• Rush 2112 Remastered Rarlabs

Rush will celebrate the 40th anniversary of their landmark 1976 album 2112 with a deluxe reissue featuring rare live and previously unreleased material alongside 2112 tracks covered by Foo.

• Listen to your favorite songs from 2112 (Remastered) by Rush Now. Stream ad-free with Amazon Music Unlimited on mobile, desktop, and tablet. Download our mobile app now.
• 2112 (pronounced 'twenty-one twelve') is the fourth studio album by Canadian rock band Rush, released on April 1, 1976, by Anthem Records. After finishing touring for its previous album, Caress of Steel, in early 1976, the band was in financial hardship due to the album's disappointing sales, unfavorable critical reception, and a decline in attendance at its shows.

The future is a tricky beast to predict. When George Orwell’s 1984 was first published in the late 1940s, the year in which the novel is set must have seemed light years away. And while many of Orwell’s predictions came uncannily true (Newspeak, omnipresent government surveillance, etc), he failed to anticipate the popularity of Bananarama. Similarly, while Stanley Kubrick’s 2001 remains a stunning piece of cinema, the actual year itself offered precious little in the way of groundbreaking outer space exploration – the US was too busy invading Afghanistan. Rush were lucky in setting 2112 so far into the future that only the Methuselahs among us will discover whether or not the Priests of the Temples of Syrinx ever assume control. (Not as lucky as Zager and Evans, mind you, but lucky all the same.) To truly appreciate the brilliance of Rush’s 2112 – concept and title track combined – one must reflect on the zeitgeist of the 1970s, and specifically the year 1976. Rush had released three albums up to this point – a self-titled first album, Fly By Night and Caress Of Steel – but by and large, the band were still, to echo a track title from their aforementioned debut, finding their way.

And ’76 was categorically not the best year in which to release a record such as 2112. Babylon was all set to burn, Rush’s hard-rock sci-fi shtick was widely regarded as out of place and out of time, and their promo photos – three gawky, long-haired Canadians wearing satin kimonos – didn’t help their cause one iota. As spring ’76 turned into summer ’76, Britain began to wilt and wither under a relentless heatwave, daytime temperatures regularly exceeding 90 degrees Fahrenheit in old money. The fields and meadows became more parched than Paul Gascoigne after a month in rehab. The walls of the offices of Sounds music weekly, where this writer worked, dripped with sweat and deadline desperation. We still had typewriters and Bakelite telephones. Still, we opened the windows, gasped at a non-existent breeze, stripped to our underpants and carried on in the face of adversity.

Despite this hostile environment, Rush stuck their heads above the sun-scorched parapet. News of 2112’s excellence spread by word of mouth more than anything else, and when the band toured the UK for the first time in ’77 – at the height of punk, no less – an army of pale-faced rock fans emerged from the shadows to greet them like conquering heroes.

Listening to 2112 today, one is struck by both its brilliance and its brevity. The main concept suite, which occupied side one of the original vinyl record, lasts a shade over 20 minutes. The five songs on the flip-side (as was) are all around the three- or four-minute mark.

But sometimes less is more, and the title track – which of course details the failed struggle of a lone man to bring the joys of music back to a dystopian world – remains an awesome piece of work. It’s comfortingly familiar too. Even if you haven’t heard 2112 for years, you’ll recognise immediately every last Alex Lifeson power chord, every last shrill Geddy Lee warble, every last Neil Peart pitter-patter drum pattern.

There’s an endearing naivety to the piece too – this was no work of premeditation, just an honest outpouring of fantastical thoughts. And for this writer, immersed as I was in Moorcock and Marvel Comics back in ’76, 2112 was very much the right record at the right time. The best part of the 2112 story has always been when the central character discovers an abandoned guitar (‘ What can this strange device be?’) and learns slowly how to master its six sonorous strings. Lifeson’s initial gentle tentativeness is genuinely evocative, and when he finally gains the confidence to let rip it’s no exaggeration to describe the moment as life-affirming.

Conversely, the passage of time hasn’t been particularly kind to the remaining tracks on the album. A Passage To Bangkok is, to put it bluntly, a jaunty pop song about an interesting train ride; The Twilight Zone has delightful chiming Thin Lizzy guitars but is so low-key it’s almost throwaway; Lessons could by a CSN&Y demo; Tears is reminiscent of a saccharine Moody Blues lullaby. Thank God, then, for storming closing track Something For Nothing, which almost sounds like a leftover from Rush’s Zeppelin-esque first album. With a running time of just 3.59, Something is much too short, however, and fades inexplicably early.

