John (Don't know his last name) at OK Cupid said I could put lyrics up here in case someone wanted to try to come up with music to go with them.

I guess this is being offered as an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license. I don't want my lyrics altered, unless I am consulted and agree to any changes.

I had an idea for a tune that I could share if someone wanted to play with that as well, but the tune would need a bit of work to be interesting.

Best Wishes,
Sheryl

<b>Online Dating</b>

Seeking a suitor at your computer,
One girl is smarter, another is cuter.
One guy is kinder, another is wiser;
One's a big spender, another's a miser.
One is a thinker, another's a looker.
One girl's so sleazy you'd think she's a hooker.

Chorus:
It’s online dating,
The newest form of mating.
The easy way to find a spouse.
Don’t even need to leave your house.
Just type a bit and click your mouse
To find the perfect match.

So many choices and so many faces.
So many people in so many places,
(Yet) John's too persistent, Bob's inconsistent,
Dave doesn't shave, and Danny's too distant.
(And) then there is Eric who's way too generic.
(Still), anyone's better than Daniel or Derek.

Chorus

So you dissect, reduce and compare them,
Rip them to shreds, torment them and scare them,
Rank them and rate them, tease them and bait them,
Drag them through hell, then don't even date them.
(From) Gary to Larry, from Barbara to Alice,
So many people, you start to grow callous.

Chorus

Some people like you, some people hate you
Some are just happy if they can debate you.
Some will affect you; some will reject you;
Misplace a comma and some will correct you.
(So) when they're annoying, coy, or flirtatious,
Just bite your tongue and try to be gracious.

Chorus--Twice

©2007 Sheryl Zettner

Hi, Sheryl!

This is John, aka Talysman the Ur-Beatle. Welcome to the Cartel!

I'm sure someone will get around to these lyrics soon. There's kind of an enormous backlog right now, but I think this song would work well with another song idea I had, "57-Way Love Triangle" (which isn't written yet, but it will be, eventually.)

57-Way Love Triangle. Hahaha :-) That sounds like a fun idea for a song!

Did you see calamarichris's post on the need for calling two way relationships "monoamorous" relationships? I thought that was great.

I guess with 57 participants, it would technically be something like pentheptamory. Hahaha :-)

There would be lots of good rhymes for that as well. Let me know how it goes. :-)

Did you have an idea for a melody, or at least a rhythmic pattern? Do you have a decent voice and are you willing to record it? (Don't worry about carrying a tune - we have the technology to fix that.)

Hello Major Zed,

Well, I had an idea for a melody, but it's kind of lame. (I think the chorus sounds too much like the main part of the song. Music writing isn't my strong point.) Maybe someone could re-work it if they don't have their own ideas?

My singing voice sounds good with a little reverb anyhow. X-) I'd have to get my audio software reinstalled on my new computer if I were to record anything though. I'll work on that tonight. Thanks for looking at it.

Sheryl

Reverb we got!

Maybe if you put together a short audio or MIDI file (one verse, one chorus) we could work on the melody first.

I use Sonar or Acid, but that doesn't really matter because we can always share WAV or MIDI files no matter what you use. Since a stereo WAV file is 10MB per minute, and my ISP isn't real generous, I prefer files-upload.com as a (big) file transfer medium. Example: http://files-upload.com/files/222706/SchrodingersCarRSV.mp3

Also, if you enter your name followed immediately by ## and a password string, your name will show on the post as followed by !! and a generated id string. Once you've established your id, it will be harder for someone else to spoof your posts.

OK, cool. :-) I'll try to put something together ASAP. I just switched computers recently, and I am just now getting the software installed on to this new one, so I'm not sure whether that will go smoothly or cause me some irritation. We'll see. Might be easier, as I will have more USB ports to play with this time. :-)

PS BTW, where exactly would I be uploading files to? Hahaha

Use your own ISP or get a free account at files-upload.com (or some other such solution like yousendit.com) and then let us know the URLs of the files. That's for transient stuff. I tend to put finished product on music.download.com etc.

Finished stuff can also be linked here from a transient url and I'll grab it and upload it to interrobangcartel.com as soon as I can.

OK, this is just to give you a VERY, VERY ROUGH idea of a potential tune. To me at least the tune is CRAP at this point and doesn't even quite fit the rhythm of the lyrics. :-(

I had a real hard time singing it because I didn't entirely have a firm idea on how the melody should go to start with, which made trying to repeat it for 4 stanzas a total bitcher. Hahahaha Plus, I think it's in the wrong key for my voice, and I accidentally switched keys in the second stanza. Oops!

IN OTHER WORDS, THIS SOUNDS LIKE SHIT. Hahahaha But at least it should give you a vague idea of what I thought could be done with it.

And as long as I am giving a long list of excuses, I don't sing acappella worth 2 cents. :-( Ouch

http://files-upload.com/files/457474/onlinedating.WAV

Honestly, I can sing much better with background music. It helps me keep in tune and to a consistent beat. And I sing much better when I actually have a firm tune in my head, as opposed to a vague idea for one.

Thanks,

Sheryl

OTOH, it might just be a bad tune for my voice. In fact, in some places the tune even fit the words quite right.

PS I just offered this melody to stimulate ideas. I don't actually like it (at least not the way it is.) I'm just more of a lyric person.

Whoa... this is going a bit fast for me... Don't be surprised if it takes some days before I can get you some feedback on this. But be assured, I am interested.

Hahahaha. It was going a bit fast for me too. :-D I was just trying to keep up with your suggestions.

Maybe at some point I will re-record it so it doesn't sound so lousy (or try to figure out the music in midi or something.)

Thanks for showing interest in the project. If nothing else, it was good to get motivated to reinstall my music software on my new, used computer, which I had been avoiding doing because my old computer had gotten so cranky (flaky monitor on an iMac.)

So what are you running for s/w?

Did you have a "vibe" in mind for this? The acapella suggests the soft end of the spectrum (Joan Baez on acoustic guitar; Nora Jones behind a huge piano) but the subject matter cries out for something more techno. I'm hearing a dance beat with modern technopop backing (Kat DeLuna's Whine Up or Run The Show?).

I like the first 7 bars of the melody; bar 8 "another's a miser" I'm not sure about. Bars 9-11 are ok and bar 12 has the same problem as 8; they both go down and drain energy from the song. Maybe if instead of AABBCCDE it went AAAABBCC. I dunno. Still pasting it into SONAR to really see what's going on.

Think about the vibe.

I'm using Metro on an old iMac in OSX (10.4.9.)

Dance beats are always good. :-) I was trying to make it energetic, but maybe I didn't pull that off. lol

The problem I had with thinking up an energetic melody to this was that the 6 line stanza is a bit long. That slows it down some.

That's why I was trying whip it up with a faster rhythm that unfortunately clashes somewhat with the natural rhythm of the words in some places.

But if you are hearing a dance beat, maybe you have a better idea of how to pull off what I wanted than I could figure out. Because I do definitely want it to have as much energy as possible. :-D

Metro, huh? Interesting. Originally from Cakewalk. I wonder if it's compatible with Cakewalk's other formats, like the one I'm using (*.cwp).... At least we can share WAV and MIDI files.

Right about the 6 lines, but I think we can make it work. OK, so we go in an energetic dance direction....

Yeah, that's the one. :-) It's Sagantech these days, although I started using it when it was still Cakewalk. But if I recall correctly, Cakewalk stopped supporting Mac software.

I don't think Metro does .cwp files these days, but I could be wrong. It saves its projects with an .ovv extension though.

Here's (http://download.yousendit.com/319808C4425D92FA) a ZIP file containing an MP3 of the first 4 lines that suggests how this might sound; it's there mostly to show how to keep to the beat. There is also the beginning of a MIDI version of the melody. I'm probably not going to be able to do much on this in the next few weeks. If you fill out the MIDI (only really need one verse, one chorus) maybe we can bounce ideas back and forth.

Awesome, thanks!!!! I'll work on it on this end. Much appreciated. :-D

Random thoughts. (1) How to let the lyrics breathe. Here's a demo with two ways: http://download.yousendit.com/B579C3407893562D
I suppose both could be used in the song, using one as a changeup to relieve boredom. And/or alternate with the "breathless" style and/or save that style for the chorus and/or make the chorus or part of it breathe even more... Lots of options. (2) The standard 12-bar blues chord progression with turnaround (I-I-I-I, IV-IV-I-I, V-IV-I-V) can be adapted here by mapping the bars to the two halves of each of the six lines in the verses. Then do something else (consistent) in the chorus. That's all for now....

Hey, thanks for the file! I'll take a listen this evening. :-)

I need to get to work on that midi. Got distracted last night. (It's hard to have my mic working properly and not want to play with it--hahahaha) Oops! Thanks again! :-D

It occurred to me that IBC is supposed to be a punk rock band. That inspired this iteration: http://download.yousendit.com/A6A9A69657E3C76C

However, the vocals aren't really right here; they should be about twice as fast! If you went this route, then maybe it would be so breathless that the "energy drain" I complained about in >>15 would be a welcome relief....

>>24 Punk is but one of the flavors!

Let me know if I can add to this. I am always happy to put in some guitar tracks as needed.

Thanks! I'm liking the punk idea the more I think about it, and it would be great to track you on some punk riffs when the time comes.

Thanks for the files. I hadn't gotten much done the last few days because I'm helping my folks get ready to take a trip to Scotland/Ireland, so things are a bit chaotic. But I am going to get on it shortly. :-)

In terms of punk, I kind of like the kind of punk that's closely akin to new wave. Not really sure what all the distinctions are there.

I personally liked the first half of the breathe demo one better, but maybe it's the drum beat I am partial to. But pretty darned cool. :-)

Also like the echo-ish affect of that one. Pretty darned cool. Makes the singing sound much better than it was too. :-D

Hey Major Zed,

This is off topic, but you wouldn't consider mixing a song that I already recorded, would you? For ages I have had a song file with the harmony track, but when I tried to mix them initially something went haywire. The timing on the words didn't match with the music, even though I recorded the singing listening to the music.

I think my computer didn't convert the file right off the CD or something, but you seem to be able to do awesome things with straight audio that I can't do.

My friend who is getting a PhD in music helped me with the harmony, so it's super cool (I think), but the song remains unmixed. It's not remotely punk though.

It's not a big deal if you don't want to, but the way you made my voice sound cool in those files was really impressive and something I couldn't do.

Actually I just tried to remix this other song myself, and it sounds much better than last time. So I don't know if I need help on it or not. I need to remix with a better audio track, but at least I think it is in time this time round:
http://ia341209.us.archive.org/3/items/PatriotCall-mixOne/patriotver1.mp3

Timing sounded good on "Patriot". You must have done something right this time. But in general, yes, I would consider producing tracks you (or other people) recorded, as long as (1) I get "produced by" credit wherever you end up putting the song and (2) you're not in a hurry to get the final product.

