Re: Nur Ein VII: Round One
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:59 pm
Of course I'm overreacting! This is Nur Ein, dammitt!!!!!!!Lunkhead wrote:frankie, I think you're overreacting.
Illegitimi non carborundum
https://songfight.net/forums/
Of course I'm overreacting! This is Nur Ein, dammitt!!!!!!!Lunkhead wrote:frankie, I think you're overreacting.
Frankie - a wise man once said (last week to be exact):frankie big face wrote: I honestly don't see it that way, but hey, maybe I'm wrong. It just says incorporate a round so I did. And I thought I did it in a clever way.
j$ wrote: if you are going to flaunt the non-optional challenge quite so brazenly each round, you're in for a tough ride. Respect the game, man!
I wish the challenge had have been "must include a cannon". Though I think that has already been used the year that Tchaikovsky won Nur Ein.frankie big face wrote:Jon, while that is an interesting way of looking at the two terms, it is not correct. The instrumentation has nothing to do with distinguishing whether a composition is a canon or a round. By definition, all rounds are canons, but not all canons are rounds. Rounds are "simple canons" where the imitation is identical and at the same pitch level.Generic wrote: I haven't heard Frankie's song yet (or anyone's), but I do feel compelled to note that, in music, a round is vocal by definition. Its instrumental equivalent is the canon.
Oh Ken. Tchaikovsky wasn't born until 1840. Is there no end to my pedantry!ken wrote:Nur Ein 1812?
One Shure 57, recorded song live. Recorded over first take two more times, gradually trying to make each pass sound less in sync and unhinged as the song progresses until the end when each take splits into the round. Cathedral verb setting on entire mix. It's an ode to Richard Youngs!Rabid Garfunkel wrote: Oystercatcher
I hope something changes soon. The difference between the dry(?) guitar (in 3/4 of the song) and the over-reverbed vocals is bleah to the extreme, for the intimate tone and the lyrical content you've got going on. Until the freakout, anyway.
Left hand, piano; bass; vibes. G-A-F progression, 2 measures apart. Freaky sideshow, I like that appellation, thanks!chocolatechips wrote:16. Rabid Garfunkel - I found this pretty enjoyable in a freaky sideshow ("some seriously silly hair") kind of way... where's the round?
Wow, that guy's a monster! (Good thing.)BenKrieger wrote:One Shure 57, recorded song live. Recorded over first take two more times, gradually trying to make each pass sound less in sync and unhinged as the song progresses until the end when each take splits into the round. Cathedral verb setting on entire mix. It's an ode to Richard Youngs!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Youngs
Rabid Garfunkel wrote: Jon Eric
Drinking song! You'd better have one bitch queen of a chorus though… oh, you went that way instead. No complaints there. Half time solo section seemed more padding than "necessary".
Haha thanks. It took me a few tries to work it all together. I'm still an experimenting n00b, but that's what the first few rounds are for. I can now check this off my yearly goals.chocolatechips wrote:I've actually been wanting to experiment with dubstep on my entries but haven't figured out how to get it right yet so I've got to give you great credit for making ths work.
Glad I dodged the bullet then :p.Rabid Garfunkel wrote:Gooey Caramel Centaur
Tambourines make me angry
Ah. What jingle-beast did you employ?supremeedible wrote:Glad I dodged the bullet then :p.Rabid Garfunkel wrote:Gooey Caramel Centaur
Tambourines make me angry
You're probably right, now that I listen to it. All I did was make the computer make sounds, but I suppose that particular sound was probably meant by whoever prepared it to be a tambourine. Sorry it angered you so. I am just running through a checklist of half-assed percussion solutionsRabid Garfunkel wrote:Ah. What jingle-beast did you employ?supremeedible wrote:Glad I dodged the bullet then :p.Rabid Garfunkel wrote:Gooey Caramel Centaur
Tambourines make me angry
i'm going to take this as a complimentRabid Garfunkel wrote: Ross Durand
*smiley face*
My favourite - someone eliding two separate responses to try and win some non-existent arguement, in the wrong thread. I shall now listen without trying to let anyone's "outbursts" influence my opinions. ps. I am probably not as good a person as you. Good luck.Tawnee wrote:My favorite- "The 'Yeahs' were unnecessary, ps. where was the shouting." GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE! Seriously? Horseshit. Pure and utter horseshit.
No worries, yo. A tambourine killed my grandfather, back in the war. And he was a percussionist sympathizer, too. Can't trust those sneaky jingle-beasts. Be wary, they're always watching, waiting...supremeedible wrote:You're probably right, now that I listen to it. All I did was make the computer make sounds, but I suppose that particular sound was probably meant by whoever prepared it to be a tambourine. Sorry it angered you so. I am just running through a checklist of half-assed percussion solutions.
Sadly, no, I am not tuff enuff for that. I just take umbrage at someone unwilling to tell the difference between my opinion and someone else's, especially as there was no judging entrance exam. It's insulting to the other judges to compare them to me. If someone has decided to 'fall on their sword' then better just not to enter than go looking for an unnecessary fight. IMO.Jefff wrote:IS THAT A THREAT