So to the bonus tracks on this 40th-anniversary release – and a right mixed bag they are too. Solar Federation isolates the spoken voice-over at the all-conquering climax of 2112: ‘ Attention all planets of the Solar Federation: we have assumed control.’ Er, that’s it. Dave Grohl, Taylor Hawkins and Nick Raskulinecz fail to get to grips with the Overture movement of the 2112 opus – the ‘headbanging bit’ (Rush fans will get it) goes spectacularly pear-shaped, and Grohl’s insensitive bish-bashing makes one hanker for the niceties of Peart’s drumming technique. Billy Talent’s Passage To Bangkok is musically faithful but ruined by unnecessarily aggressive vocals. Steven Wilson delivers a sensitive The Twilight Zone, but there’s a baffling duet with a Dalek on the chorus. Alice In Chains, bizarrely, treat Tears like an Andrew Lloyd Webber show tune.

Still, Canadian singer-songwriter Jacob Moon’s gruff yet tremulous vocals are the highlight of his version of Something For Nothing, and Lifeson’s signature guitar tone is replicated with remarkable accuracy. But this is hardly an all-star cast and is unlikely to appeal to hard-core Rush fans. Where are Max Webster, Triumph and Frank Marino when you need them? It all feels a bit flat.

Aside from the cover versions, we have two excellent live out-takes from a 1976 Rush concert at Toronto’s Massey Hall: 2112 itself, truncated to 15.47 but still sounding vital and vibrant, plus a sparkling rendition of Something For Nothing. But then the barrel bottom is well and truly scraped with an appalling live recording of The Twilight Zone, a song Rush have only ever performed in concert twice. Putting the boot into bootleg, this should never have left the Memorex C90 from which it likely originated.

Finally, there’s an archive US radio advertisement, an unenthusiastic voice informing the listener: “ 2112 is a concept of life in the future, conceived and performed by Rush on Mercury Records and tapes.” So thanks for that. Beside the audio, 2112 – 40th comes in a multitude of shapes and sizes, including a three-LP 200-gram vinyl edition with a Starman turntable mat, Hugh Syme’s original Starman pencil sketching, three button badges featuring each band member, and a whole lot more besides, all housed in a box lined with velvet flocking. It all sounds very exotic, but not half as exotic as 2112 sounded back in 1976.

Battle of the Bands V BotB (- BotB II (- BotB III (- BotB IV (I am your host, vividox. This version of BotB is going to be a little different than previous renditions, so please read through the rules, even if you are a seasoned competitor. BotBV will be comprised of 6 rounds, each running for two weeks. Participants will submit one song per round.

Because rounds are limited, there will be no restriction on the number of people who can play. The tentative round schedule is as follows: 12.06.10 - Round 1 12.20.10 - Round 2 01.03.11 - Round 3 01.17.11 - Round 4 01.31.11 - Round 5 02.14.11 - Round 6 In general, submissions will be due by 7PM Eastern on the Friday before the new round starts. Some leeway may be considered around the holidays at my discretion. Song requirements: - Original studio recordings only (i.e.

No 'live', 'best of.' , or 'mix' songs) - The artist must be the original performer of the song (no covers) - The song may not have charted on any Billboard singles charts (US only) -.this criteria is waived if the band has never had an album chart - The album from which the song appeared may not have charted on the BB200 - The artist may not have charted higher than 100 on the BB200 with any album - If a song has appeared on another album that has charted, it is not eligible - Bands may not have been used in any previous BotB List (Submitting Songs: - I prefer you send me the mp3 via e-mail. Send your mp3 to battleofthebandsv@gmail.com - If you do not have a copy of the song, can't find a copy of the song, and really really really want to use that song, talk to me and I'll see what I can do. Scoring: - One vote per person (non-participants are encouraged to vote as well). No alt voting please. Each voter will have as many points to pass around as songs in the round.

14 songs = 14 points - You may give any one song up to 4 points, no partial points. The maximum number of songs you can vote for in a round is 2X/3, where X is the number songs submitted that round, rounded up. With 14 songs, ROUNDUP(2X/3) = 10 - (Participant voters only) If you don't want to give away which song is yours, you may vote using less than all of your points, and I will assume the remaining points go towards your song. 4 point restriction still applies.

Votes will be due by 7PM Eastern time on the Friday before the next round starts (12 days after the round begins). At the end of each round, participants will receive a score of points divided by votes.

