The Song Fight Bulletin Board

jack wrote:i think it's funny how so many people here love to debate semantics and syntax.

Really? That's all the internet is - semantics 'n' syntax. And sex sites.

I'll tell you what's funny

the Jazz wrote: Punk is dead, as evidenced by Avril Lavigne.

Hahahahaha. I mean, do you even think about what you're typing, or do these gems just come naturally to you?? Hahahahaha

j$ wrote:

jack wrote:i think it's funny how so many people here love to debate semantics and syntax.

Really? That's all the internet is - semantics 'n' syntax. And sex sites.

ah johnny. you're forgetting that the internet gave us such bits of enlightenment as the molsen twins and johnny in the corner.....

if people put half the effort into debating the songs of the week instead of debating the words of the day, i'd be a happy camper and never complain about the lack of reviews ever again.

not that i'm complaining....

the Jazz wrote:Mingus. The "free jazz" movement is entirely about losing your shit...

Mingus rocks so hard! Anything that gets the performer or the listener to lose their shit and a feel a bit of adrenaline is rocking. We are molded by our environments, right?
Ghetto Boys rocks the hardest rap that I've heard.
Run DMC's "Rock Box" is so rockin.
That said, I also rock way out to Avril Levigne's "Complicated" too. I'm a pussy, yeah yeah.
And SoD's "Toxicity" and pretty much everything by one of my favorite bands, Queens of the Stone Age.

Ok so here it is. My ULTIMATE rock out is Tool's "Ticks & Leeches". It blows my veins right out of the skin. Blows my Mars right past earth and into Venus.

True true. (he says smugly after reviewing all three fights through a raging headache. It didn't work as the homeopathic cure I hoped it would, mind. You bad musicians, you! )

Reviews are so overrated; the whole site doesn't have to be about reviews. The whole way that reviews are set-up on this site doesn't engage a back and forth dialogue, especially when most of the songs will never be re-recorded, so any suggestions are basically moot. One person says something about your song, and then you either thank them, or ignore them. Whoopeedoodahday.

This is not a discussion about semantics, it's a discussion about a vague word with many meanings, which will be different from person to person. The whole conversation stemmed from something that actually came up during the review process, so this conversation is taking place BECAUSE people review songs. It's not a distraction from reviews, it's an extension of them.

I think that some of the most interesting conversations on songfight have grown out of one song, but become much more than about one song, but after the conversation there is a greater understanding of what people think about stuff and crap. Dialogues on "what is a song", "can music be art" or the concept of "what is racism" have been born from reviews, and they were thought-provoking. A conversation about the relative importance of passion in music could be just as interesting.

opinions are pretty overrated too.

if you get no value out of reviews, i'll be sure to keep that in mind. it will save me some time next time you're in a fight i review.

erikb wrote:

deshead wrote:I don't think glossiness is in any way related to rock, present or original sense.

So if not glossiness, then what? What qualities make music "rock the fuck out"?

I think we're all saying the same thing: Be genuine. Be passionate. And above all, recognize that it's a personal thing.

(Also: I didn't comment on it earlier, but using American Idol to illustrate the principles of rocking out was fucking brilliant. You rock.)

Leaf wrote:For me, a tune that rocks is one that ... and get's me all excited. My body loses all tension ... I wanna ... run

Sounds like you're saying that in order to rock, a song must contain the brown note

jack wrote:opinions are pretty overrated too.

if you get no value out of reviews, i'll be sure to keep that in mind. it will save me some time next time you're in a fight i review.

Where did I say that I get no value out of reviews? That is not something that I have ever said. I said they were overrated, and I said that a discussion such as this engages people so much more than reviews, which rarely lead to any sort of discussion. It's almost always leaving one comment, will a follow-up of a "Thanks!" or just ignoring the negativity. It is neiter rude nor mean to state this true fact. In general, people don't really get into why they like something or don't, not in any deep way, and not in any back-and-forth way.

where did i say the whole site had to be about reviews?

you started the rant.

oh, and this thread was started out of something that was said in a review. so maybe sometimes there is a bit more dialogue than just "thanks" in the review thread.

jack wrote:if people put half the effort into debating the songs of the week instead of debating the words of the day, i'd be a happy camper and never complain about the lack of reviews ever again.

not that i'm complaining....

and if the songs were half as interesting as debating the word of the day, i'd be a happy camper too.

this was just not a good week for songfight.

blue wrote:

jack wrote:if people put half the effort into debating the songs of the week instead of debating the words of the day, i'd be a happy camper and never complain about the lack of reviews ever again.

not that i'm complaining....

and if the songs were half as interesting as debating the word of the day, i'd be a happy camper too.

this was just not a good week for songfight.

and thats cool blue. i respect your opinion, even if you're a bit more emphatic sometimes than others.

you take the time to do reviews, and i think you understand why people appreciate them, for better or worse. you pull no punches and i respect that. i've been on the receiving end countless times and i don't hate you. i respect you. but no matter how much i respect you, it will always just be one opinion.

jack wrote:where did i say the whole site had to be about reviews?

you started the rant.

oh, and this thread was started out of something that was said in a review. so maybe sometimes there is a bit more dialogue than just "thanks" in the review thread.