I thought punk made sense for O.L.D. because it's usually fast enough to carry the 6-line verses. Wouldn't have to be hardcore punk; could be power-pop or just about anything, really, as long as it had a fast beat and the words went by fast. Even rap or hip-hop could work. (I'm pretty eclectic with popular music genres in my own songs.) Eventually, it would be good if you could name a song (or two) that kinda sorta sounds like what you would like your song to sound like...

p.s. I deleted the same post as #32 because I left the name field blank and it came out "George Clossisadge" (or something like that)!

Cool on the mixing bit. :-)

A speedy beat's good, but not so fast that people can't follow the words. Otherwise there's no point (for me at least.) Also I wouldn't break up the rhyme too much either because it's there to add energy.

If it were rap or hip hop, someone else will have to sing it because I would probably spew midstream. Hahaha Hey, I'm from the 80s generation! Hahaha

So what are some examples of power-pop, so I can see what you have in mind there? Is there something I could listen to on youtube or something? Sorry, I'm not always great with music labels. :-/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_pop

In the spirit of Green Day.

Just Drums and Guitar: (verse, short bridge, chorus) X 2

http://www.spaceroom.org/music/Interrobang/OD_DrumsGuitar.mp3

I won't feel bad if this is nothing like what you are looking for.

Yes, power pop! Especially at the higher BPMs. This does the first couplet at the original 105bpm, then 120, 135, and 150. I think something a tad over 135 is about right:
http://download.yousendit.com/DAE1261D4E1543DC
(a.k.a. OLD_guitar_demo_105_120_135_150bpm.mp3)

New version at 135 bpm, same link >>37

Feels pretty good at that speed.

I like that example, Charlie. Thanks! Oh yeah, that's way cooler. Kind of like the halfway point between Rush and Blondie. :-)

Just listening to that second file. Oh, that sounds really cool!!!! Is it just me? I think that's seriously awesome.

Man, yall can do some amazing things with midi!!!!! That's pretty damned impressive!!! :-) I like.

My main computer died today when all the applications started at once. I'm going to have to sort that out. Talysman gave me some ideas to try out, but my apologies for taking so long to reply.

Also the parents just took off for their trip to Scotland and Ireland today.

I like that power pop sound on this. Way cool!!!

Oops, looks like I forgot to post my name in the blank. I guess I am Wesley Pepperway today since it said I need a password to delete the comment. Hahahaha

It's always good to have an alias. :-D

PS You guys turned a really lousy day into a great one. I'm still in awe after hearing that file.

Oh, and just as vote, I liked it at 120 bps the best, although the 135 wasn't too bad.

So far, I don't think there's any MIDI! Correct me if I'm wrong, but ?Charlie did drum loops and live guitar. And I did some basic chopping & squeezing on audio files.

Speaking of MIDI, though, I guess we'll have to wait for that MIDI transcription, until your computer is back up. :-(

>>44 You are correct. Live guitar and drum loops.
These guitar patterns are pretty simple. It would not be difficult to turn them into a couple of loop audio files as well.
Then whoever uses them can play with the speed a bit. (I assume that MZ did that for the multi speed sample file.)

Ohhh OK, I thought you had based it on that midi file you started for me. I was wondering how you managed to get it to the timing of my singing. However it was done, it sounded cool. :-)

If worse comes to worst, I can start over on the midi on my OS9 computer. I have an older version of Metro on it as well. It just doesn't work as well. Assuming that file you uploaded, is still downloadable.

Sorry for the delay! :-(

No, that's expired. See if this works...
http://home.comcast.net/~majorzed/OLD01.mid

Thanks!!! Got it! It's loaded on my OS9 machine and is working (knock on wood.) I'll do it today. Thanks again. Sorry for the hassle.

I'm still working on this.

I'm not really good with notation, so some of this is turning out harder than I anticipated because of the timing. But I am working on it.

Given up on fixing my main computer for now, but the notation seems to be working fine in my OS9 version of Metro. (That won't work for audio though, but hopefully I'll have thinkgs sorted out before that is an issue.)

Take your time. Nobody's getting paid for this. Again, all you really need to do for starters is one verse and one chorus. Then we can play what-if with it. Only much later should we consider variations across the song, breaks, etc.

OK, will do.

Gee, Wes, that's nice of you to help out Sheryl ;-)

We'd get more done if Wesley wasn't so damn hot!

I'm starting on this as my next project now. If I don't get any more vocal input, I'm going to "operate" on Sheryl's contribution, aiming at a 135 BPM powerpop/punk format. I don't intend to change the lyrics, nor the melody of the verses (just a bit of the rhythmic phrasing0, but I'm thinking the chorus melody should change drastically. I'll post a MIDI of what I have in mind eventually. I could morph Sheryl's VOCAL into a new chorus, but maybe it would be better to start with a new recording of the chorus if possible :-). Charlie, if you could eventually send me your guitar work without the drums, that would be helpful, too - no rush, though.

I glanced at this a few days ago but I missed the last part asking for the guitar stuff. Sorry about that. I will put that together this evening.

Any idea how to get Sheryl's attention?

?!C - thanks for the guitar stuff. I'm distracted by the RW now, but will probably be looking for more guitar eventually.

I told Sheryl what's up, not sure why she isn't posting here. As far as vocals go, she has a computer problem at the moment and is unable to record. This may change by the time you have a MIDI, though.

I'll remind her when the MIDI's up, in case she forgets to check here.

Hi, Sorry I have been away. As talysman says, I've been having computer problems. My apologies for just disappearing.

Yes, the music I had done sucks, and I couldn't figure the notes out properly in midi either. There was something about the timing I had mind that just wasn't converting over right.

I'm sure whatever you have in mind would be an improvement.

Thanks for everything!!!

Sheryl

I did some nip & tuck with the first verse and chorus; I'm going to hit it with Melodyne soon and use that to come up with a MIDI version to analyze the possible chord sequences. Watch this space....

OK, there's some stuff in http://boxstr.com/browse/majorzed/534949_PxFmM. The _MD1 files are after pitch tweaking with Melodyne. The _vocalonly WAVs are just the vocals whereas the _fullmix MP3 has the drums and guitars, too. After pitch tweaking, I believe the intended sung melody is as follows. Let's talk about what it should be.

"Online Dating" - lyrics and melody by Sheryl Zettner

Seeking a suitor at your computer,
E E D D C# E E D D C#

One girl is smarter, another is cuter.
F F E E D E F F E E D

One guy is kinder, another is wi-iser;
G# G# F D# D# F G# G# F F D# D#

One's a big spender, ano-other's a mi-iser.
C C C# E E E E C# C# C# C# A# A#

One is a thinker, ano-other's a loo-ooker.
F# F# G# A A A A G# G# F# F# E E

One girl's so sleazy you'd thi-ink she's a hoo-ooker.
C# C# D E E E E D D C# C# B B

[Chorus:]
It’s online dating,
C# C# D# E E

The newest form of mating.
D# C# B B G C# B

The easy way to find a spouse.
G# A G# F# G# A G# F#

Don’t even need to leave your house.
G# A G# F# G# A G# F#

Just type a bit and click your mouse
A A A# C# D# E D# C#

To find the perfect match.
G# G# G E D# E

Quick update - It's looking like the right thing to do harmonically (i.e. minimum changes necessary) is to set it up in the key of A Major, with the verses doing the following chord progression:
C#m DM AM C#m7 F#m7 C#m7
III IV I III7 VI7 III7
This means more pitch-tweaking is in order on lines 2 (a bit), 3 (everything up one semitone) and 4 (quite a bit).
Charlie, can you tell me what you were playing in the guitar comp? The next rendering will probably have a MIDI organ background to make the chords stand out.

Here is the guitar progression.

Verse using Barre Chords
A G C D (with a brief slide to C)
A G C F
1 repeat

Bridge
F F

Chorus
E G A D (with slide to C)
E D A (with bends on low G) gives the effect of A G A G
1 repeat

Thanks!

OOOOKay! It's better to hit piano keys than computer keys when working out musical ideas. Here's my recommendation for melody and harmony:

http://boxstr.com/files/1524495_nnzta/OLD02midi.mid

This covers the first verse and chorus; the rest would basically follow this pattern, possibly with some changeups here and there. If you play it in Winamp, you should be able to see the lyrics along with it. There are a few seconds of silence up front (for no good reason) and in between the verse and chorus and inside the chorus (for guitar fills). The bass track plays the root of the recommended chord. The verse is in AMajor, the chorus is in EMajor. The tempo is 135BPM.

Sheryl: the range is an octave and a half, from Eb3 to A4, but I think that's what you sang before. Would you be interested in giving us a new recording?

Charlie: I haven't thought about the guitar parts yet - I like what you did already, but need to figure out how it fits in harmonically. So not asking for a new track yet...

Anyone: comments welcome.

Here's another take on online dating I wrote last month...

MSN Facebook Drama Queen

Websites are your only friends
Chatlines help you make amends
While strangers see your perfect smile
from profile images you compile

Every second of every hour
your inbox is your only power
when empty online off you go
in search of others to devour

Avoiding what is face to face
You make your friends in cyberspace
Promoting sexuality
Through virtual reality

Messenger texting narcissist, you run like child
when things aren't best
your online friends are just a lie
They don't care if you live or die

Perfect love when you control
a person using digital
most passive and most perfect rape
to make you whole, to make you great

emoticons, a smiley face
xo means in that special place
silence means that you're too lame
to meet and (talk) away the pain

Your facebook love is just a myth
Which brags about the one you're with
As status soon to be updated...
“Relationship is complicated”

©2007 Chris Michael

At any cost
Using any means
MSN facebook drama queen

Hey, Chris...

If you want to add a new song to the Interröbang Cartel repertoire, it's better to start a new thread. This is just until the wiki comes back up, so we can keep track of open projects and transfer the info to its own page, when we're able.

Also, what is the licensing status of your song? Your name looks new, so I'm not sure how much you know about the Cartel. Are you contributing lyrics under the Creative Commons license, as described here:

http://www.interrobangcartel.com/copy.cgi

Are you an ARK regular under a different name? Just curious.

Hey, thanks for re-writing the music! I'm going to take my computer to get fixed soon.

I can't record anything till I get it fixed, but I will be doing so shortly. But yes, I'd love to record it once I can. I can't even get the midi to work right on this stupid computer I've been borrowing.

Sheryl - while you're waiting for MIDI capability, why don't you download this to your iPod:
http://boxstr.com/files/1634389_wyteo/OLD_fullmix_v1c1_demo_MD2.mp3

Focus on the melody and harmony; this is not what the final Power Pop product is going to sound like in terms of tone.

?!Charlie - I still haven't figured out what to ask for in the guitar department. Maybe I should just trust you to look at the MIDI and comp something brilliant - that's worked in the past!

I am assuming the midi is from >>66.

I will take a look at it and see if I can get some ideas.

Yes. Thanks.

Sheryl - are you open to any mods to the lyrics?

I have a question about the notation in the MIDI file.
I notice that you I, II, VI, V.
Do these correspond to the scale modes?
I Ionian
II Dorian
IV Lydian
V Mixolydian

My theory is pretty weak so it may take some deciphering.