These scores will be additive across the six rounds. During the course of the six rounds, there will be eight objectives to accomplish: 1) Submit one instrumental song 2) Submit one short song (2:30 or less) 3) Submit one long song (7:00 or more) + (4) Submit one song in which both male and female vocals are present 5) Submit one song in which no guitars appear 6) Submit one song in which no pianos/keyboards/synthesizers appear 7) Submit one song in which no drums/percussion/electronic beats appear beat boxing is okay 8) Submit one song that was released in 2010 or 2011 - Obviously, more than one objective can be met each round.

If you submit a 1:57 long instrumental with no piano, you have met objectives 1, 2, and 6. At the end of all six rounds, each objective you have not completed will result in your final total score being reduced by 10% (for a maximum of 80% and a minimum of 0%). The participant with the highest score at the end of six rounds wins. If any questions or clarifications need to be address, let me know.

Round 1 (- Results (Round 2 (- Results (Round 3 (- Results (Round 4 (- Results (Round 5 (- Results (Round 6 (- Results (Final Results (Total Points Given/Received (Awards (http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarialdiscussionforum/showthread.php?p=5062146#post5062146). Just so I'm clear. The previous overarching theme of finding bands that have never charted is out the window. I don't think one exists, but if we could find a Beatles song that has never charted as a single from an album that didn't break the top 100 it would qualify? Also, I'm not a fan of the random requirements, but whatever.

I don't like the 'forced' theme rounds of the old games either. Not sure which one I like more. Anyway, I'm in.

Do we have to have a copy of the song in question or just send you the name? I don't have copies of any of this stuff as it stands. Just so I'm clear. The previous overarching theme of finding bands that have never charted is out the window.

I don't think one exists, but if we could find a Beatles song that has never charted as a single from an album that didn't break the top 100 it would qualify? Also, I'm not a fan of the random requirements, but whatever. I don't like the 'forced' theme rounds of the old games either. Not sure which one I like more. Anyway, I'm in.

Do we have to have a copy of the song in question or just send you the name? I don't have copies of any of this stuff as it stands. I copied the song requirement rules exactly as they were in punman's version. I would prefer if you could send me the song.

It makes it a lot easier on my side. If you have a song you really want to use and you don't have it, I'll see what I can do. Also, I'm not a fan of the random requirements, but whatever. I don't like the 'forced' theme rounds of the old games either.

Not sure which one I like more. Also, the point of these requirements was not to be overly constraining. It shouldn't be too hard to find an instrumental or a song under 2:30. Most of these objectives really aren't that difficult. And, if you feel like you can choose a strong enough song to get enough additional points to cover the 10% loss at the end, you can simply choose to not satisfy a requirement. OK, so I'm obviously the guy who will be asking the questions about the long songs. And with an unnecessarily long post to boot!

Time will tell.) There are certain tracks on albums that are tracked as a single song, but are, in fact, a suite made up of different songs. The primary example that will be immediately familiar to you is Rush's '2112'. For the benefit of those here who don't care for the band, I'll describe the song here. What complicates matters in this song is that although '2112' has eight individually named sections, some sections segue from one to the next, and others end with an actual bit of silence before the next section begins. In the case of '2112', parts I & II are effectively one 'song', then III & IV, V & VI, and finally VII & VIII, with a break between each pair of sections.

I have to assume that the whole suite would not count as a 'long song' simply due to the fact of the break between sections, but that Parts III & IV would count as a single song and count as 'long' due to being over 7 minutes in total. Unfortunately, there's a lot of wiggle room in the middle. It can be VERY fuzzy. I have songs that clearly stand on their own, yet fade into each other. (Black Bonzo's 'How Do You Feel' from the previous BotB has a Part 2. You can hear it begin in the last second of Part 1's fade-out.

I had to manually split the MP3 for the contest.). I have songs that stand alone, yet have an ambient interlude connecting them.

Bohemia rap songs mp3 free download 2015. (E.g., a lot of Tangerine Dream's live stuff.). I even have songs that are completely connected rhythmically (i.e., no way to split the file without sounding clumsy), yet have no musical connection otherwise. (Pink Floyd has a number of these. 'Yet Another Movie' into 'Round and Round' for one; both medleys on Abbey Road count as well. That's not Pink Floyd, by the way.:duh: ) So, the obvious question, then, is: Do any of these qualify under the 'long song' criterion? Brian Eno is disqualified, not for his solo work, but for his collaboration with David Byrne (My Life in the Bush of Ghosts). And Robert Fripp is disqualified for his Exposure album.

Unfortunately, most of his side projects are 'The Robert Fripp ' and 'Robert Fripp and the ', so they're all disqualified as well.:-( Oh, and PC=PC+6. I've just been listening to Exposure, ya big synchronistic lug. I also have large chunks of Fripp's other output, with and without his friends, though unfortunately some of it is on 'vinyl'.

