I am actually fine with allowing any number of songs of any length as i think we are going to be a little self regulating over the matter. After all this discussion, no one is going to risk playing a liturgy of epics for fear of losing the interest of the crowd, that's my take, buy it or not. The truth is, when you start to look at the specifics, certain years were known for their "short and sweets" and others for the opus, it seems unfair to arbitrarily preclude the great songs merely because they were too long to fit in your format. Everyone knows that simply because a song is long, it does not make it better. If you wanted to set a time limit on the songs you almost needed to do it before we chose our years.
You guys need to stop being such slack ass lazy digitty buggers ...if this thing needs to run to 4:00 am to get to the root of what is a great song, so be it. (please note the sarcastic tone in this last sentence)
2 comments:
Good points about self-regulating, Marc. Ultimately, it will up to each player, and therefore each judge, to determine whether or not a particular musical piece has gone beyond its buy date beyond the 7 or 8 minute mark.
But....the contest will likely run out of steam if we push it beyond the five hour mark, so cutting off a song at an 8 or 10 or 'x' minute mark probably still makes sense.
As for needing to know limits before picking the year, we're talking 10 songs total that will be played, possibly 1 or 2 more in a tie-breaker situation post-10 rounds. No more than 7 per year really. I've got to think it's possible to narrow down a list to a max of 7 great songs in any given year, without having to resort to the long bomb more than once or twice.
Yeah I agree. The point is to to have a fun night, and hear some great music, and let's not corrupt that. But I do want to play enough rounds to justify all of this research!! That's where the motivation to limit the time per song comes in (in some way). I like where we've landed and I think it should be a blast.
Post a Comment