In the key of AMajor (verse), I=AMajor chord, II=Bminor chord, III=Cminor chord, IV=DMajor chord, V=E7, etc. In the key of EMajor (chorus) it's EMaj, Fmin, Gmin, AMaj, B7, etc. I'll put up a CWP file with more detail later tonight - I have an interesting idea for the transition between verse and chorus. However, with distorted guitar (and I do want distorted guitar!) you're probably better off sticking with power chords (tonic + 5th) anyway.

?!Charlie - this is (almost) what created the last mp3: http://boxstr.com/files/1666712_qjnbm/OLD03a.cwb It has the MIDI for the chords the organ is playing in the background. The new thing is the use of the F#minor at measure 16 - this is known as a pivot chord because it makes sense in both the AMaj and EMaj keys, so functions as a transition between them. Be patient; this sucker's 22 megabytes.

Hey, ?!Charlie - thanks for the new guitar track. We can really make this work. I'm beefing up the bass part next (up to now it's just a placeholder for the chords).

Sheryl - How's it coming? Think you might record the vocals again in the next few months? I asked about lyrics earlier because of one specific thing, so might as well spill it here.

"Seeking a SUITOR at your comPUTER" has this really neat internal rhyme that adds a lot to the song. "So many choices and so many faces" and "So you dissect, reduce and compare them" and "Some people like you, some people hate you" do not, and I think it would be great if they did.

Let's see... faces... faces... Would one of these work?
BASES
BRACES
CASES
CHASES
LACES
MESA'S
PLACES
RACES
SPACES
TRACES
VASES

OK, I cheated here. There's a cool rhyming dictionary freely available at http://www.analogx.com/contents/download/audio/rhyme.htm
(But don't use PLACES - that's the obvious one.)

I kind of like CHASES since it links to the whole pursuit of relationship theme.

Sorry for the delay, but I finally got my computer back and running. Yea!!!!!

The preferences on my audio program seemed to have gone haywire, but I should be able to record something soon. Let me just check out these files

From those words you listed, chases is the one that leaps out at me. Let me look back on the lyrics and see what I can figure out.

I'll get back to you as soon as I get my audio program back in shape.

Sorry it's taken so long to get my computer fixed. I feel like a major flake. :-/ I just didn't know how to fix it, and I don't have the money. But my last attempt seemed to have mostly preserved my data while fixing the problem. :-)

Smiles,

Sheryl

That's odd. I don't see my last comment I made yesterday. Anyway, I got my audio program working again, and my computer is back up. Now I just need to learn this new melody.

Hey, Major Zed,

Got a question. I was just listening to the midi trying to adjust my head to the minor changes. When I get to the second stanza, do I leave the same gap as you have at the beginning of the song? Or is that just for the intro?

Because it could just as easily be for some intermediary guitar, I suppose. And in fact, I made the mistake on one of my previous song attempts of not putting any breaks between a long stream of singing, and man was that hard to sing!!! Hahahaha

Once again, my apologies that computer was out of commission for so long. Fixing it just beat me so many times that I stopped trying for a while, but it seems to be its old self again. :-D

Smiles,

Sheryl

I've been trying to learn the melody from the midi. It's all cool, except in the 10th bar. I guess it's A# in your version, but I think it should end with an F. Is that ok. The other is confusing to sing. It just doesn't sound right to me. Thanks!

Here's an MP3 that I just threw together real quick to give you a rough idea of what it might sound like (and I included my changed note):

http://www.mailbigfile.com/d4f0106edf524d5edc3843d3b1c04afb/listFiles.php

Not sure how long that file will be retrievable at that site, but I can always send it again.

Whoa! I step away a couple days and 5 more posts! I just downloaded your MP3; will listen to it and go over your other points and get back to you. No apologies needed... glad you're back in operation!

Hi, Sheryl - thanks for dealing with the changes. My advice to you is to do it in whatever way is most comfortable and feels like the best for you. Putting in a gap or not doesn't matter on the production end - that's totally flexible. It's probably better for you to leave it in. Ditto for changing notes here and there (not too many!) - whatever sounds best to you.

In a more practical vein, please, please, please don't throw anything away. Record multiple takes. Do it however you feel more comfortable - do multiple takes of a stanza, or multiple takes of the whole song, whatever. (I generally do a couple of song runthroughs and then go back and redo selected portions, but that's me.) But send it ALL, every bit of it. Your raw vocal track will be pure gold when it comes to assembling the ultimate take. Even the worst-sounding error has potential for an interesting fill or backing, so DON'T THROW ANYTHING AWAY. Wav format is preferred, but if you must compress to MP3, can you use 320 kpbs?

I have to tell you, I was pretty impressed with the first a capella you did. There is something about the tone and emotion that came through there, a sense of yearning, that I hope comes through again. If it feels too rushed at 135 BPM, record it a bit slower, say 125 or even 120 - we can handle that in production, too. Picture yourself fronting a punk band really cranking it and sing out along with them.

Summary
(1) sing it the way you want to sing it, even slower if that feels right
(2) record multiple takes and send it all, every bit of it
(3) stand proud and sing it out! you're going to be a star!

So you dissect, reduce and compare them,
compare:
AWARE
BEAR
CARE
DARE
DECLARE
DESPAIR
FAIR
IMPAIR
PAIR
PARE
PREPARE
REPAIR
SCARE
SNARE
SPARE
STARE
THEIR
THERE
WEAR
WHERE

Some people like you, some people hate you
hate:
ADVOCATE
ANTICIPATE
APPRECIATE
CREATE
CULTIVATE
DATE
DECORATE
DEDICATE
DEFLATE
DISSIPATE
DOMINATE
DONATE
EDUCATE
ELEVATE
FASCINATE
GRATE
GREAT
IMITATE
INFLATE
LATE
LUBRICATE
MOTIVATE
OBFUSCATE
OPERATE
OVERSTATE
OVERWEIGHT
PENETRATE
PLACATE
POPULATE
RATE
SATURATE
SEDATE
SPECULATE
STATE
STRAIGHT
SUFFOCATE
TABULATE
UPDATE
VACATE
VALIDATE
VIBRATE
VIOLATE
WAIT
WEIGHT

A couple more things... First, you probably figured out you don't need to sing all occurrences of the chorus. But for the last chorus, give it a big Broadway finish. Maybe sing different notes, going up. Definitely hold that last word "match" for much longer than the regular choruses.

Second, here's what's important. (1) emotion and expression. (2) timing. (3) hitting the right notes. (3) is definitely a distant 3rd, and even 2 is not that important. (1) is the important one. Don't even worry about the others. Timing and pitch we can correct in the studio. Emotion and expression are still solely the province of the human heart.

Hi Major Zed,

OK, I'll record several times in wav format. I just didn't think the first time I recorded it would be worth anything other than making sure you liked the way it sounded, especially since I changed a note there.

In terms of maintaining the internal rhyme throughout the song, my thought would be that that MIGHT work IF it can be done with natural language all the way through. And if it doesn't become singsong.

I had a poem once where I tried to have internal rhyme every other stanza, and I never did like it because the rhyme didn't add that much extra energy. And yet, in order to maintain a 4 way rhyme pattern within the meter, things ended up sounding awkward and forced. Here, let me show you the pattern, so you can see what I mean:

"You're dangling lies before my eyes
Betraying all my trust
I can't disguise that doubts arise
To things which we've discussed.

You fear I'll know what you won't show
Manipulate your mind
Are you so slow to think I'd go
And stab you from behind"

So it had lots and lots of internal rhyme, but it ended up kind of strange in some parts, like that "you fear I'll know what you won't show" is pretty lame. In that sense, I think too much structure can detract if it's too difficult to maintain. We'll see. It might work. Wouldn't hurt to experiment

Anyway, I'll start practicing the song and recording some wav files (assuming I have wav.) The default on my program is aif.

Thanks!!!! :-)

PS In terms of the internal rhyme, I suppose it can be done. Here are some possibilities. Let me also ask around and see whether people think this is better:

So many faces and so many chases,
So many people in so many places....
---------------------------------------

So you compare them, torment them and scare them,
And though you don't like them, you don't even spare them...
-------------------------------------

Some people hate you while some try to mate you,
Some are just happy if they can debate you.

Was just thinking on that last stanza that it might be a bit repetitive to use the word "mate" since "mating" is in the chorus. Maybe instead:

Some people hate, some will sedate you,
Some are just happy if they can debate you.

PS Thanks for the kind words about my singing. :-)

I'm going to change "from Gary to Larry" to "from Bob to Rob" because there are two many syllables in the Gary to Larry. Works fine in a poem or even singin a cappella, but I can't even begin to squeeze that in to digitized music that keeps to time. Hahaha

Use your judgment on the lyrics - they're yours, after all - I was just making a suggestion. And I'm pretty sure I can handle AIF if that's an issue on your end.

I think your idea works actually. I was just a little concerned it might not because I have had problems from being overzealous with the rhyme in the past, but the changes you suggested actually made it easier to fit the rhythm in the tune.

Here's how I re-wrote it to fit the melody:

Online Dating

Seeking a suitor at your computer,
One girl is smarter, another is cuter.
One guy is kinder, another is wiser;
One's a big spender, another's a miser.
One is a thinker, another's a looker.
One girl's so sleazy you'd think she's a hooker.

Chorus:
It’s online dating,
The newest form of mating.
The easy way to find a spouse.
Don’t even need to leave your house.
Just type a bit and click your mouse
To find the perfect match.

So many faces, so many chases.
So many people in so many places,
Yet John's too persistent and Bob's inconsistent,
Dave doesn't shave, and then Danny's too distant.
And then there is Eric who's way too generic.
Still, anyone's better than Daniel or Derek.

Chorus

So you compare them, torment and scare them
And though you don’t like them, you don’t even spare them
You rank them and rate them and tease them and bait them,
Drag them through hell, then you don't even date them.
From Bob to Rob, or from Barbara to Alice,
So many people, you start to grow callous.

Chorus

Some prospects hate you, some will sedate you
Some are just happy if they can debate you.
Some will affect you while some will reject you;
Misplace a comma, and some will correct you.
When they're annoying, or coy and flirtatious,
Just bite your tongue and pretend to be gracious.

Chorus
------------------------------

I made a few other changes, like "people" became "prospects." "People" sounded too broad, but another possibility there might be "suitors."

Anyway I've been rehearsing on it off and on all day and will try to record some takes tomorrow. :-)

Sheryl

Me like-y

Wow. That made a huge difference.

Very cool. I think I understand the usefulness of an editor in the writing business now.

Yea! Glad y'all like it this way! :-)

I've been recording and re-recording this evening, but I'm not happy with any of my takes so far. :-( I think maybe I had the input volume too high on the first few, but I'm sending them on anyway (like you said.) But I KNOW I can do much better.

I sung really well in one of my first takes, but apparently my recording program either did not like me using Quicktime or my headphones simultaneously while recording, and it sounded really tinny.

So I plugged my headphones into one of my other computers and listened to the music that way. The only problem with that method is that it makes it almost impossible to start the midi file and the recording at the same time. I think you said it didn't matter too much if there's extra space though. I can always go back and try to crop it if it's a problem, but for now I am just sending some wav files, so that you can experiment with them (if you want to.)