Song requirements: - Original studio recordings only (i.e. No 'live', 'best of.' , or 'mix' songs) - The song may not have charted on any Billboard singles charts (US only) - The album from which the song appeared may not have charted on the BB200 - The artist may not have charted higher than 100 on the BB200 with any album - If a song has appeared on another album that has charted, it is not eligible - Bands may not have been used in any previous BotB List (I support all of these requirements except #2, since it unduly restricts fans of fringe formats. For example, one of my previous submissions, Birthday by the Cruxshadows, charted on the single sales and dance single sales charts. These charts count only physical single sales, and because so few physical singles are sold, a couple hundred copies was good enough to chart.

My suggestion would be a twofold eligibility system: If a band has never charted an album on the Billboard 200, then any song is eligible (assuming it meets the requirements of 1, 5, and 6). If the band has charted an album #101-#200, then requirements 2 and 3 also kick in. I support all of these requirements except #2, since it unduly restricts fans of fringe formats.

For example, one of my previous submissions, Birthday by the Cruxshadows, charted on the single sales and dance single sales charts. These charts count only physical single sales, and because so few physical singles are sold, a couple hundred copies was good enough to chart. My suggestion would be a twofold eligibility system: If a band has never charted an album on the Billboard 200, then any song is eligible (assuming it meets the requirements of 1, 5, and 6). If the band has charted an album #101-#200, then requirements 2 and 3 also kick in. Can you design some kinda query tool for this? I am guessing it goes by whatever MP3 you submit to vivi. The problem is, he's excluding 'mixes'.

Putting aside that every song is mixed, he probably wants to avoid extended dance mixes. So, if Depeche Mode's Get The Balance Right! Were a legal submission, you couldn't submit the 8 minute Combination Mix just to meet the long song requirement. The fairest solution is to allow single and album versions, anything not specifically called a remix. The problem for me comes from when I find songs on compilation albums. A long song sure sounds like it could be a remix, but without the original album, I can't know.

OK, so I'm obviously the guy who will be asking the questions about the long songs. And with an unnecessarily long post to boot! Time will tell.) There are certain tracks on albums that are tracked as a single song, but are, in fact, a suite made up of different songs. The primary example that will be immediately familiar to you is Rush's '2112'. For the benefit of those here who don't care for the band, I'll describe the song here.

What complicates matters in this song is that although '2112' has eight individually named sections, some sections segue from one to the next, and others end with an actual bit of silence before the next section begins. In the case of '2112', parts I & II are effectively one 'song', then III & IV, V & VI, and finally VII & VIII, with a break between each pair of sections. I have to assume that the whole suite would not count as a 'long song' simply due to the fact of the break between sections, but that Parts III & IV would count as a single song and count as 'long' due to being over 7 minutes in total. Unfortunately, there's a lot of wiggle room in the middle. It can be VERY fuzzy. I have songs that clearly stand on their own, yet fade into each other.

(Black Bonzo's 'How Do You Feel' from the previous BotB has a Part 2. You can hear it begin in the last second of Part 1's fade-out. I had to manually split the MP3 for the contest.). I have songs that stand alone, yet have an ambient interlude connecting them. (E.g., a lot of Tangerine Dream's live stuff.). I even have songs that are completely connected rhythmically (i.e., no way to split the file without sounding clumsy), yet have no musical connection otherwise. (Pink Floyd has a number of these.

'Yet Another Movie' into 'Round and Round' for one; both medleys on Abbey Road count as well. That's not Pink Floyd, by the way.:duh: ) So, the obvious question, then, is: Do any of these qualify under the 'long song' criterion? I would say that if the band names a series of tracks as a collective work, then they can be considered one song. Example: With Rush's 2112, the track listing specifically states: 2112 I Overture II The Temples of Syrinx III Discovery IV Presentation V Oracle: The Dream VI Soliloquy VII Grand Finale Therefore, Rush's 2112 could be considered one song, in its 20:33 entirety. However, I would also say that you could use any single track (or, track VI and VII if you wanted to), since the band decided to divide it up that way. Conversely, if a band simply continued two tracks into each other without naming them as a collective work, they would NOT be allowed to be used together. Example: Van Halen's 'Eruption' + 'You've Really' Got Me' The two songs run into each other, but since Van Halen didn't name them as one work, they can't be counted as one song.

