The Song Fight Bulletin Board

I scored the songs using the scoring scheme and got:


GLENN CASE 8.3
TOMORROW 7.5
HOBLIT 6.7
ADD 5.0

Actually - I scored them with my girlfriend's daughter's boyfriend. He kept saying: "can we play that Glenn Case song again.... that's awesome...has that guy got any other songs to listen to?"

Yeah...I can probably find you one or two...

You have a new fan in Toowoomba Glenn!

Congratulations on reaching the halfway mark! I’m really enjoying these songs. Keep it up!

ADD - Maybe I’m just an Add fanboy (or girl!), but I’ve really loved these last two songs. I think Mo may be on to something and that some additional colours would benefit the arrangement, especially in (or following) the instrumental section in the middle. But I feel like that’s nitpicking. The lyrics have the right amount of allegory for me and hook is quite clever. The last line is perfect.

Caravan Ray - This is your best song of the competition so far, in my opinion. The groove created by the interplay of bongos and guitar is very satisfying and the vocal melody (of the first verse especially) has a circus music quality that fits the theme well. It’s like a lost Kinks song and that’s a good thing.

Glenn Case - First of all, congratulations on the technical achievement of using completely unqualified people for all the instruments. Just remember, that’s only 1/6 of the scoring! Because unfortunately, the quality of the performance is definitely impacted by that choice. As Mo noted (I don’t even know why I’m writing reviews—he already said it all!), the groove really suffers here. I understand it’s intentional, but I found the fluctuation between straight time and shuffle to be disorienting. Good lyrics.

Hoblit - This time around, Hoblit channels his best Bob Mould—this definitely could have been an album track on a Hüsker Dü or Sugar album! I dig the vocal performance—it’s passionate and powerful (just like Bob Mould!). Unfortunately, the lyrics didn’t do too much for me—perhaps they’re a little too literal for my tastes. An okay song in my book.

Tomorrow - I appreciate your approach to the challenge. It’s a clever take and the samples are an effective part of the arrangement. The performances are solid all around, so congrats on that. Sadly, I did not think the lyrics were very compelling. But the thing that really killed the song for me was the ending. I tried not to let it color too many of my ratings, but I felt everything about the ending was inferior to the rest of the song—the production and the performance, especially. I don’t think you need the end for this song to work, but if you do, I think you should clean it up.

yeah the ending was the part of the mix I fucked up, so it's helpful to me that someone did actually notice, thx for the notes!

Add - I like the organ a lot and the intro was enticing. The fact that it isn’t grabbing me as much as I want it to is likely a combination of the melody, vocal delivery and maybe a touch of ear fatigue from a mix that isn't quite as clear as some of the other entries. That being said, there is still quite a bit to like here. I'm not quite sure where this one will fall.
Challenge: Great idea. It would have been more impressive if the kid could've done a more complete lyric. (Or you incorporated some random unrelated discussion.) As is, it's more of an inspired bit of writing than a full on part by an "unqualified" participant.

Caravan Ray - There is a cool rhythm going on between the drums and the guitars that I feel is working very well. I like this arrangement and the vocal delivery quite a bit. The mix seems mostly clear. I’m not sure if the laughing clowns background is absolutely necessary or not, but that bit of knowledge makes the lyric work better for me.
Challenge: Lyrically, obviously. But is it enough? Am I missing something else?

Glenn Case - This feels a bit plodding in tempo/feel but not to a fault. After reading the challenge note in the lyric thread, I'm only assuming the tempo was, at least in part, chosen for performance reasons. The sparse guitar line works very well. *I went on about the snare here but it doesn’t really matter.* Despite my opening comment, this slow burn is a grower. The mix is pretty good (as usual.) The doubled/layered vocal works very well.
Challenge: A whole band of "unqualified" performers? Check.

Hoblit - The mix seems a bit unbalanced. The vox stands out quite a bit (which is quite likely purposeful.) But overall it's clear enough and doesn't sound bad. I like the chorus but it maybe doesn't hold up as well as I'd like on repeated listens. I’m not sure how well I like this one, honestly.
Challenge: Lyrically and with the intro performance. It would be more impressive if Glenn hadn't knocked it out of the park with a similar tact.

Tomorrow - I've been consistently drawn to your songs as the better of the rounds. I'm unsure if there is genre bias or some other chord you're striking. I'm not hearing blatantly bad mixing. I like the guitar solo tone and playing.
Challenge: Samples of 'unqualified' performances. Interesting but perhaps not highlighted as much as I would have liked. Still, I think the result is excellent.
Philosophical question: If you change ‘unqualified’ performances into nicely used samples then how much are you using ‘unqualified’ performances in your song?

Mr. Brown wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 5:54 am

Philosophical question: If you change ‘unqualified’ performances into nicely used samples then how much are you using ‘unqualified’ performances in your song?