Trying to upload to mail bigfile right now. Looks like the site I was using takes 46 minutes per wav file and only lets you upload one at a time, so maybe I should look into one of those you were using. I think you mentioned one earlier in the thread.

Anyway, these are purely the vocals (without the midi to make me sound better--hahaha.)

My biggest problem with listening to the midi to sing along with is that I can't always anticipate when the music is about to start up. One of my sicker computers has notation I could follow, but the monitor is screwed. I have a lot of sick computers. sigh

Anyway, will send some links with files shortly. :-) Thanks! And thanks again for waiting so long for me to get this junker of a computer working...or mostly working anyway hahaha. :-)

Sheryl

http://www.mailbigfile.com/2164df49273baf6580c53740e83cc274/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/6c2e1780ba8840a5617b339e5b124d87/listFiles.php

It says these stay up for 3 days.

Could you supress the upper frequencies some? Seems like there's an option in my sound software for something like that. It sounds to high pitched in some places. I think next time I record it, I'm going to try and subdue that aspect of my voice some. The lower pitches sound more natural, eh?

Here's another one. Now I am going to bed. Don't even ask what time it is here. lol

http://www.mailbigfile.com/0e81f66c7c9cee1ec85db31cb724a5b3/listFiles.php

In case I didn't mention it, I sure hate my voice without accompaniment. :-( Not that I suppose that that is actually relevant to getting a good sound file together, but I will keep at it till either I come up with a good wav file or my computer dies again (whichever comes first.) lol

Don't worry about vocal tone (as long as it's clean) - "We control the vertical, we control the horizontal..." I'm downloading them now; won't get to hear them until tonight. Keep those vocal chords healthy!

Well, like I said, I just sent these because you said to send all my takes. I wasn't happy with them. But I will get one I like eventually. :-)

Sheryl: if you want to do more takes, be my guest. This might help: http://boxstr.com/files/2076609_vjebz/OLD03midi.mid because (1) it has the note change you requested and (2) it has "clicks" to help you keep your timing in between the parts. Not that we really need more takes, but I sense your dissatisfaction :-) Let me suggest that next time, have fun with it... It's a funny song! Smile while you sing it! Picture yourself singing it to a bunch of preschoolers who are all giggling and waving their arms in time with the song - the old gray-haired music teacher is banging out the accompaniment on the scruffy upright piano in the corner (and taking nips out of the airline bottle when no one is looking) and at the end everyone cheers and digs into the ice cream. Don't worry about flubbing a word or a note or two or three - we have plenty of alternate takes now. Have some fun!

Thanks, Major Zed!

Here are some takes I did this evening before I read this latest comment. I don't think they are necessarily more expressive, but I felt I did a better job at hitting the right notes and timing my singing along with the midi in at least one of these takes (I think it was the 5th, but don't quote me.)

http://www.mailbigfile.com/c12bdfaeba1864d4749464e8b1c94d8d/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/491c19a841692f45ba01b6e653347865/listFiles.php

And here are two partial takes:

http://www.mailbigfile.com/939520b8de350f9ee088ffb5917a404a/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/4773b8ca7a21e8356e9050239e942fbb/listFiles.php

But thanks for the new midi.:-) Having some clicks could be useful because that really was a problem predicting exactly when the music was going to start up again. Appreciate that! :-)

You're right. I should try and be more expressive when I sing. I guess I am too self conscious about not sounding shrill.

I think my voice sounds better at a lower pitch. I think I will try shifting it down sound in my audio and see if that improves things.

Thanks Again!!!

Sheryl

No wait, it was Take 4 that I thought was best. It's still too high pitched, but I think I mostly kept within the time and to the notes.

But I think later today after I sleep I will try taking the notes down some and see what that does to the sound.

Just listing to the midi with the markers. That's much easier to come in on time. Thanks!!!! I'll try to re-record some take tonight. :-)

Just for phun, let's reveal the power of triple-tracking (takes 3, 4, and 5, with some effects)...
http://boxstr.com/files/2086293_mwzak/OLD_demo_080516.mp3
The bass goes Eric-generic at 0:12, but you get the idea.

Sheryl,
Just noticed in verse 3 the lyrics go
1) So you compare them, torment and scare them
2) And though you don’t like them, you don’t even spare them
3) You rank them and rate them and tease them and bait them,
4) Drag them through hell, then you don't even date them.

"You don't even..." occurs in 2 & 4, too close together I think. It works best in 4. Upon closer inspection, 2 doesn't quite make sense. If you don't like them, why would you care about sparing them? Lot's of "you" in there, too. How about
2) And if you don't like them, you don't have to spare them
3) Just rank them and rate them and tease them and bait them,

That is, if you're going to record more takes.... ;-)

And if you do, try saying 4 as "then ya don't even date them"

Peace
M*Z

>>108
That actually has a pretty good overall sound to it. Certainly not a finished piece but is going in a good direction.

Hi Major Zed,

Can't seem to get through to the boxstr.com site at the moment. I'll check back later for that.

Re: the meaning to "And though you don't like them, you don't even spare them."

That means that even though you are not interesting in people romantically, you are still dragging them through a courtship process unnecessarily, which you could in fact spare them from.

This happens when people either use the probability/fishing method of dating of chatting up everyone and then picking the most promising prospects that result. Or if not the probability method, then the jealousy method, where people chat up people they don't like in order to create a cult following from the opposite gender. In other words, they use people to make themselves look popular, so that the people they do like get competitive over them to win their prizes. And a lot of the song is about this insane sort of behavior, so I think it makes sense if you consider the context it's written in, even though I admit it is a little vague when isolated by itself.

I can see your point about changing the first "don't even" though to something else in order to avoid repetition.

I suppose I could change that to "you don't try to spare them." Just double checking that I haven't used "try to" anywhere close to that. Yeah, that would work. :-)

Thanks!! I was kind of lazy today and worked on something else, but I will do the re-records today and change that bit to avoid the repetition.

Smiles,

Sheryl

Although, it might be more clear if I sang, "and WHEN you don't like them, you don't try to spare them." Because obviously you like some of the people. Except I don't really like that. hahaha

How about, "And if you don't like them, you're not apt to spare them"?

That sort of gives it a double meaning that allows for your initial interpretation that one does not spare people they don't like them, but also still suggests that there are motivations for chatting up people who you don't actually have an active interest in and that maybe it's a bit brutal.

It could also be "when" instead of "if."

Ah... I reveal my inexperience with online dating. Suggest not using "apt" because it doesn't sound natural. "And [if/when] you don't like them, you won't even spare them"?

"won't even" doesn't sound much different from "don't even."

I'll ask my mom before I record anything new. She's always good for a second opinion. I don't think apt is too unnatural, although I agree that it's not as natural. There's still the "don't try to" option. Hahaha

Mom agrees about not using "don't even" twice, but she figures the "not apt to spare them" sounds natural to her. Let me record it that way a few times, and we can ask for others opinions.

I guess it could also be more normal here in Texas than in California as well. Maybe you are just not apt to say it there. ;-)

I think Zed's in New York or someplace east. But I rarely hear anyone say "apt" out here, except when I say it.

I like the powerpop direction this song is going. I listened to the triple-track demo and it sounded pretty good!

Hi There Talysman!

Well, I just recorded 3 takes with apt that I am uploading. I like the word apt, but I can always record another three with "don't try to" as well if you guys think it is too weird on the west coast. hahaha :-) I guess we are just apt to use the word more often down south. lol

The place markers/beats he added to the midi made it so much easier to record. I think it may have added some energy knowing when to start singing. :-)

Oh, the power pop sound is cool!! The link wasn't working when I tried last night. Neato! :-) Zed also doctored my voice up really well there, especially in some places. :-)

Very impressive sound engineering. :-D Wish I could do stuff like that with my sound software. I wonder if knowing what I was doing would make a difference. lol

PS That really is quite amazing. Keep listening to it. :-)

Asked my mom to listen and she said not to be offensive to me, but she heard my singing, and it wasn't my best. I don't sing high pitch as well. But that it was really impressive what he did there. :-)

OK, here's Take 7:

http://www.mailbigfile.com/f9ccaf36a19868d64ab3c2e023b2ee15/listFiles.php

I'll upload 6 and 8 tonight, but this was the best one from the batch with "apt" in them. I'll do some with "don't try to" tomorrow. :-)

OK, here's Take 6 and 8, and I will try recording them the other way later today (it's 3AM now):

http://www.mailbigfile.com/3fd081a4ebefa1eceb37ef97ce8dedc6/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/3da6d59d88025bac9978ee90fc30a95d/listFiles.php

Come to think of it, if Major Zed is in New York, I wonder if these are going to be up long enough. They supposedly keep them online for 3 days.

Maybe I should hold off sending anything else until I am sure someone is around to download them in California. Hahahaha

Thanks again for that beautiful mix, Zed!!! Absolutely amazing!

Really makes me anticipate hearing the rest of your mix. :-)

Sheryl

OK, I downloaded takes 7 and 8, and 6 is on the way. My day job (in Connecticut), however, is calling me. Will listen to the takes later and get back to you...

Oh, so you're not in California? Hahaha I was assuming you were in California like talysman. One should never assume anything. :-)

OK, well I'll also record some takes the other way and post them, but it sounds like there's no hurry then.

Considering what a brilliant job you did on that first bit and all the takes I have and am sending, it should be pretty darned cool!!!

Thanks so much!!!! I hope you are as tickled with this as I am because it really makes me smile to hear that MP3. :-)

Maybe I could just isolate some takes to the "so you compare them" stanza. Try out some different approaches and use the one that sounds the best.

That sounds like a good approach. No need to redo everything if you're getting happy with the rest. (p.s. "when/won't" has the Advantage of Alliteration.) If you're doing more takes, how about trying the chorus a little differently for the very end? Maybe "to / find / a / per / fect / maaaaatch" as quarter notes going up the scale with a whole note for "match". And yes, I was pleased with how good the last demo sounded.

OK, sounds like a plan! :-)

The latest takes are the strongest yet. I'm going to work on the other (instrumental) elements until you tell me there is no more vocal work coming from you.

Thanks. I didn't have a chance to work on it today, but I will definitely do so tomorrow (or rather later today since it's already morning.) Thanks!!

I can believe that the last were the best because knowing when the music was coming in really, really helped me. Many thanks again for adding that in.

I just recorded a few takes with "don't try to spare them," but I don't like the way it sounds. And I wasn't comfortable singing it that way. Whereas "apt to" sounds less common to you "if/when you don't like them, you don't/won't try to spare them" feels unnatural and ackward to me. I'll upload the takes, but I don't like them as much. That's just my opinion.

OK, here are the takes with "try to," which I don't like as much.

http://www.mailbigfile.com/696de4846acb72e3f66898c5afadea51/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/84e282fd2154771bc95f5882685b64cf/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/6ccc886d15378fe1a5495766b4a6f2b8/listFiles.php

Alliteration or not, I would never say, "and when you don't like them, you won't even spare them" in every day conversation, so I'm not recording that one. It's too weird.

I'm figuring out the notes on midi ending notewise that you mentioned, so I may just try and record it the way I think it should sound for what you were describing. Hopefully that will work.