It had to be 7 minutes. I have a lot more songs at 6+ minutes than 7+ minutes. For this category, do we go by the album version? The radio or single version of a long song is often shorter. That's the point.:) 6 minutes isn't really that long of a song. Since you are allowed to submit either an album version or a single, I will go by the length of the song you send me. If you send me the radio version and it's 5:51, I don't care how long any other version is, you sent me a 5:51 song, it doesn't count as a long song.

Will add 'the band must be the original composer of the song'. Absolutely no covers allowed, well known or not. That's problematic. 'No covers' is a fine rule. But that is significantly different than 'the band must be the original composer of the song'.

That would eliminate the vast majority of country music, for example. For example, if Meat Loaf were an eligible artist, you'd exclude all of his Jim Steinman compositions.

Meat Loaf was the original performer, not the original composer. I hope your official rule will be 'original performer', not 'original composer'.

That's problematic. 'No covers' is a fine rule. But that is significantly different than 'the band must be the original composer of the song'. That would eliminate the vast majority of country music, for example. For example, if Meat Loaf were an eligible artist, you'd exclude all of his Jim Steinman compositions. Meat Loaf was the original performer, not the original composer. I hope your official rule will be 'original performer', not 'original composer'.

Eh, I have a severe distaste for 'original performers' who didn't write the song. Yes, I realize that disqualifies most country music and 90% of pop artists, but c'mon, being an artist is about creating music, not replicating someone else's idea first.

/rant Whatever, if you guys want to allow first performers, I guess I can be fine with that. Eh, I have a severe distaste for 'original performers' who didn't write the song. Yes, I realize that disqualifies most country music and 90% of pop artists, but c'mon, being an artist is about creating music, not replicating someone else's idea first. /rant Whatever, if you guys want to allow first performers, I guess I can be fine with that. That sounds like a great rule for Battle of the Songwriters. Also, to be consistent, you should remove any instruments that were played by non-composing musicians in the band.

Sorry Ringo, you didn't write the song? We're going to have to remove your drum track for the competition. Tangent: I originally scheduled the start of Round 1 on December 6th. That's still quite a bit away. I had made such a big sign-up window to allow for some music dredging. Does anyone think that's too much time?

Would anyone like to see the start time pushed up? I am not sure what would work out better. Next week isn't good because of Thanksgiving and I am not sure that the week after for starting works much better either since it is after thanksgiving. Either way, I don't have more than a song or two in mind but have a list of 5-10 bands that I can/want to use songs from so as long as I know when it is (and don't forget) I can make it work. Just to make sure.we only care about the Billboard 200 chart right.if they are like 10 on top something else it doesnt matter. Just wanting to make sure.

Rush 2112 Remastered Rarlabs

I have 4-6 songs I want to use. However isn't that good and is being used to fill the 7+ and instrumental songs. I am not sure if I want to do that.Also I might be super lame and try to find like a 7 minute violin solo or something to fill in the song without guitars or drums since none of my other songs have those. Only Billboard 200 matters. You can do that, but take into consideration if you do a 7 minute violin solo it'd better be the tits to get any points. If you try to fulfill all your requirements in one shot you might be putting yourself at risk of receiving a really low score that round.

Just some food for thought. Only Billboard 200 matters. You can do that, but take into consideration if you do a 7 minute violin solo it'd better be the tits to get any points. If you try to fulfill all your requirements in one shot you might be putting yourself at risk of receiving a really low score that round. Just some food for thought. Yeah I know.but from the other game I played.people have crappy taste anyway so I don't know how well I do.also if I score well having -30% on all of votes is probably going to be worse than having zero votes on one of my songs.

Counts as a guitar.:lol: I never in my wildest dreams thought someone would try using a Chapman Stick to fit that objective, but I'd definitely say that counts as a bass, since it basically serves the same purpose. (You trying to submit some Liquid Tension Experiment?:P) Close.

Same player.:-) (LTE wouldn't count anyway re: Petrucci.) I mean, a Stick could also be described like an amplified hammer dulcimer. What do you think about the dulcimer? (FWIW, Dead Can Dance is ineligible. I checked three contests ago.) Different kinds, too. Hammer dulcimer is a completely different instrument than a mountain dulcimer, which is basically a variation on the ukulele.

(But you know this.) Maybe a ruling that anything that is played like a guitar (i.e., strumming is a conventional way to play it) counts as a guitar, and any instrument where striking the strings (either directly or indirectly) is the convention counts as a piano. What do you think? Of course, that says nothing about the harpsichord, where striking a key causes a pluck of a string, but that's obviously a keyboard instrument too. Same player.:-) (LTE wouldn't count anyway re: Petrucci.) I mean, a Stick could also be described like an amplified hammer dulcimer. What do you think about the dulcimer?

