That perfectly describes your song this week!Caravanray wrote: There's plenty of well written, well executed songs done by competent people seriously in the style to which they are best suited which I simply don't like.

That perfectly describes your song this week!Caravanray wrote: There's plenty of well written, well executed songs done by competent people seriously in the style to which they are best suited which I simply don't like.
It would be cool if someone made a website where you could rate songs good, bad, average or mediocre. Oh hell, let's just replace the last two with "okay." And then, if you wanted to, you could write comments about the songs. Or not.Leaf wrote: I'm gonna review this weeks' fights (deep breath) with one word answers. Good or Bad. Despite if there is something I like, or an element that ... hell, ...hmmm. Not sure what word is best for the middle...cause "mediocre" may be too negative... "average" too good. Fuck it, four words. Good, average, medicore, bad.
If anyone wants to know why (I gave them the one word) , I'll try to explain.
I really have no idea. That's the problem.What I meant by that, is that I'm picking up a vibe, or opinion on what others around this particular community view as a "song"..some of these views and opinions are conflicting of course. I'm listening to these songs, trying to think like someone I'm not...someone who would rate them in that fashion, a fashion of "quality of writing", yet I can't HELP but listen to the performer instead, or the cool sounds, or the riffs. The story to me is the music instead of the lyrics... although I've been trying to tell a story with my lyrics lately that are more .... accessible?erikb wrote:What is a song supposed to be?Leaf wrote:I rated one thing bad, based on the views I'm picking up about what a song is supposed to be, and I really liked it.
as far as flossing goes, the key word is yet.fodroy wrote:i don't floss, and i've never had a cavity.jack wrote:think of production as the personal hygiene part of your song.
my roommate only bathes twice a week, and he has a girlfriend. i don't.
that's all.
Stay tuned. Exactly such a thing is coming. Working hard on it as we speak.frankie big face wrote:It would be cool if someone made a website where you could rate songs good, bad, average or mediocre. Oh hell, let's just replace the last two with "okay." And then, if you wanted to, you could write comments about the songs. Or not.Leaf wrote: I'm gonna review this weeks' fights (deep breath) with one word answers. Good or Bad. Despite if there is something I like, or an element that ... hell, ...hmmm. Not sure what word is best for the middle...cause "mediocre" may be too negative... "average" too good. Fuck it, four words. Good, average, medicore, bad.
If anyone wants to know why (I gave them the one word) , I'll try to explain.
No so fast. The boards, including the reviews, are the heart and soul of Songfight. The songs, the fights, the votes, those are the skeleton and the musculature. I go to the main page once a week to download songs, then spend the rest of the week on the boards, looking at reviews and other posts. The next time I visit songfight.org is when the next fight is up.jb wrote: Song Fight isn't about the reviews. It's about the songs. It's about the fight. Song Fight went along quite well for at least a year before anyone thought to "review" anything.
You'll need 45 to beat King Arthur, though.sdurand wrote:I'm way ahead of you. I'm already up to 25 songs without a win. I think I only need 32 to beat erik. However, this is not actually my goal.kill_me_sarah wrote:I intend to break your record.erikb wrote:*Disclaimer: I was for a while the losingest SFer in SF history.
Steve
Yeah that's my bad again KMS (I'm making a regular habit out of that) It was Melvin that made the Lennon reference, the Dylan thing just made it sound familiar to me. What I said about Lennon I will say again about Dylan. Thier poorly recorded "demos" might not be as easily listened to by John Q. Public if they weren't already familiar with the artist.kill_me_sarah wrote:Actually, I don't know that I ever made reference to Lennon originally. I talked a bit about Dylan, but I think someone else's Lennon and my Dylan comments were confused
jb wrote:Dan-O has a point.
JB
Actually - I thought I was providing an example of all 4 of JoS's criteriafrankie big face wrote:That perfectly describes your song this week!Caravanray wrote: There's plenty of well written, well executed songs done by competent people seriously in the style to which they are best suited which I simply don't like.
I think it's time for an exclusive special challenge: write a song and record it in mono with one voice and one accompanying instrument, don't produce or master it, use a $10 mic, record it to Spud's answering machine, don't use any additives or preservatives, don't listen to it even once after you make the recording and then SHUT DOWN THE MESSAGE BOARDS. OPTIONAL CHALLENGE: Disable the voting.Jim of Seattle wrote:No so fast. The boards, including the reviews, are the heart and soul of Songfight. The songs, the fights, the votes, those are the skeleton and the musculature. I go to the main page once a week to download songs, then spend the rest of the week on the boards, looking at reviews and other posts. The next time I visit songfight.org is when the next fight is up.jb wrote: Song Fight isn't about the reviews. It's about the songs. It's about the fight. Song Fight went along quite well for at least a year before anyone thought to "review" anything.