Thanks!!! :-)

>>127 Well, it was worth a try.
>>128 Record it the way you think it should sound!

http://www.mailbigfile.com/f2ab4745e3ed552778cbe4310800079b/listFiles.php

OK, here's the ending the way I think you meant (3-4 takes in one file.) I extended the last note out even longer on the final take.

I never could get the notes on the staff in the midi to do this, and I was shifting them all over the place. lol Hopefully that's not because I am creating a new musical scale. Hahahaha :-)
00
Tried to keep to the time, but since there was no midi in the background, I would imagine one version will probably come closer than the others.

And obviously I can redo this again and again if what I sent doesn't work. Just let me know.

Smiles,

Sheryl

BTW, insofar as this was my first project with the cartel, I'm wondering what you guys normally do with your songs once they are completed. Or is that decided in the forum as well?

If the final mix sounds as cool as that demo MP3 you uploaded the other day, I would be crushed if there weren't some attempts to distribute the song far and wide. :-) OK, maybe I am getting of things, but it's just what you guys have done is so magical, and I am obviously partial to my lyrics as well, so I really want it to be heard. Hahaha

But it got me wondering what was normal for the group.

Typically people have made posts in Live Journal Interrobang Cartel area. I often do the same in my personal journal as well. Depending on the relavance I also sometimes post in alt.religion.kibology newsfroup but that is typically when a song is related to some discussion in the group.

I usually host my own songs on my server, but we can put songs up on the IBC web site and John (Talysman) can update the MP3 page as well.

We also have a MySpace page that can get announcements as well.

You are also free to promote as much as you want.

Go to majorzed.com and check the links on the left to see where I typically put stuff. I expect to put this one on acidplanet.com and probably music.download.com, too.

>>130 That'll do!

Thanks, Charlie. So you guys wouldn't mind if I uploaded the final MP3 to my Soundclick.com account and archive.org pages (with credits to everyone obviously and links to the cartel page, etc)? Those sites are kind of like myspace, except they aren't owned by Rupert Murdoch.

I dislike myspace because they removed my song page I put up a year or so ago, saying I violated their terms of service, when I had done no such thing. If you want to upload it there, I wouldn't object, but I won't. My song they removed was a very anti-Bush political song that I wrote condemning the war in Iraq before it started, so probably some extreme far right winger made up some shit about me hassling them or something. That's the only thing I could conceive might have caused my song to be removed because I had the paperwork from the Library of Congress securing my copyright, it was completely original, and I had only visited the site to upload the songs and credit the folks who helped me produce it. There was absolutely no justification for it being removed.

I wouldn't have minded them temporarily removing material if they had an appeal process and actually confirmed that terms of service had been broken, but there was no way to appeal the decision. No review. So I thought fuck them--they are only a big game because people use them. I like soundclick better anyway. It's easier to use.

Glad to hear that the ending will work! :-) I guess that is mostly it? Just let me know if I need to re-record anything.

In the meantime, if anyone needs help with lyrics on their songs and wants my feedback or a female vocal on something in my vocal range, let me know. :-) That's about all I am good for, but I'd be more than happy to contribute if any has a need for me in another project.

Also, I have a zillion poems that could be converted into songs once everyone else's projects are completed...This was great fun once I got my computer fixed. :-)

Smiles,

Sheryl

Do you guys normally get LOC copyrights? I would be happy to pay for one if you guys wanted to officially protect the actual recording.

I don't know how that relates to my initially listing the song idea as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives, but an LOC copyright gives everyone credit for their contributions, so I don't think it would be to anyone's detriment to get one.

Last time I did that it was something like $20, I believe. But if you would rather not, that's fine too. I just have done that with everything I am really proud of in the past. Not that it has actually done anything for me so far. lol Makes me feel like I am taking my art seriously though. Just a thought. :-)

As far as I know, the Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org/) licenses are compatible with keeping your ownership rights. I don't see why a LOC copyright would be a problem.

If you haven't already, you should check out http://community.livejournal.com/interrocartel/ - after all, you are now a member of the band!

OK, great. I think it would be good too in that it makes it clear your claims as well because you did alter the the melody and add the harmony and such. It's not like it is just my song anymore. It has definitely grown in an exciting way I could not achieve on my own. :-D

Cool, and thanks! I'll check that out. :-)

BTW, here's the copyright form link that I was thinking about (if anyone wants to read it):

http://www.copyright.gov/forms/formpai.pdf

I think this is the right one. It might be the short form, but I think it's probably the PA. :-)

Just looking over the copyright form.

There's also a Form SR for sound recordings, but it just protects the one recording as opposed to the actual creative work as a whole. With the Form PA you can submit the music as an audio CD, so I think it is more protective of our rights as the actual creators.

Just for the record, all our material is protected by copyright, but we usually license it under some form of Creative Commons.

Registering a copyright under the LOC doesn't offer more protection, but it does serve as a record of the date of copyright, and allows you to collect more damages if you have to sue someone for stealing your work. Of course, that requires paying the legal fees... generally speaking, I don't think registering a copyright is worth it for the kind of thing we're doing. If we were offering a commercial CD, that might be different.

If you want to be "officially recognized" and pay for the privilege, then go for it. I think there's a way to do multiple songs at once that's cheaper per song than doing it individually.

I just want credit as producer... after I earn it!

Hmmm, they have upped the price to $45 as well, unless you use their beta upload. That's $35, but you have to pay before submitting, and I don't see anything in their FAQ about what happens if it doesn't upload properly.

But Major Zed, you are right that you can submit collections for the same price.

Besides Talysman, what if someone heard the song online and offered us a million, billion dollars to switch it to commercial? :-) I betchya hadn't thought about that!!!!!

Hey, a girl can dream!!! For some reason they never did that with my peace song like they were supposed to though. Hahaha

You know how they have vanity publishing? I guess this is more a case of vanity copyrighting, eh? Oh well. If I didn't have my fantasies, I'd be sunk. Life is too real otherwise.

OK, here are some recordings of me doing the ending again from the MP3. For some reason they don't sound as good to me. For one thing, one of the notes sounded off in that recording, so I wanted to compensate when I resung it, but it's hard to follow something that isn't quite right and get it right. Hahaha

But here are two files of me singing the end over and over and over again (several takes in each file.) Hopefully there is something good in there.

http://www.mailbigfile.com/42fc47342559a4b6802d25090ad0daac/listFiles.php

http://www.mailbigfile.com/63580a87b6389c9e2dbec33c5cab012a/listFiles.php

And of course, I can continue to re-sing it till there is a good take, so let me know if these aren't good.

Smiles,

Sheryl

Thanks. That's a lot better. I posted a new model at the interrocartel livejournal blog. Now let's hope we get some participation.

Good. :-) Would it be ok to invite people in the OK Cupid community I know to sing the ending? The song was based on observations from that site.

Sure... as long as they understand they have no rights to the finished product.

Oh, OK. That's a good point.

Status report: Here's the full lead vocal, time- and note-corrected, double tracked, mono, no reverb (well, just a bit at the end). http://boxstr.com/files/2316226_jvamh/OLD_double_track_vocal_demo2.wav
You will notice that the last note of the second couplet in each verse (there are three couplets per verse) is a B and not an A. My musicology consultants agree that it should be a B, signifying "more to come." If it still sounds funny to you, play it against the backing chords (see the MIDI) and keep playing until it sounds OK. ;-)

This is the note that I changed from your original midi, is it not?

Yup, I changed it back. Ain't technology amazing?

I guess I have no control over what you do with the song at this point, as I offered it up on the terms that it could be played with. However, there was a reason I said it should be A rather than B. But no, I don't feel that technology is being used in an amazing way here.

Ok, you tell me your reason and I'll tell you mine. (A creative conflict! That means we must be a real band!)

:-) OK, fair enough.

Mainly, it sounds like it's not returning to where it came from musically. And also it sounds kind of monotone relative to the notes right before it, like it's not moving anywhere. A bit stagnant sounding relative to the notes it's next to, like I am swallowing the words (or not giving the emphasis of a swich in pitch.)

I may not be saying that well, but it just feels like it's going the wrong direction. Like it might sound if you were changing key mid-stream.

Switch in pitch, I meant. But mainly the first thing I said. The beginning of the tune kind of starts off in a way that usually affects where a given segment ends up, but the segment of music doesn't go back home (so to speak.) It just sort of lingers there.

I would call it a rebellious note, except it's so close to the notes its next to that I can't consider it very rebellious. Am I saying this in a way that makes sense? I don't know the musical terminology, but I know that where you start a segment of music is supposed affect where you end up, and it just doesn't sound right in terms of where it ends up before it jumps to the next section of music.

PS I'll ask someone I know who is a professional musician in Zurich. He might not answer my email, but if he does and says you are right, then I will take everyone's word for it (even though it doesn't sound right to me.)

Also, it's sort of parallels the hooker thing with the A note, except not as intensely. Like one part goes down a little bit, and then the next the part goes down all the way. Like part of a progression.

I dislike the way it makes "correct you" sound the most. It just sounds bland and unexpressive to keep the tone the same there. Kind of mechanical.

Here's the score (you need to copy & paste somewhere with equal-spaced fonts to see it right). Key is A Major. The note in question is the B in "miser"

1 | 2
Seeking a suitor | at your computer,
E E D D C# | E E D D C#
I(AC#E) | I(AC#E)

3 | 4
One girl is smarter, a | nother is cuter.
F# F# E E D E | F# F# E E D
II(BDF#) | II(BDF#)

5 | 6
One guy is kinder, a | nother is wiser;
F# F# G# A E E | E E F F# C#
VI(F#AC#) I(AC#E) | I(AC#E) VI(F#AC#)

7 | 8
One's a big spender, a | nother's a miser.
D D C# B E E | F# C# C# E B <==
IV(DF#A) V(EG#B) | VI(F#AC#) V(EG#B)

9 | 10
One is a thinker, a | nother's a looker.
F# F# G# A E E | E E F F# C#
VI(F#AC#) I(AC#E) | I(AC#E) VI(F#AC#)

11 | 12
One girl's so sleazy you'd | think she's a hooker.
D D C# B D B | G# G# B C# A
IV(DF#A) II(BDF#) | V(EG#B) I(AC#E)

The chord progression is I-I,II-II VI/I-I/VI,IV/V-VI/V VI/I-I/VI,IV/II-V/I
where "/" indicates break within measure, "-" indicates break within line and "," indicates break within couplet.

Note the ending is II V I which is a "perfect cadence," a classic in popular music. The earlier parts of the progression dance around in more-or-less standard ways. The chord at the end of the second couplet ("miser") was put as V, the dominant. "The dominant diatonic function has the role of creating instability that requires the tonic or goal-tone for release." (Wikipedia) To the ear, the dominant sounds incomplete - there must be more coming. On the other hand if the tonic (I) were used there, this would not generate a feeling of suspense. Being at the end of the second couplet, the listener could easily come to the conclusion that this is the end of the verse (two couplets per verse is more common than three) and the next thing they would expect to hear would be the chorus (or a bridge or prechorus leading to it). To hear instead another couplet is quite jarring, almost like a stutter.

