if the criticism is phrased poorly we snap back.

... I'm just a little tired of reviews-in-a-vacuum without any back-and-forth, and certainly without any give-and-take or other hyphenated amalgamations that would indicate we consider anyone else to have a valid opinion, or something to contribute other than "I liked it" or "meh" or "I hated it".

I'm guessing we agree more than we disagree. I like the dialog. My reaction is more to the feeling I get of those who snap back by explaining their song if they think the writer of a negative review didn't "get it." I put that in a whole other context than, for instance, your explanation of why not to vary the bridge so much - this becomes a conversation between two creators about creating, not a rebuttal merely justifying creativity- There's much to the tone of some postings that rubs me wrong, and I think it probably matches your complaint about no give-and-take. I love talk, I just don't like defensive justification (I hope I don't sound too defensive here), or categorical dislike.

[Dan Wrekenhaus 2]

Daj Werkenhorse – This song strikes me as totally inane. I suppose Neo Geo enthusiasts might like it, but…. No relation to title except you say it once.

I am curious, how do you define relation to the title, it seems like that would be up for interpretation. Maybe I skimmed over that section in the faq?

[Spud]

I am curious, how do you define relation to the title, it seems like that would be up for interpretation. Maybe I skimmed over that section in the faq?

Many contestants prefer to make it clear that they wrote the song for the competition by using the title in a more significant manner in the submissions. For example, the storyline of the lyrics might support the title, or the words, notes, chords, and rhythm of the chorus can be coordinated to make it clear that there are the same number of syllables as there are notes, etc. Others try to invoke a "mood" or feeling that might be evoked by hearing the title. While many contestants feel that these techniques help to "prove" that the song was actually written for the competition, others simply feel that it is more rewarding to respond to the challenge in the spirit in which is it given. However, there are no hard and fast rules here, and the worst that can happen if a contestant chooses not to follow these traditions is that he or she will receive a questionable review. You get out of it what you put in.

[mico saudad]

This is one of the prettiest things I've heard on songfight. I wish there were more swelling harmonies.

Thank you! I usually go for the swelling harmonies but I decided against it for this one. Check back with me when my entry is more fiction than fact and I'll guarantee some harmonies!

[Ross]

I am curious, how do you define relation to the title, it seems like that would be up for interpretation. Maybe I skimmed over that section in the faq?

Of course it is up for interpretation, and you got mine

To see what I 've written about my personal point of view on this a couple of weeks ago, read the last paragraph of my review posting here

http://songfight.net/forums/viewtopic.p ... c&start=45

[Jefff]

rdurand-
Based on the post you linked to, I'd be interested to see you argue why my song (Add) would be called "Tear It Up" rather than "Systematic Panic". Cuz I don't see it.

[WeaselSlayer]

Oh jb, you really marsh my mallow right up!

[Ross]

rdurand-
Based on the post you linked to, I'd be interested to see you argue why my song (Add) would be called "Tear It Up" rather than "Systematic Panic". Cuz I don't see it.

Ahh, I'm being held accountable. This is the part I like.

I guess it's just the way you emphasize that phrase in the first half of the song by adding multiple voices to punch it and by looping it so dominantly. I typed as I listened, so that comment came before the second half - "waiting for something new" might have been the title, too. It just sounded to me like "systematic panic" was a jumping-off point for the song, but it didn't speak to me as the theme, that's all. I like it, though.

I'd love to hear you make your case for the other side.

[jack]

aren't you the same guy that complained about people talking too much about their songs and leaving little to be "interpreted"?

[jb]

aren't you the same guy that complained about people talking too much about their songs and leaving little to be "interpreted"?

Of course I am. But then, you noticed I haven't discussed the lyrics at all one bit, right?

[jack]

aren't you the same guy that complained about people talking too much about their songs and leaving little to be "interpreted"?

Of course I am. But then, you noticed I haven't discussed the lyrics at all one bit, right?

hehe. i was talking about r. durand asking about the ADD song. i'm well aware of your complaints by now.....

[Jefff]

it didn't speak to me as the theme, that's all.

Thematically, I think the song as a whole (including the second half) sounds both systematic and panicked. You might be able to make the case that it's also torn up. IMO, that would be harder to argue, and even then, "trying hard to tear it up" is made clear in the beginning to be a variation on "it's a systematic panic", so "SP" would cover that and still be more appropriate. It would be really hard to argue thematically for "waiting for something new".

Seems like the only thing "tear it up" has going for it is that I say it a whole bunch. But then I also say "systematic panic" 3 times, one of those being in the post-"tear it up" section.

Anyway, "Tear It Up" would work as a title, but the choice isn't as clear as you suggested.

[jb]

aren't you the same guy that complained about people talking too much about their songs and leaving little to be "interpreted"?

Of course I am. But then, you noticed I haven't discussed the lyrics at all one bit, right?

hehe. i was talking about r. durand asking about the ADD song. i'm well aware of your complaints by now.....

oh right. heh.

[Ross]

aren't you the same guy that complained about people talking too much about their songs and leaving little to be "interpreted"?