What'd be really neat would be if you assigned a number to the ratings (say, 0 for bad, 5 for okay and 10 for good), and assigned the average of these for each song. Then you could, for example, have a list of the week's top rated songs etc.Jim of Seattle wrote:Stay tuned. Exactly such a thing is coming. Working hard on it as we speak.frankie big face wrote: It would be cool if someone made a website where you could rate songs good, bad, average or mediocre. Oh hell, let's just replace the last two with "okay." And then, if you wanted to, you could write comments about the songs. Or not.
Also it would be nice if you could select certain songs or artists as your favorites so they'd all be stored in one place. Also, as regards the rating system, I think you should have to have at least, I dunno, five or so ratings before your rating shows up.obscurity wrote:What'd be really neat would be if you assigned a number to the ratings (say, 0 for bad, 5 for okay and 10 for good), and assigned the average of these for each song. Then you could, for example, have a list of the week's top rated songs etc.Jim of Seattle wrote:Stay tuned. Exactly such a thing is coming. Working hard on it as we speak.frankie big face wrote: It would be cool if someone made a website where you could rate songs good, bad, average or mediocre. Oh hell, let's just replace the last two with "okay." And then, if you wanted to, you could write comments about the songs. Or not.
Is this some kind of joke, or is it obvious that a site called "somesongs" exists, and it's URL is:kill_me_sarah wrote:Also it would be nice if you could select certain songs or artists as your favorites so they'd all be stored in one place. Also, as regards the rating system, I think you should have to have at least, I dunno, five or so ratings before your rating shows up.obscurity wrote:What'd be really neat would be if you assigned a number to the ratings (say, 0 for bad, 5 for okay and 10 for good), and assigned the average of these for each song. Then you could, for example, have a list of the week's top rated songs etc.Jim of Seattle wrote: Stay tuned. Exactly such a thing is coming. Working hard on it as we speak.
YOU HAVE UTTERED THE NAME OF ADONAI! Details of your stoning are now being arranged. Stay put, we'll contact you.boltoph wrote:Is this some kind of joke, or is it obvious that a site called "somesongs" exists, and it's URL is:kill_me_sarah wrote:Also it would be nice if you could select certain songs or artists as your favorites so they'd all be stored in one place. Also, as regards the rating system, I think you should have to have at least, I dunno, five or so ratings before your rating shows up.obscurity wrote: What'd be really neat would be if you assigned a number to the ratings (say, 0 for bad, 5 for okay and 10 for good), and assigned the average of these for each song. Then you could, for example, have a list of the week's top rated songs etc.
http://www.somesongs.com
? Or am I supposed to read through 9 other pages of bullshit to arrive at this conclusion ?
Now just get them to add a "great" to the list of voting options (something that I've always wanted...)....
oh you can still find a bunch of Bad Songs there, if that's what you're into...I assume ya'll are into that, since thread has been created here, to publicize, and create buzz about, bad music. Badass TUNEZ
Hold on. At this point I'm not building this thing to be sharable by people. That's what the voting and the reviews are for. So this isn't "somesongs for Songfight" or anything like that. In the initial version, anyway, the ratings are for the rater's own personal consumption only. My vision was to build my own personal SF filter, to enhance my SF listening pleasure. But yeah, somesongs was an inspiration for the rating system (I am indeed using the zero-5-10 rule for the ratings so that bands and fights can have average ratings to them.)kill_me_sarah wrote:Also it would be nice if you could select certain songs or artists as your favorites so they'd all be stored in one place. Also, as regards the rating system, I think you should have to have at least, I dunno, five or so ratings before your rating shows up.obscurity wrote:What'd be really neat would be if you assigned a number to the ratings (say, 0 for bad, 5 for okay and 10 for good), and assigned the average of these for each song. Then you could, for example, have a list of the week's top rated songs etc.Jim of Seattle wrote: Stay tuned. Exactly such a thing is coming. Working hard on it as we speak.
Actually I can't listen to any Dylan at all, demo or not. Mystifies me what people hear in him. But that's another topic.Dan-O from Five-O wrote:Yeah that's my bad again KMS (I'm making a regular habit out of that) It was Melvin that made the Lennon reference, the Dylan thing just made it sound familiar to me. What I said about Lennon I will say again about Dylan. Thier poorly recorded "demos" might not be as easily listened to by John Q. Public if they weren't already familiar with the artist.kill_me_sarah wrote:Actually, I don't know that I ever made reference to Lennon originally. I talked a bit about Dylan, but I think someone else's Lennon and my Dylan comments were confused
Obviously a lot of folks have stated that production means nothing to them, and (I haven't counted mind you) I think just as many have stated it does. In the end you'll just have to take your chances on whether anyone will give your song a fair listen based on that criteria.
Tell me what? You have a knack for bringing out all my insecurities.Spud wrote:Is someone gonna tell him?