The "All 57 Song"

witesol · Post by **witesol** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:36 pm

Ubertar, I apologize for leaving it infinished. I meant generally speaking not specifically you. There was no smoke and mirrors by me not posting an opinion of the song I listened to, other than I could tell where you're coming from musically and where you are engineering wise. I won't claim to know you, but one can tell how well someone has their craft down. I can temper your opinion based on what I heard.
So, apologies.

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:53 pm

That witesol post (above) is the most patronizing post yet in this snarky thread.

ubertar · Post by **ubertar** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:53 pm

That still sounds passive-aggressive to me, but I'll accept your apology.

I'd be curious to hear some more of your stuff... I wouldn't want to make any kind of judgment based on just one song, especially something that was meant as an experiment. I can understand if you don't want to post anything else here, though.

trodden · Post by **trodden** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:02 pm

I'll try not to puke on the bar again next time.

kid-surf · Post by **kid-surf** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:21 am

ubatar-

What sounds familiar about me going to the beach? Seems pretty important to you to garner support for something (?) so spit it out homie. What's bug'n ya? ,

Why not just come out with it. Or, well, why say it at all? (sound familiar?)

One thing with me, If something's on my mind, I'll just tell you. Just like that. The good thing about that is you'll always know where I'm coming from. No ambiguity. Trust me. Not passive aggressive, just aggressive.

Anyway ... since you seem to think that was a top secret message of some sort, I'll decode it for ya.

Someone previous in this thread insinuated that all of us getting "witesol's" back were all one and the same guy. Well, to find out for yourself the we weren't, all you'd have needed to do is go to Malibu on the day I said I'd be there. It's not like I'm gonna change my schedule to accommodate a meeting. So, the alternative was going to Malibu.... but like I said, you gotta live in LA, otherwise it could be a long drive.

And now I'm lock-down in the studio till..............? So I guess, at this point, you'll just have to take our word that there were no trollz in this thread other than the dude called "Ismellephant", but he came clean.

Hope that uncovers the mystery.

Let me know if you wanna write a book about it, I'll help you find you a publisher.

And by the way --- Thanks for halfway admitting that the negative reaction to witesol's tune was due to territorial pride. I already told witesole that that was the reason, but I'm sure he knew it himself too.

If it's any consolation to you --- I didn't like the approach that was taken to post my buddies tune, and I let the dude (Dot) know that. Why? Well, for one, I think you essentially bait people to tare it apart when introducing it to a forum where people have no clue who you are (it can be perceived as presumptuous to imply that you're "enlightening" people when they don;t know you). I think that's why people here got pissed. And I think when you realize witesole is a cool guy, then you get passed the other and realize that what he did was pretty cool, regardless if you like the music. So, I think the response witesol's tune received here is textbook territorializm in other words.

Don't mean it's a good way to carry yourself. Besides, when artists attack other artists (hey, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt

) it says to me one of two things. 1) Immature 2) Insecure.

If you're neither of those, there's nothing gained by slamming someone else's work. It's not informative to anyone because it's subjective. Saying something sucks is the same as not saying it, conceptually, so why say it other than to be a dick? Right, there's no good reason.

We're supposed to be one brotherhood, us musicians, not like some goofy high-school clique. Besides, do you really wanna be in the dork clique?

Anyway, see you at the beach cutie (remember when chicks would right that in your yearbook.)

Anywavs..... that's prolly my last post unless there's something else. Right, I'll get the door.

Cheers,

P.S. MadG -- is that you? Oh, well, you'll tell me if it is..........

red cross · Post by **red cross** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 4:40 am

That song still sucks though.

bobbydj · Post by **bobbydj** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:06 am

It would be so cool if this thread was is rules. Actually, in some inexplicable way it might be.

b3groover · Post by **b3groover** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:26 am

Man, there are some serious egos in this thread.

The amazing thing is, it represents everything that is annoying and pretentious about TOMB, in the most hilarious way! Congrats!

ubertar · Post by **ubertar** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:35 am

Hey kid-surf-- I was just referencing this thread, which spawned a running joke/catch phrase around here.

toothpastefordinner · Post by **toothpastefordinner** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:26 am

I think the problem is here that if you can't make a decent-sounding recording with a 57 and a little bit of time, you're not good at recording.

witesol · Post by **witesol** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:07 am

Now I'm patronizing, wow.

OK, Maybe I should have posted that I don't understand your music Ubertar, I'm not qualified to comment on your song. I'm not familiar with that style at all. It doesn't press my buttons. So what. At least I can stop short of saying it just sucks. What I referred to in "understanding where you're coming from musically" and didn't express, was that I now understand how you wouldn't like my song at all based on what I heard. Why I didn't post that is because I can't pretend to know what else you listen to and enjoy. But usually what someone does in the course of a few original songs does give at least a hint of their tastes or music sensibilities, wouldn't you agree? In addition to not understanding the music genre, the first cut I listened to was recorded rather poorly. Yes, the second one was much better, clearer. Also I can't tell if the exploration of the tuning, mismatched grooves and dissonance was coming from someone who knows the rules, and chooses to break them. Again, it was finished material. I make it a point to not comment on someones finished projects. The songs are done, what good would it do to criticize it at that point. Would someone go back and remix it? Normally people get defensive at that point when unsolicited $.02 comes in, understandibly so. I do. It's tacky.

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:42 am

When you put something out there and let it run free (your song, for example) you are exposing yourself to scrutiny and criticism. Deal with it somehow (besides saying that you don't think it's valid to criticize a finished work).

You must enjoy the attention or you wouldn't keep coming back here for more.

I still think you should have used the 57 on guitars instead of just using the POD. Then it would all have that 57 sonic imprint, whatever that means. That would have been more interesting.

witesol · Post by **witesol** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:43 am

Tatertot wrote:That witesol post (above) is the most patronizing post yet in this snarky thread.

yea, does seem to appear that way. It wasn't. explanation above.

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:51 am

Your explanation makes sense. I know it's very difficult to convey subtle concepts in a typed post. Sorry about that.

About that POD guitar...

ubertar · Post by **ubertar** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:51 am

witesol wrote:OK, Maybe I should have posted that I don't understand your music Ubertar, I'm not qualified to comment on your song. I'm not familiar with that style at all. It doesn't press my buttons...

See, that doesn't bother me at all. Thanks for posting.

Message Board

The "All 57 Song"

Who is online