You write "the segment of music doesn't go back home" - exactly. It shouldn't go back home there. Going to I is a full stop. Instead, we want a pause.

Other notes consistent with V are E and G#, possibly D if we go with a jazzy V7 chord. Do you like any of those better than B?

If you wish, we can post a query to Interrocartel LiveJournal and solicit the opinions of some more experienced and professional musicians. Doctroid agrees with me, but there are others whose opinions would weigh heavily also. I'm open to being convinced to change, but I don't think changing V to I and B to A in "miser" (with no other changes) is a good idea.

I'll try E and G# out on the midi today and see if they sound better, but sure, let's post something on the discussion board. A little discussion never hurt anything. I wish this gentleman I wrote would reply to me. :-/

Geez, there's raccoon's in the attic again. :-/ Not that that has anything to do with what we are talking about here, but I wish they would go away.

Oh, and the thing to me is that it doesn't sound suspenseful or whatever, it just sounds dissonant and non-harmonious. While I don't have the musical education, I still know what sounds right to me and what sounds off. So I wouldn't mind a little more debate among the musical scholars. Hahaha

http://community.livejournal.com/interrocartel/58997.html

Status update: (1) we resolved the melody/harmony issue and (2) ?!Charlie just sent me an extremely tasty guitar solo to replace the singing in chorus 3. Onward!

Yea!!! Awesome!!! That should keep it from sounding excessively repetitive, eh? Thanks, Charlie!!!! :-D

I'm curious about the song. Is it sounding good? :-)

It always sounds good to me. That's why I bounce it off ?!Charlie and he tells me exactly where and why it sounds like $h1t. It goes through many iterations of polishing and incremental improvement and the occasional inspired change or addition. Expect a few more weeks of this. One thing I can say, though, is that (IMO) you're going to sound a bit like Carly Simon.

Just checked her website. Hmmm... Hope you aren't adding vibrato to my voice.

Man, I'm fussy!!! But I sure hate those singers who waver their voices like Tarzan when he's calling Jane. lol

Nope - no added vibrato. There's just something about the tonal quality in your voice on certain vowels (that gets emphasized with the double tracking) that reminds me of her. A good timbre.

Oh good!!! And thanks! :-)

I just heard some heavy vibrato in the two files I listened to on her site and thought to myself that what with your sound software being so high tech, you could probably do that to my voice too.

Just something about wavering notes really annoys me for some reason. The worst was that Whitney Houston song, "And I Will Always Love You."

I could have, but opted not to change your expression - just "tune up" the notes. And add some harmony. (!) But FYI a little expression doesn't hurt! ;-) Carly's getting on in age now and maybe she warbles more than what I remember (which is back a ways). I should take the time to figure out what I seem to be remembering...

I think warbling hides singing defects, so people are more inclined to warble the older they are. I don't think good singers use it much to be expressive. At least not much of it.

Like Mary Hopkin. I wish I could sing like should could!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5pkkAhETYg&feature=related

Or those ladies from Abba could really hit their notes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK3mVxGfzPY

Actually listening to some of these sound files of singers I think are great, they use it a little, but with real subtlty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2IkLGFiKx0

The good ones mostly sing clear, but throw in some warbling in some in small doses to accent things.

Actually, here's the Mary Hopkin song I was looking for initially. I think her voice sounds so pure on this song!!! I really wish I sounded like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3iDFmHT6_o

Not so much vibrato here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MamStfXD3hw
But after listening to a bunch of Carly Simon - what was I thinking?

Hahaha :-)

It's interesting to listen to these things after seeing what you did with my voice in that demo file by doubling it up. I had never noticed that much before, but I guess that is what they are doing in this song as well. Makes me wonder what the original sound files sounded like.

The other thing is how a sound gets masked by everything else going on around it. I saw a Steely Dan documentary where they took "Peg" (I think it was) apart, track by track, to show what made it tick. There was a short vocal part by Michael McDonald that sounded pretty lousy all by itself, but worked really well in the song. I found that with my own songs as well - got a bad vocal part? Just cover it up with a lot of other stuff at the same time.

I guess that would work better with songs where you don't really need to listen to the words. Like some of the Beatle songs I really love are clearly more about the music. Maybe less well on humor pieces, although sometimes blurring things can draw focus in if someone wants to sing along, I suppose.

Picture time.... I like to have an image to go along with each song. This time, I'm thinking one of the mug shots we were talking about for the video. Better you than me, Sheryl. Think you can put one together?

OK, I'll try to come up with something creative. Thanks!!! :-)

Since I don't actually have a good camera yet, I thought I would start off with seeing what could be done with my webcam. Considering that a lot of people use crappy webcams when communicating online, I'm not sure that is a bad thing. But I'm just sending this your way for feedback.

This first one takes advantage of the computer screen, but maybe I would have to remove the icons (such as the Apple one the screen, which might break copyrights if it were left there):

http://free.mailbigfile.com/e258f76671b19dc78e3a9b75c0d73b45/download/2045184/horror.jpg

Here's just a single shock pic without the screen as a backdrop:

http://free.mailbigfile.com/572b0dfeac43da99edb59df60c97ab85/download/2045187/shock.jpg

I'll take some looking lovey dovey and such as well.

The advantage to the webcam screen approach is that the pic looks like a crappy web shot, but since I actually grabbed it as a screen shot on my computer, it's only my pic part that looks yellowed and fuzzy. :-)

Sheryl

http://free.mailbigfile.com/72b1cf0df6ea08fc8ddc55044a181edf/download/2045236/love.jpg

Here's one for Love. Hahahaha

Anyway, let me know what you think of the idea of using the computer itself as a backdrop for silly webcam shots. Seems like that would make it clearer that this is about online interaction

Like I say, these are just some sample ideas to throw at you.

Sheryl

Oh here, I like this one the best. You don't know how many chick pics I have seen where women do this annoying over the glasses sultry pose. It's comical, even when it's not supposed to be:

http://free.mailbigfile.com/8e020e55ee16fec05b8d520dd0d788dc/download/2045286/pseudointellect.jpg

http://free.mailbigfile.com/a6c49b18fb5709bf8cde4cb512b38a9e/download/2045293/bored.jpg

http://free.mailbigfile.com/94f4b66ad50f6f455006248eb8e1547e/download/2045292/outcold.jpg

http://free.mailbigfile.com/d01c128598aae754d654dc05c67c6b93/download/2045295/laughing.jpg

If we need some legitimately sassy pics, I took some not too long ago when my hair was actually combed. Also I took a bunch wearing different hats that was kind of fun, but I wasn't trying to be satirical in those.

I like "bored" - it's more like "bored and dismayed".

:-) Thanks!

Do you like the idea of using the desktop as a backdrop, and if so, you have any ideas of how careful we have to be about removing signs of the operating system and such?

I'm going to have to see if I can get Photoshop working on another computer. The one that had it died, and it's an old OS9 version.

PS I really had fun with that! :-)

Yeah, I like the desktop as backdrop. I'm looking around for another photo to paste into the desktop. Maybe I should send it to you to make it look right. I have Adobe Photodeluxe - easy enough to obliterate the little apple and anything else necessary. Hack on it and make it look like something else - a pineapple? Insert the IBC logo somewhere, etc.

That sounds good. :-)

Maybe change the window from "My QuickCam Express" to saying something like "Welcome to masochistluv.com!" or something?

Sheryl: Your "bored.jpg" is cool. Could you recreate it? Move the webcam picture up and to the left a bit, and place this "blurb.jpg" (http://boxstr.com/view/full/2680838_keyyy) to its right and a bit lower, in a window of about the same size. Then send it back to me and I'll work on the details.

When I went to that link, it made me set up an account, but even after I did that I got a message that said:

"BOXSTr Message This file is unavailable for view. If you are the owner of this file, please make sure that the containing folder is set to public or hidden in order to share this file."

Anyway, I'll certainly try and recreate the expression with the appropriate back drop, but you probably have to re-upload that file because it's not coming up. Or just email it to me.

Smiles,

Sheryl

Try http://boxstr.com/files/download/2680838_keyyy/Blurb.jpg

NOW HEAR THIS! (Open to all Interröbangers)

Submitted for your approval.... I have two alternative mix/master samples of Online Dating. One I'll call the "COMP" version and the other I'll call the "EQ" version. They differ in several ways, but principally the predominance of the vocal portion. I fear that in the "EQ" it might be too strong and in the "COMP" it might be too weak. Or one of them might be just right. Or both could be wrong. See what you think. Play them a lot, on hi-fi and on lo-fi. Play them before and after your favorite fast-tempo rock, especially with female vocalists. Try them on a few different days. Try them when you are rested and when you are harried. Then let me know what you think.

http://boxstr.com/files/2686098_1zkx4/OLD_mixdemo_COMP.mp3

http://boxstr.com/files/2686108_8z599/OLD_mixdemo_EQ.mp3

Hmm. It is really hard to hear a difference.
As usual the presentation form tends to have a dramatic effect on the overall sound. On my cheesy stereo it sound fine, though since the bass end is weak the guitars come out weak. On the Sony headphones though, (which have a much better overall sound), the guitars are present, but with the predominance of the tone coming through in the lower end. Perhaps just a slight boost in the mid would let them come through in a system light on bass end.

Overall the vocals seems to be at the right level and presence in both mixes. Perhaps the comp version was just slightly muddier? As I said, really hard to tell.

It is sounding very nice. I like the overall atmospherics.

Of these two, I prefer the EQ version and think the vocals are not strong enough (as opposed to being too strong.)

Don't hate me for saying so, but I kind of liked the effect you created on the May 16th demo version better than both of these. Ducks

Something about the deepness of the sound. It's like the deeper, richer tones have been filtered out or something. Would that be the bass sounds or something?

Also I preferred the the bit you had between the first stanza and the chorus in that initial version better.

Sorry, I know you have put a lot of work in this. :-( But I really was quite taken by that. I'm puzzled why you changed it.

The vocals are cleaner though. Not so lispy as that May version. It's got a jazz sound to it now.

The May 16 demo had way too much bass in it. If you're listening on a bass-challenged system (computer speakers?) it's going to sound pretty good. If you listen with a subwoofer, it's going to sound overwhelming and horrible. The challenge in mixing is to come up with the perfect balance that sounds good wherever it ends up being played.

I'm not surprised you'd like to hear stronger vocals - you're the vocalist! :-) I bet ?!Charlie's first impression will be "you need to turn up the guitar." I know I'm disappointed that the synth isn't more prominent. But again, it's all about balance. Burying the synth so that it's subliminal most of the time, and only peeks out here and there, was the right thing to do. The vocals should indeed be out in front, but not to an extreme.

I urge you to find a similar-style song you like (that means NOT Mary Hopkin!) and compare the relative levels of the vocal, guitars, and percussion. Listen closely to how the pros do it.

"the bit you had between the first stanza and the chorus"... That version has a two-bar turnaround and the latest versions only keep the second bar. ?!Charlie had suggested that two bars was too long, and I agreed, so I trimmed it. When you hear it in just the first verse, it may be OK, but by the fourth verse it got annoying. (The extra bar does reappear in quite a bizarre manner in the third verse, but you haven't heard that part of the new mix yet!)