Fair enough. Does it sometimes happen? Of course, as I already stated above, there have been great discussions that arise from review threads. But it doesn't happen often. It is neither mean nor rude to state this true fact. And now when it does happen, it's seen as a detriment to the review thread, instead of a supplement to it. It gets pulled out into its own thread, and then people notice that more effort goes into threads like this than goes into reviewing. I will stop now, because I do not want this thread to steer farther off course from the original discussion.

don't stop. this thread IS all about discussion, like you said.

i see nothing wrong with stuff like this, or moving bigger discussions out of review threads. i don't think it's too much to ask to have a thread for reviews, where people can read reviews. or post reviews. that will be about reviews. and if people don't want to read them, they don't have to.

i'm all for other discussions. there's a reason i have over a thousand posts and it's not because i've done a thousand reviews.

jack wrote: it will always just be one opinion.

well duh. i didn't think the gospel -vs- opinion debate was on the floor right now.

OMG I always thought that "rock and roll" referred to sitting in a rocking chair while rolling cigarettes! And so "rocking the fuck out" was obviously about rocking the chair REALLY HARD until it falls over! But now I know better thanks to this thread!

dude, jack, what up with unnecessarily derailing this thread by mentioning reviews?

Let me get this back on track:

There is a difference between rock as a personal feeling about a song and the Ideal of Rocking as championed by the likes of Lester Bangs. What I was talking about was Rocking, not rocking, and so far Boltoph and Deshead have attempted to rebut my statements by talking about rocking. What I'm saying is that there *is* an absolute ideal that defies reinterpretation or commercialization.

Dan-O: It's about the audience insofar as one gets on stage to be an entertainer and the feedback from the audience can boost one's energy level and potential to Rock. However, when one really gets in that zone, like with any other kind of zen/zone state (or Flow, if you ilke), everything else fades away, it's just about the Rocking.

Threads about reviews being overrated are so overrated. If there weren't reviews I wouldn't songfight. Specifically, if there weren't negative reviews I wouldn't songfight. Some also might argue that I don't songfight. But I will start again soon.

Squarepusher rocks the fuck out, and he's electronic jazz.

Future Boy wrote:However, when one really gets in that zone, like with any other kind of zen/zone state (or Flow, if you ilke), everything else fades away, it's just about the Rocking.

oooooooooooooohm.. well now we know why you chose the SP dude with the zen patch

Future Boy wrote:the Ideal of Rocking as championed by the likes of Lester Bangs.

Ok now we've separated the "rocking out" from a "genre" of "the Ideal of Rocking". I have to do my research cause I have no idea who Lester Bangs is but I'm thinking of Sharon Stone's ex-boyfriend in the movie Casino...and I didn't realize I was rebutting any of your statements...sorry, didn't mean to!
I'll have to check out this Lester Bangs guy. What I can say is that the "Rock" is definitely evolving. So we might direct this towards the definition of "what really rocks" in the year 2005. Otherwise we'll be all over the map... but somehow I think this issue will always be all over the map...
and I have to say how much I love the use of that word "championed" that rocks.

Future Boy wrote:Dan-O: It's about the audience insofar as one gets on stage to be an entertainer and the feedback from the audience can boost one's energy level and potential to Rock. However, when one really gets in that zone, like with any other kind of zen/zone state (or Flow, if you ilke), everything else fades away, it's just about the Rocking.

I don't want to get into a big thing, cause I agree with you on the Zen thing, but I still think your statements are contradictory. You started off by saying how you, as an audience member, don't want to watch a bunch of musicians just standing around, that you're not getting your money's worth from that. Then you say that the audience plays a part, but not that big of one.

For me, the audience plays a huge part. The more I RTFO the more energy they give back to me in applause. The more energy I recieve the harder I play, which in turn, if I'm on, gives them more to become excited about. This can grow exponentially, in theory anyhow. It's a symbiotic realtionship.

You can also receive that same type of energy from you bandmates, which makes your Zen point completely valid. A good drummer can get my energy level up when they really attack the drums, a keyboardist or any other part of the band when they really feel a solo or play their part with more energy or conviction as Leaf said.

For me a good trio can really RTFO. I'm always amazed at how much sound a good trio can produce. Just the bare essentials, bass, drums and guitar, like a good rockabilly band. That really does it for me. The Stray Cats played with a ton of energy and live, they definitely RTFO.

How is audience participation at all mutually-exclusive with it being the band's responsibility to instigate the fucking out of the rock?

fluffy wrote:How is audience participation at all mutually-exclusive with it being the band's responsibility to instigate the fucking out of the rock?

Well I don't recall saying that, but since you mentioned it, by being there. Whether they bought a ticket or payed a cover charge, or whatever they did to get to the show, by being there they have as much a responsibility to bring something to the table as the band. If they wanted to sit on their hands or be a couch potato, they should have stayed at fucking home. Don't bring your sorry, sour, non-participatory ass to my show, stay at home with gramma and play scrabble or something.

That doesn't absolve the band to kick it into high gear right from the outset without the audience making a peep by any means. However, most concerts I've been to have some sort of energy level going before the band ever sets foot on stage. The band definitely has got to bring the energy with or without the audience, but for me, and maybe it's only me, if I'm RTFO I want them to respond. Otherwise get the fuck out, go the fuck home, and I'll continue to try to RTFO with or without them.