I don't think that exactly summarizes my view. I guess I'm not fond of a tone I think I've detected in the past (not this fight) that if a listener has a different interpretation than the writer intended that the listeners interpretation is some how invalid - but I think discussions of differing interpretations can be interesting.
By the way, my first post on that was not that people shouldn't talk about their songs, it was that songs should not require a manual. If I don't "get" a song without it being explained to me, it's not likely to get my vote.

[erik]

case for the other side

"Call your song whatever phrase you sing the most" is one of those axioms that is tossed off those horrible songwriting books that they sell which "teach" you how to make the most MOR songs which few will find offensive and even fewer will find memorable. It's really an unwritten rule of thumb, something that most people do unconsciously without even thinking about it, so when someone comes along and does something that goes against the grain, it sticks in our collective craw, even if we can't really say *why*.

In cases where the song title is something other than the most-repeated phrase, there are usually one or two reasons for it. 1) People like cool titles. (I read a songwriting book where they interviewed songwriters, and the variety of different approaches is amazing. One of the things that has stuck with me the most was John Fogerty, who said that he kept a notebook to jot down song titles when he thought of them. Not cool phrases to include in the song, just things that sounded like cool titles for songs, and then he proceeded to go on about how having a good title made him write a better song. "Proud Mary" is a cool title, and "Rolling on the River" is a terrible one. Cool title wins.) 2) The unexpected title can be an extra piece of information to let the listener know where to focus their attention, instead of just a series of words to request songs during the Morning Zoo with Dudley and Bob. Like in that song by the Killers called "Mr. Brightside". The hook to that song is on the word "jealousy", that's the part you'r gonna remember after you hear it for the first time. But if you call the song that, then you're saying on some level "This song is about jealousy". Calling it Mr Brightside, while initially confusing, ultimately lets the audience know that the song is about more than just jealousy.

[Kapitano]

Abcedarian
With this kind of thing, you're either carried along or bored rigid. I was carried along, somewhat to my own surprise.

Productionwise, it could do with being louder and compressed, maybe with a touch of reverb.

ADD
Reminds me of Public Image Limited. vocally and to some extent lyrically. It's not easy to maintain seperation between voices and between instruments when there's this much going on - but you've managed it.

The fuzz guitar solo sounded stilted somehow - mechanical and unfluid. Hihats panned left and snare right - distracting IMO.

I liked the vocal breakdown at the end, though I expected the instruments to come pounding back to join the voices.

Calfborg
A completely stoned Beck, covering The Eels, produced by Wreckdom.

CC and the Creeps
Okay, we've all experienced what you're singing about. But a song about incomprehensible error messages can only be a joke. And joke songs, even when well played and produced, are rarely funny after the first 30 seconds.

See my 'Goodbye Monster' for an example.

Daj Werkenhorse
I think you listen to the B52s. It's got their kind of vocal rhythm and intonation. It's also completely unlistenable.

Hello To Ruin
Great fun to make. No fun at all to hear. Are you the Landstanders?

The Hell Yeahs
Wouldn't make 'Best of The Hell Yeahs', but could be in 'Best of The Hell Yeahs II".

As Abcedarian said, the vocals sound like they were dubbed on - maybe because the grungy guitars are overcompressed? Sounds like it would rock big time live - there's just something flat about the recording.

Oh, and I really like the lyrics.

John Benjamin Band
Birdhouse In Your Soul...1983 techno stylee? I wouldn't have the nerve to do something this simple and...fromage.

The fuzzy guitar fits surprisingly well, and the vocoder actually sounds like fluid singing - impressive for those of us who know how difficult that is.

The K Twins
Kamakura came up with the chords and lyrics, and I made a backing to fit. Pink Floyd (Kam) meets Tears For Fears (me).

The Motor Monkeys
Everything sounds good, with nothing mixed too high or low. That slightly whining, nasal voice is just right for cutting through the guitars without drowning them out.

Like someone said: good, straightforward, and undestinctive.

Ricky Shallow and the Blown Loads
Waste of bandwidth. I prefered you naked.

Ross Durand
Hey! I've just had a brilliant idea that none of the other reviewers would ever think of! It would be so cool! You should do do a collaboration with St...

Anyway. Music sounds like Dire Straits when in 'Sultans of swing' and 'Walk of Life' mode. For the second time in this fight, I'm reminded vocally of the B52s, here more so because you've used that odd slapback delay that was used as a sustitute for doubletracked vocals in the late 60s.

Don't tell me you're not interested in production, this is far too well mixed and mastered for someone who doesn't care about it.

Interesting take on the title. Almost literally 'The Madness of Crowds'.

Sell Crazy
Reminds me of...postpunk newwave bands of the 70s. Bits of The Police, bits of The Clash. The song structure is a bit fragmented.

Sounds like a live studio recording - more polished than something recorded in the bedroom, rougher than a 'full' studio recording.

Steve Durand
You really need pitch correction software. Or to put it in the songfight idiom: "There is pitchiness in your voice that detracts from the lyrics."

The music makes me think of Human League in demo form. In fact, everything about this piece makes me think 'I know what you're trying to do and it would be good if it worked, but it didn't." That goes especially for the synth solos.

Good idea, badly done, and too long.