The sibilants in the vocals took some work to clean up. Your recordings had a whistling sound to some (but not all) of the "s" sounds. You can hear it clearly in "is wiser" and "miser". So I had to go through them one at a time and adjust their levels.

Hi Zed,

Actually, I was listening with Sony headphones that are pretty darned clear. No speakers involved. I still think a little more bass and slightly louder and more resonant vocals would sound better.

In terms of other musicians, I point to the Beatles, who were all about vocals and are considered by many as the greatest band of all time, even though a lot of times their lyrics were kind of lame. But they weren't afraid of their vocals. And they weren't even the best of singers at that.

Actually, some of the worst singers are still prominent with their vocals. Bob Dylan is a good example of someone whose singing sucks, but still didn't hide it behind his music.

I agree that musicians like Steeley Dan probably hid their singing behind instrumentation, but then I don't like his music either. I mean, maybe this is just about taste in music.

Not sure we are talking about the same thing in the "two bar turn around." What I was talking about was two notes originally, and now it it is a about 7. I'm referring to the bit after "you'd think she's a hooker." You had what I think was a nice electric guitar bit that went up and down, which has been replaced with a bouncy, somewhat monotone rumbling midi sound, which is if anything is longer than what you had before, so I don't think we are talking about the same thing.

FWIW, I'm not just being critical to your work since you did both versions. I just really liked the feel to that original sound, even though the sound quality needed some work compared to this version. Would it be hard to get the best of both worlds?

I do think the vocals sound cleaner here. They were too tinny to start with. I just preferred the fuller sound (which I believe was the bass), a slight bit of reverb, and the stronger vocals of the original demo. As well as that guitar bit that sounded kind of grunty in the original demo. It sort of jolted my attention, whereas the new version's got a jazzier feel now, which is less dramatic in feeling.

But I 100% admit that some of this may just indicate my tastes in music styles. ???

Also, in terms of my preferring the vocals be stronger because I sung them. In addition to what I said about the Beatles having prominent vocals, I think also it is way more common to have strong vocals along with humorous lyrics. Can you imagine Weird Al or They Might Be Giants allowing their music to take equal weight to their words? I don't think so. Maybe Steeley Dan where no one cares what he is singing, but not music where the words are important.

Anyway, I'll work on the graphic.

Not sure this is what you had in mind with the pic. I had a tough time splitting the screen, so that the text was all visible and yet the screens would be similar in size, so I improvised by overlapping them some. I gather the point was that the left pic shows the response to the right one? But obviously it doesn't work if you can't read it, which is why I made the right one slightly larger.

Something tells me this is not quite the affect you were going for though. Would it be easier if I just took a snapshot of my desktop without any open windows?

Anyway, here are some options for what I did do. I'll be happy to redo them if they aren't right.

http://www.mailbigfile.com/d293a9b1e271bd442945cc07e1340476/download/2292693/boredA.jpg

http://www.mailbigfile.com/fe5fb9518be938772e7588304d829353/download/2292696/boredB.jpg

http://www.mailbigfile.com/f20caa7f242b98c9ed3060243fded80f/download/2292697/boredC.jpg

http://www.mailbigfile.com/a5dff57c0aceac803745c7098fdcaeca/download/2292698/boredD.jpg

http://www.mailbigfile.com/f424e1f5c971f0aa51bade5e8c5bd829/download/2292699/boredE.jpg

In terms of your expression, I like version "E" the best with "B" the runner up. In terms of "blurb" on-screen, first, it doesn't have to be big enough to see all the words - as long as you can make out the first 7 lines, that's enough. Second, why is there so much gray space around it?

Not sure why it was putting a gray box around it. This stupid picture viewer is kind of annoying. I had to hide the toolbar on it as well. :-/

My guess would be that Apple watered it down so that they can sell decent picture viewers separately from the OS. That seems to be what they did with Quicktime and Itunes anyway. The newer versions do less than the older versions and are clunkier. sigh

PS I'll try doing another version today with a smaller box then. Couldn't sleep last night, so I just got up though. Yawn.

OK, here are a few more pics of me looking perplexed at direction of dating conversation:

http://free.mailbigfile.com/2a9b956bd0dd2bf530908894fcabf6bf/download/2063701/ohbrother1.jpg

http://free.mailbigfile.com/4f09bebd9527db3aeeb5bbb80a73de98/download/2063703/ohgod1.jpg

http://free.mailbigfile.com/abe727fb72f96a99f0d020cefcbb69be/download/2063705/ohjeez.jpg

Here's another option. Have my picture looking over at the other picture:

http://www.mailbigfile.com/d98e48a4fa014f9a2bada19c67d171a0/download/2295644/lookingover.jpg

To be fair, I mentioned the various versions in one of my journals, and when this guy said he was curious, I emailed him the link to all three versions (including the May version.) Here's what he said:
---------------------------------------------------

Here are my impressions of the mixes, in order:

Original:

This mix is the loudest of the three. The bass is too loud, in my opinion, but that's why it sounds fuller. There is a stereo effect on the vocal that is really making it sound full. However, the effects are mixed to the left instead of to the center. This, combined with the overall loudness of all the parts, actually makes it harder to listen to. The stereo image leans way too far to the left on this one.

Second mix:

This one has more reverb on the drums and far less effect on the vocal. The vocal is panned to the center. The vocals are far easier to understand on this mix. The stereo image is now too small. We've gone from one extreme (too wide) to the other. The vocal is good in the center, but now the guitar needs to fill out the edges. Spread the guitar out and then bring it up in the mix. It's too quiet in this mix. The bass guitar is EQed better in this mix, but now it's too quiet. Bring up the backing parts and spread out the guitar and I think that will be the best mix.

Third mix:

This is very similar to the second mix but there is more effect on the vocal. I'm not a fan of that particular effect. It sounds "cool", if that's what you're going for, but it makes it harder to understand the vocals. I prefer the second mix with very little effects on the vocals.

So, that's what I think. The second mix is close to being good. It just needs more volume on the backing tracks and move some parts around to fill out the stereo image. It's a bit too small as it is, but I like it the most of the three. I know you like the first one, but it has all sorts of problems from a mixing standpoint.

Thanks for sharing with me! I hope my opinion helps somewhat. If it doesn't, just ignore me. :-)

Pics: I like lookingover. Mind if I run with that one?

Mixes: Interesting comments, worth going back for a re-listen with them in mind. But which one was "second" and which one was "third"?

Yes, run with it!

The second one that he preferred was the one that I actually liked the least. Not the EQ one, but the other new one.

I only included his feedback to have another opinion on the board. I didn't actually agree with him, except the part that you had gone from one extreme to the other.

I'm not sure if he was referring to the bass though, but I still think the newer versions need more bass. And stronger vocals, assuming we want people to pay attention to the lyrics at all. And yes, I am biased in that direction. No point having words no one pays any attention to.

Agree with you on the bass. The jury is still out on where the vocal level belongs.

Oh good. As long as it's being deliberated, that's cool! :-)

Haven't had much time lately, but I did check out the mixes a bit... I think the vocals are important, but the mix sounds about right, except when the voice pitch drops; the line "To find the perfect match" sounds muddy and indistinct.

I don't think this means the volume should be raised. Instead, maybe the instruments could be panned to either side and the vocals could be placed in the center? Also, Zed, I believe you mentioned once a trick of cutting a hole in the right frequency range, so that the vocals and the instruments don't occupy the same frequencies. You may have done this already, but then altered the pitch on that line, putting it in conflict with the instruments.

Something can and will be done about "to find the perfect match." But when you say the mix sounds about right, which one are you talking about - "COMP" or "EQ"?

To weigh in on the vocal volume issue, on my playback environments the vocals seem to be quite present. If anything sometimes the instruments sounded a bit lost. (Not just guitar :) ).

From experience I can say that mixing is really difficult to do well, and I think MZed really puts in the effort. There are times where you have to roll with what you have before you over engineer the life out of the song. (My own experience here, not being critical of MZ's work). Overall I think it sounds really good.

Thanks for the input (and kind words), but again, can you distinguish "COMP" from "EQ"? Do they sound different to you? Does one sound better than the other?

Zed and Charlie,

I get the impression that Charlie is implying (however diplomatically and indirectly) that I am being unreasonable to question things at this late stage after you have put a ton of work into this. And I have no doubts that you have put a ton of work in, and I thank you a million times over for that.

However, I am also getting the feeling from various things that have been said that he had considerably more influence in how this mix turned out. For several of the changes, you have stated (paraphrasing), "Charlie thought it should be this way."

So let me just be blunt and ask--who was consulted more in the mixing of this song that is based on my original melody and lyrics?

As long as we are discussing stakes, I do realize that you both have put a large amount of time and energy in this, and I swear I am grateful for that. However, I also don't think it is unreasonable that I have some sway in what is only the SECOND batch of sound files that have been shared with me.

I haven't had an opportunity to weigh in since the May demo because I didn't have access to the changes being made till this second batch. I was not consulted. I don't see how I have waited too late to express my opinions if I wasn't being given anything to express opinions on.

I mean, that seems to be the argument--that a ton of time has already been put in on this, and I'm too late to have any say in how my song turns out because a lot of work was put in before I was allowed to express an opinion. I don't see how I could have expressed any of this any sooner if I was not being emailed sound files along the way.

Apologies, ?!Charlie - you did answer >>217 in >>194.

And Sheryl - if I didn't want your opinion, I wouldn't have asked for it. Earlier, I had sent ?!Charlie a test print to get his opinion about how the guitars were sounding because I did some "major" transformation to the sound he had created. (Recall all the back and forth you and I had over the vocal treatment.) At that time, he opined about the turnaround, and while I hadn't been looking for that kind of input, it was a good idea, so I made the change.

I think ?!Charlie's comment was actually a response to talysman's suggestions, or maybe it was directed to me and my infinitely fussy approach to mixing, basically saying "It's good enough Zed, let it go!" I've been burned in the past by reviewers at Acid Planet, Gods of Music, and the c0nsensus, however, complaining about my mixes, so I strive now to get them as professional sounding as I can.

Thanks for clarifying that. I apologize then.

Anyway, I want to make sure that we are talking about the same thing when you refer to the "turnaround," so I just made short clips of each to be precise about what I meant:

This

http://free.mailbigfile.com/71aa1367e864208ed6046468e7c4c30a/download/2073189/transitionA.mp3

Versus This:

http://free.mailbigfile.com/1265b618ed3560c25566d048b6f3a3c9/download/2073196/transitionB.mp3

What I liked about the original one is the powerful contrast of the two notes (or maybe it's the timing on them) gave it some energy and magic which I don't feel in the second version.

I just want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.

I saw your art blog. Sure you don't want to create your own cover art from scratch? "The Collision of Native and Colonial America" was absolutely awesome.

Thanks! The problem with my art is that I did most of that with Photoshop starting from drawings, but a lot of it was messing around with filters and stuff.