(FWIW, Dead Can Dance is ineligible. I checked three contests ago.) Different kinds, too. Hammer dulcimer is a completely different instrument than a mountain dulcimer, which is basically a variation on the ukulele.

(But you know this.) Maybe a ruling that anything that is played like a guitar (i.e., strumming is a conventional way to play it) counts as a guitar, and any instrument where striking the strings (either directly or indirectly) is the convention counts as a piano. What do you think? Of course, that says nothing about the harpsichord, where striking a key causes a pluck of a string, but that's obviously a keyboard instrument too. Chapman Stick's wiki page say it's in the guitar family.

It counts as a guitar. Dulcimers are an entirely different breed of instrument, IMHO. Dulcimer usage wouldn't break the no guitar objective. Songs that I will NOT be submitting to fulfill the 7:00 criterion: Namlook & Laswell - 'Outland: From the Earth To the Ceiling' - 62:00 Move D & Namlook - 'A Day In the Live' - 52:45 Radio Massacre International - 'Burned & Frozen' - 52:21 Radio Massacre International - 'Frozen North IV' - 40:15 Flower Kings - 'The Truth Will Set You Free' - 31:01 (I hate this song anyway) Transatlantic - 'All of the Above' - 30:59 oodles of Klaus Schulze. I could go on.

I considered Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells.:rofl: That would just be mean. Songs that I will NOT be submitting to fulfill the 7:00 criterion: Namlook & Laswell - 'Outland: From the Earth To the Ceiling' - 62:00 Move D & Namlook - 'A Day In the Live' - 52:45 Radio Massacre International - 'Burned & Frozen' - 52:21 Radio Massacre International - 'Frozen North IV' - 40:15 Flower Kings - 'The Truth Will Set You Free' - 31:01 (I hate this song anyway) Transatlantic - 'All of the Above' - 30:59 oodles of Klaus Schulze. I could go on. I'd get really bored and skip.

But you know I have the attention span of a. Songs that I will NOT be submitting to fulfill the 7:00 criterion: Namlook & Laswell - 'Outland: From the Earth To the Ceiling' - 62:00 Move D & Namlook - 'A Day In the Live' - 52:45 Radio Massacre International - 'Burned & Frozen' - 52:21 Radio Massacre International - 'Frozen North IV' - 40:15 Flower Kings - 'The Truth Will Set You Free' - 31:01 (I hate this song anyway) Transatlantic - 'All of the Above' - 30:59 oodles of Klaus Schulze. I could go on. The longest song I have in my collection is The Orb - The Blue Room (Full Version). It's 40 minutes long. It's ineligible because, first, it's a remix, and second, The Orb somehow managed to chart in the top 100 of the Billboard 200.

Aren't most albums intended to be a collective work? I mean, you could pick something by Barry Manilow and it'd have an over-arching theme (i.e., all of the songs are sappy ballads) or Depeche Mode (other than their first 2 or 3 albums, all of the songs are about sex, religion or both - OK, sometimes about drugs). At some point you end up drawing a line at what you decide counts as a 'collective work' and what does not. Unfortunately, that line will fall along a rather fuzzy area and be subject to interpretation. Which is fine - I mean, it's music, not science after all. Oh, and there is a definite break at the end of each of 'Fatal Tragedy', 'Through Her Eyes' and 'The Spirit Carries On'.

Aren't most albums intended to be a collective work? I mean, you could pick something by Barry Manilow and it'd have an over-arching theme (i.e., all of the songs are sappy ballads) or Depeche Mode (other than their first 2 or 3 albums, all of the songs are about sex, religion or both - OK, sometimes about drugs). At some point you end up drawing a line at what you decide counts as a 'collective work' and what does not. Unfortunately, that line will fall along a rather fuzzy area and be subject to interpretation.

Oh, and there is a definite break at the end of each of 'Fatal Tragedy', 'Through Her Eyes' and 'The Spirit Carries On'. But it's the same kind of a break that you get in the middle of 2112. DT's SFAM is much, much, much more of a collective work than an overarching theme you see in a Barry Manilow album. Hell, DT's is deliberately named 'Act I', 'Act II', 'Scene One', ' Scene Two' etc and even has a Overture that outlines the thematic elements in the entire album. The album tells a single story from beginning to end. Any one track is just a small piece of that story. I mean, c'mon, you are the one who was arguing for 2112 being a single song, I'm pretty surprised you don't see this one as the same thing.