The challenge was "Use 'unqualified' people," not "Use 'unqualified' performances." Since you are being philosophical, I'm going to split hairs.

frankie big face wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 6:00 am

Mr. Brown wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 5:54 am

Philosophical question: If you change ‘unqualified’ performances into nicely used samples then how much are you using ‘unqualified’ performances in your song?

The challenge was "Use 'unqualified' people," not "Use 'unqualified' performances." Since you are being philosophical, I'm going to split hairs.

Yes. The challenge said nothing about whether the unqualified people had to be associated with the song. It just says “use unqualified people”. That is why my possum roofing man story is valid.

mo wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 25, 2024 12:13 pm

quick hitz:



Caravan Ray: I think that the lyric could use a little more crafting--YMMV of course, but I think the question of why the narrator can't give the addressee the love they want, like what makes them "unqualified" could use a little more detail, just a hint or so. My take is that would add a lot of depth. Right now the narrator feels to me like they don't mean it and it's just a way to get out of a situation, which, ok fair enough. I mean what else could you expect from a reggae song, really

Yes. I agree. The lyrics are all over the shop. That’s what happens when we write quickly to deadlines! The final idea was that the singer was confessing to being called out as being as unemotional as a lifeless clown head. It was rushed and I didn’t get there. still - I like how this song turned out. And am pleased the judges likewise saw something. I think I will re-record this with better thought out lyrics.

Oh yeah I do quite like the song and I have liked actually all your other entries. I also thought the laughing clowns imagery was very effective, even not having grown up with it. Congrats on the win!

frankie big face wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 6:00 am

Mr. Brown wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 5:54 am

Philosophical question: If you change ‘unqualified’ performances into nicely used samples then how much are you using ‘unqualified’ performances in your song?

The challenge was "Use 'unqualified' people," not "Use 'unqualified' performances." Since you are being philosophical, I'm going to split hairs.

I feel like there's too much assumption about say, my and Evermind's qualifications to be doing anything here. But also I thought, even though scoring is all over, that it was pretty clear that the narrator is saying he's not qualified to be the "man of your dreams" in the eyes of his beholder, if you will.

I can also make up some other stuff probably

mo wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 11:49 am

I can also make up some other stuff probably

Haha. Not necessary. I thought your take on the challenge was creative and appropriate.

Mr. Brown wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 27, 2024 5:54 am

Philosophical question: If you change ‘unqualified’ performances into nicely used samples then how much are you using ‘unqualified’ performances in your song?

Well I think the question is really: How much of the performance is actually the result of production or synthesis?

The first step was to identify clean and usable parts of the performances, and then extract the vocals using a stem splitter.

The organ-like synths in the choruses were produced by extracting single notes from the original vocal tracks, splitting the sample into A and B sections, then swapping their positions and crossfading (B->A), so that looping them is clean. The samples were then loaded into a pitch-shifting sampler with no additional processing. These are arguably the most processed due to the crossfading, looping, and pitch shifting, but nothing that entirely transforms the sound.

The "oh oh ohs" were pitch shifted to change the melody and were split and nudged to adjust the timing to the tempo and groove of the song.

The long "ah" in the solo section was time-stretched. No other processing.

The ending clip was time- and pitch-shifted to simulate a vinyl spin-down effect. No other processing.

No synthesized parts were added or mixed, and pitch stabilization was not applied to any parts, only pitch shifting.

Whether these things make the samples my work or the original vocalist's is up to interpretation.

Evermind wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 29, 2024 12:33 pm

Whether these things make the samples my work or the original vocalist's is up to interpretation.

This distinction should be irrelevant, since your challenge was to "use unqualified people," not "present something that sounds bad to the judges." If that's the basis you started with, but then turned it into something creative and listenable, then (at least) there's a judge here who appreciated that effort.

Mr. Pink wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 29, 2024 1:42 pm

Evermind wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 29, 2024 12:33 pm

Whether these things make the samples my work or the original vocalist's is up to interpretation.

This distinction should be irrelevant, since your challenge was to "use unqualified people," not "present something that sounds bad to the judges." If that's the basis you started with, but then turned it into something creative and listenable, then (at least) there's a judge here who appreciated that effort.

Hear, hear! The whole point of these "challenges" is to spur creativity. Everyone in the competition successfully completed the challenge in the sense that there was some creative aspect to each song that was obviously directly related to the phrase "Use 'unqualified' people." In my opinion, some people were more creative than others in their usage and that's why we have "good, okay, and bad."

This is the perfect example of how I believe the scoring system is preventing potentially bad things from happening. Because the challenge is only 1/6 of the overall score, no single judge can tank an artist's entry (through ranking) for not meeting the challenge, as we have occasionally seen in other Songfight-related competitions. —*feeling validated*