I lost my version of Photoshop when my OS9 machine died. (It was an old version that doesn't work on OSX.) But if you think any of the pics would be useful to throw in somehow. They probably are not too applicable, unless you want to use my alien pic as an example of an online dater. Hahaha

I was thinking of buying a newer version of Photoshop online, but it looked like they might not work with my machine.

My apologies, but I just sent you probably way too many emails about the file you sent. The last one was just two clips of some things you did that I thought were amazingly cool. Didn't want you to think my editing suggestion were the whole picture. Those bits were extraordinary. :-)

Just for completeness, note the track is done! Announcement here: http://community.livejournal.com/interrocartel/60032.html

Yea!!!! :-D

I was just thinking. Can I use the graphic on the main page to have a T-shirt made? Cafepress does really nice T-shirts. Man, I need to get Photoshop back up and working!!!! It would have to have the link on it to be useful as an advertisement.

But all you have to do to get nice t-shirts made is submit a graphic in the right resolution (dpi). Some I made before are only $15, and there is a discount if you are the store owner. I can't remember what it costs, although there is shipping and handling.

Check out the ones I had made before. They turned out quite nice. The mugs they sell apparently rub off, so even though they are the cheapest items to buy (except for the buttons.) Actually the buttons are good too. And their mouse pads are good. I got one of those. In other words, you can spend a fortune on their site. lol

Here's the store I set up. Never made a dime off it! lol So I am not recommending it as a way to earn money. But A T-shirt advertising the website could be useful. Just a thought.

http://www.cafepress.com/political_tees.49249615

Izzat you Sheryl? Pls send email for this sort of question.

Oops, I forgot to write my name in.

Yeah, it's me. I just figured that I had been barraging your email account with non-stop questions and thought this was a fairly generic idea to bat around. But if you don't mind me emailing you with things like this, email is certainly more direct. I have something else I want to ask you anyway. Hahaha Poor Major Zed!

One of the consistent comments we've had is about being able to understand (i.e. clearly hear) the lyrics. That motivates yet another mix, where the vocal effects are turned down a bit: http://boxstr.com/files/2967105_iii11/OnlineDating_72.mp3

Hey, it was good of you to work on it some more!!!

Let me see if I can get my friend Arleen to listen to both versions and see if she can understand things better in this new version. She was having problems understanding the words.

So which mix do you like better, Zed? Do you think this improves the clarity?

On my headphones it doesn't solve the clipping on the ends of letters that worried me. However, like I say, what we really need is some feedback from people who couldn't follow it at all, eh?

Yes, I think this new version improves the clarity.
Could you give me some examples of "clipping on the ends of letters"?

At 33 seconds, the word "mouse" almost sounds like mouth or mou on my headphones; the s on the end is virtually inaudible. Most of the mouse words, except the end are faint on the ending s, but that particular one just doesn't come out at all on my end.

At 1 minute, 4 seconds "Derek" sounds like Dere. No k sound. At about 2:14-2:15 "some will affect you" sounds like "some will affe you" without ct sound at the end. "Some will reject you" becomes "some will reje you." And "some will correct you" sounds like "some will corre you" on my end.

Removing the sound effects most only flattened the resonance on my end, but that's just on this one setup.

We should ask around and see what the consensus is, eh?

What you refer to as "resonance" is the combined effect of multiple versions of your voice and reverberant echoes - just the kind of stuff that muddies up word clarity. So it's a tradeoff. (And I didn't remove them, I just turned them down some.) I will look into the missing phonemes and get back to you.

Missing phonemes. I didn't know the term. Good to know what that's called. :-)

Yeah, that's all that sounded off to me, but then I am listening with headphones. But from what I am hearing, that's what is making it harder to follow the lyrics.

The reverberant echoes were classy; personally I'd take that back to the previous levels. They were very nicely done.

Actually, it's all very nicely done. But definitely, from what I am hearing, if you could draw those consonant endings out a little somehow, then it would be easier to understand. Is that doable?

In fact, I was talking to this friend of mine Trish today and mentioned that, and she also said that was her only problem with it as well.

You only identified 5 cases - surely that isn't messing up much of the understanding. Are there more?

Those were the extreme cases, where the endings sounded outright clipped off to me, but then I am listening to it on fairly good headphones.

I'm sure if someone was listening through their computer speakers, for example, that they would have problems with some of the cases where the endings are just faded, but still audible if you listen closely. Like the Ss on several of the "mouse" endings.

I can only speculate on what other people are hearing, but I do think 5 cases could throw the ear off on a fast song like that.

On the other hand, I was in the grocery the other day listening to the radio and thinking that I couldn't follow half of the words being sung on a fairly mainstream song. But they probably had a really good PR person promoting their song. We need a Brian Epstein, eh? :-) lol

I guess the real question is whether it can be fixed and how difficult that would be to do, but I do think that is what is throwing some people off.

Also, for future reference, do you know what causes that? I wonder if that wasn't from how I recorded it originally.

My mic was supposed to be fairly decent, I think, but those original sound files I sent you were pretty horrible sounding.

Hey Zed,

I was just listening to the radio today while waiting for my mom at the doctor's office. It was amazing how many songs were completely indecipherable in terms of the lyrics. I'm starting to think Dad's friend was overzealous in his advice. At the risk of being vain, our song rocks compared to a lot of what I was hearing.

I think I am just going to promote the hell out of the song online, and then maybe chart positions could be a way to get radio play as well. :-) Did you upload it to one of those other sites you mentioned?

I should get with talysman about the video idea. :-)

The pros have access to $1000 mics and even more expensive gear to plug them into. The difficulty of understanding lyrics in the popular song is legendary - witness The Archive of Misheard Lyrics (http://www.kissthisguy.com/) I haven't uploaded to any of my sites yet because it appears it is not quite finished yet! :-) I'm still working on a handful of phonemes.

Thanks, Zed!!! Wow, $1000 mics?! [chokes]

This girl in my journal suggested we should submit to this radio show, so I was looking at their submission terms. Get a load of this (particularly the second half of it)!

"The Bob and Tom Show policy does not allow The Bob & Tom Show to accept or consider any creative materials, ideas, suggestions, concepts, notes or artwork (collectively, the "Materials") other than those that are specifically requested by The Bob & Tom Show. If despite this policy, you do submit any Materials to The Bob & Tom Show, such Materials shall be deemed to become, and shall remain, the property of The Bob & Tom Show and you agree that The Bob & Tom Show shall own all rights, title and interest in such Materials."

Can they actually do that?!!! I have a hard time seeing how they can legally acquire all your rights to something purely from you sending them a copy of something.

I mean, when I took business law in college, one of the main fundamentals was that a person has to understand and agree to terms of an exchange for a contract to be binding. Seems like it would be difficult to prove that just because someone sent materials to someone that they necessarily had read those notices, understood them, and were consciously handing over all their rights to their property. Besides, what are they getting for it? It's not an exchange, unless you get SOMETHING for it.

Plus, who's to say that someone else didn't send them in? I have a very hard time seeing how that could fly in court, except maybe big company=big attorneys. But say a fan mailed it in, do they suddenly think they own all the rights?

Anyway, how about we NOT send to this show. lol :-)

That's like Microsoft suing people that send them ideas.

Hahaha. Crazy!

More craziness. I was just looking up the Musician's Atlas to see what a new copy would be. When I bought my copy in 2000, it was $19.95. Now it $49.95!

If it's like the poetry directory I bought last year, then you can find out more online for free anyway.

This is kind of sad. I was looking at one of these college radio stations that linked back to a magazine called CMJ, which is supposedly for college radio stations. Anyway, it had a list of magazines that college stations could subscribe to telling them what to play.

You look a little further, and musicians are asked to pay $90 to be listed on these charts:

http://www.mediaguide.com/solutions/music/submitmusic.php

Sounds like they are taking the independent out of indie radio. I wonder how many college stations limit themselves to these lists. :-/

The -k and -ct seem to be OK now but the -s are a problem. Too little and you don't hear it and too much and it whistles. Still working on it....

I think I got the missing phonemes now. Listen to
http://boxstr.com/files/3011796_cmywu/OnlineDating_82.mp3
I also corrected a synch problem between the vocals and guitars that appeared in two places and had been bugging me and ?!Charlie for quite some time.

Thanks for working on it!!!! Awesome!

Would you be willing to upload it again though? I think something went off in the upload because there's something weird going on with the word "thinker" at the beginning, which I doubt you would have even been working on and also in the center bit (which I also doubt you would have touched.) Because they were both fine to start with.

Anyway, thanks a million!!! Awesome!

Yes, I tried to make the "th" in "thinker" more prominent. What's the "center bit"?

Hmmm...something with the "thinker" change didn't take right. It not sounds like a hissy "sinker." The center bit being the "so you compare them, torment and scare them" part.

Anyway, don't worry about it. I'll see if I can't splice it together with the 61 version. You've done more than enough work on this. A Million hugs!!! Thanks!!!

Really appreciate you working on it!!!!

No derivations needed!!! :-) It's wonderful as it is!!!! REALLY!!!! I LOVE IT!!!!! :-D

...splice it together with the 61 version... ?!
No, nooo, NO! Try this instead: http://boxstr.com/files/3049182_bh2sy/OnlineDating_92.mp3

Awesome mix!!! I like the way you got the K back in there on Derek! :-D Nice!!!

It's interesting comparing it to the 61 version. They are so close, but there are these subtle differences that I can't quite pin down.

Very, very nice!!!!!

Ah, but can you understand the lyrics better?

I do think it is clearer, but the changes are subtle.

It's interesting how changes that are barely perceptible when you do an A/B comparison do in fact make a difference in clarity nonetheless.

It sounded slightly different, but I would completely have to guess on what you did. What the hell, I'll guess what the differences were, and you can laugh when it turns out that it was something you didn't touch at all. :-D

I would guess that there was slightly more treble in this version, and that that probably helped make it a little clearer? Was there more treble? I think that was what made me think that the center part sounded different on the 82 version as well.

The K in Derek definitely sounded better, and the first mouse no longer sounds like mouth. :-)

If I trust my instinct rather than my ears, I think you may have dropped the vocals a teeensy weensy bit back (and that probably didn't help their clarity), but it's so close that I'm really not sure. And maybe an itsy bitsy tiny weeny less reverb, which probably helped the clarity slightly but made it a minuscule less round sounding. Once again, I'm not sure. That may have been the extra treble. I'm pretty sure kind of sorta that there is a tiny weeny bit extra treble.

And maybe added a teensy weensy bit of volume to that little section before the long instrumental that you had previously dropped back?

So I would say it's a bit clearer, but particularly so with a few of the words like "Derek." It's really subtle though. I do think they are clearer, but it's strange to compare the two because you really have to focus to know why it sounds clearer.

I think the real test would be to run it past someone who was having problems understand the lyrics.

So was I right about any of this? Hahahahahaha

In short, I do think it sounds somewhat clearer, but I'm really not sure why. lol

No, on second thought. Forget everything I just wrote. They sound different, but the main difference are in the higher pitches, and I just can't tell if it made it clearer or not. But there were definitely some improvement on some consolnant endings.