First, note that I edited my post (#108) to be less argumentative.:-) Secondly, I mean, c'mon, you are the one who was arguing for 2112 being a single song, I'm pretty surprised you don't see this one as the same thing. I argued no such thing. I merely asked whether you'd count it as a single work or as separate works merely due to the fact of separate, un-segued 'songs' within the suite. Then went on a bit of a bender about how any rule would be somewhat arbitrary due to the various ways songs might be 'connected'. For the record, if I weren't a lazy such-and-such and were running a BotB (but I am and am not, respectively:shrug: ), my rule would.not.

allow the entire 2112 suite (Overture+Temples would be OK), and.would. have counted VH's 'Eruption / YRGM' (or 'Long Distance Runaround + Fish', or whatever). Honestly, I don't want to make it into an argument. My submission doesn't fall under either fuzzy area, and I doubt anyone elses will. Besides, this is your contest. First, note that I edited my post to be less argumentative.:-) Secondly, I argued no such thing.

I merely asked whether you'd count it as a single work or as separate works merely due to the fact of separate, un-segued 'songs' within the suite. Then went on a bit of a bender about how any rule would be somewhat arbitrary due to the various ways songs might be 'connected'. For the record, if I weren't a lazy such-and-such and were running a BotB, my rule would.not. allow the entire 2112 suite (Overture+Temples would be OK), and.would. have counted VH's 'Eruption / YRGM'.

Honestly, I don't want to make it into an argument. My submission doesn't fall under either fuzzy area, and I doubt anyone elses will.

Besides, this is your contest. My reasoning stems from classical music.

A suite is considered a single work, even though its movements can completely stop and restart a new idea. In today's context, all the little creative things artists like to do make it hard to differentiate, which is why I defer to the artists' naming conventions. 2112 is one song with three movements and seven parts, as defined by Rush. SFAM is one song with two acts, nine scenes, and twelve parts, as defined by Dream Theater. Eruption + You've Really Got Me are two tracks with nothing in common but a segue, as defined by Van Halen. A lot of bands have two tracks that have absolutely nothing to do with each other but segue into one another simply to be stylistic.

It's not meant to be one piece of work, it's just a stylized continuum you hear when you listen to the album straight through. That was just my thought process for that decision. As an aside from this conversation, I wish there was a way to 'link' songs in iTunes so if you had a series of tracks you wanted to always listen to as a whole it would play them together. Depends, though, on how you got them into iTunes to begin with.

Mine are nearly all ripped from CD, and you can group songs to rip as one track. I haven't tried this, but I believe there's a way to link separate tracks together so that they play one after the other even in shuffle mode. You'll have to Google it to find out for sure. I think at one point there was a way that iTunes would recognize, but iPods would not. Not sure if later pods can do it or not. I actually wanted to use a remix because it would be shorter.

Oh, and your bet is on. Honestly, I think if a mix was created (a) by the original artist (b) to be released relatively concurrently with what we're calling 'original' and (c) as a complement to the 'original' (e.g., the radio edit vs the full version), it ought to be fine, but it's not my contest. Bands used to create two versions for concurrent release all the time for that exact reason.

So, Vivi, which version of The Beatles' 'Revolution' would you consider 'original'? The hard-rock version (B-side of 'Hey Jude' that they play on the radio all the time) or the slower 'Revolution 1' (on the white album, almost no airplay)? The album version was recorded first, but the single was released first. Honestly, I think if a mix was created (a) by the original artist (b) to be released relatively concurrently with what we're calling 'original' and (c) as a complement to the 'original' (e.g., the radio edit vs the full version), it ought to be fine, but it's not my contest. Bands used to create two versions for concurrent release all the time for that exact reason.

So, Vivi, which version of The Beatles' 'Revolution' would you consider 'original'? The hard-rock version (B-side of 'Hey Jude' that they play on the radio all the time) or the slower 'Revolution 1' (on the white album, almost no airplay)?

The album version was recorded first, but the single was released first. Eh, if it's that up in the air, it doesn't really matter.

I don't want to be a stickler on that one point. I would be fine with either version of Revolution, for example. As an example of what I would not accept: Megadeth remastered their 1985 album 'Killing Is My Business. And Business is Good' in 2002.

Several of the parts were completely re-recorded and cleaned up and the entire album was completely remastered using techniques that had been developed in the 17 years since it was originally released. I would count the 1985 versions, I would not count the 2002 versions.

A few clarifications: If there is discrepancy on the length of a song (I.E. It's 2:30 in media player and 2:31 in WinAmp): if you can find a source that says the track length is 2:30 or shorter and it varies by a few seconds in various media players, it will still be accepted as a short length song.

Wikipedia does not count as a source. Also, when each round is put up, I will list what I believe to be the met objectives underneath each song. If the group strongly disagrees with my ruling I will consider reversing my decision.

So far you guys have been pretty good about discussing objectives with me if they are borderline, but I just wanted to ensure you guys have a safeguard in case I screw up. Topic of Discussion: I've been thinking of this for a few days and someone finally asked me about it. If someone submits all 6 of their songs up front and another person submits them round by round, and the first person uses Band A in round 5 and the second person uses Band A in round 2, who doesn't get to use their submission? My first reaction is that the person who submitted it first - whether it was intended for Round 2 or Round 5 - gets to use it. So the person who submitted all six songs at the start would have the 'trump card' if you will.

Topic of Discussion: I've been thinking of this for a few days and someone finally asked me about it. If someone submits all 6 of their songs up front and another person submits them round by round, and the first person uses Band A in round 5 and the second person uses Band A in round 2, who doesn't get to use their submission? My first reaction is that the person who submitted it first - whether it was intended for Round 2 or Round 5 - gets to use it.

So the person who submitted all six songs at the start would have the 'trump card' if you will. As a person who submitted his full set, I agree with your first reaction. Yes, this can cause some problems if someone submits something early and then changes his mind. But there are only six slots anyway, so it's not like there's a real opportunity to hoard bands. Topic of Discussion: I've been thinking of this for a few days and someone finally asked me about it. If someone submits all 6 of their songs up front and another person submits them round by round, and the first person uses Band A in round 5 and the second person uses Band A in round 2, who doesn't get to use their submission?

My first reaction is that the person who submitted it first - whether it was intended for Round 2 or Round 5 - gets to use it. So the person who submitted all six songs at the start would have the 'trump card' if you will.

My thought would be that the bnd would be DQ'd and both players would choose a new song. Given the restrictions on song choices having two players submit the same band would seem very rare. Either way, I don't care. I can find another song if someone steals one of mine. I was thinking about a rather complicated rule structure for a future contest, but I think whoever submits first is a fine approach. It encourages people to submit early.

An idea, if two people submit the same band with plenty of time to spare, is for the moderator to contact both. 'You both want to submit Band X. Is one of you willing to change?' Chances are, I'd have some alternates anyway. I wouldn't mind. Probably refuse to vote for the other guy's submission out of anger principle, of course. I was thinking about a rather complicated rule structure for a future contest, but I think whoever submits first is a fine approach.

It encourages people to submit early. An idea, if two people submit the same band with plenty of time to spare, is for the moderator to contact both. 'You both want to submit Band X.

Is one of you willing to change?' That certainly works if I'm on the ball and can keep up with submissions as they come in well before the deadline. Whether or not that's actually going to happen. Round 1 Download here ((Wait 45 seconds for the 'Regular Download' button to appear, then download) Battle of the Bands V is officially underway. Below are the songs submitted for Round 1. A few notes: 1) On 'The Glitch Mob' - This kind of sucks, but I can't let this one count as an instrumental. I'm afraid if I do then it becomes a slippery slope of 'how much 'ooh' and 'ahh' can you have before it's not an instrumental anymore'.

I'm just going to draw the line at 'any 'ooh' or 'ahh' disqualifies the objective'. 2) To the submitter of Fanfarlo, I'm sincerely sorry, when you sent this to me in a PM to check over I replied that it was from 2010. It turns out it was actually from late 2009.:oops: 3) This weekend kind of sucked cuz I went out of town and by the time I got back it was too late to give feedback or offer the submitter a chance to send in another song. Hopefully in the future I can respond to situations like (1) and (2) before the round gets posted up. I will ask that if you guys have concerns like whether or not the song meets a particular objective that you get those questions to me with plenty of time before the deadline. My 1/50th of a dollar on the first submitter ruling from above: I think if Poster A submitted Band X for round 5 and Poster B submits Band X for round 2, Poster A must move song to round 2.

Unless there's some magic formula as to which song is in which round that makes no sense to me. I'm not necessarily saying Poster A should move it up or forfeit their use, but it wouldn't break my heart.

I actually like that compromise. Since this way, if Poster A decides to not use Band X in round 5, Poster B wouldn't get screwed.

My 1/50th of a dollar on the first submitter ruling from above: I think if Poster A submitted Band X for round 5 and Poster B submits Band X for round 2, Poster A must move song to round 2. Unless there's some magic formula as to which song is in which round that makes no sense to me. I'm not necessarily saying Poster A should move it up or forfeit their use, but it wouldn't break my heart. I actually like that compromise.

Since this way, if Poster A decides to not use Band X in round 5, Poster B wouldn't get screwed. I guess I'm alright with that.