Fan.
Tast.
Tic.

Yep

For me, this song is precisely as long as it should be, builds exactly as it should, does in spades what it sets out to do.

This is one of those songs that sooths the soul.

crankypage wrote:
Exactly :) I tend to rate only things that made me notice how much I like them.

phineas wrote:
Agree. I tend to use 1..3 and 7..10 a lot and skip 4..6, but that's changing.
Now that I've rated most stuff I like a lot and commented on likewise and the other side of the spectrum rated and commented low, the rating for the middle sections starts, which is much harder, since I'm neither annoyed nor pleased by it, you see the song and have to actively try to tell yourself if you liked it or not and then decide to wait with the rating till next time the song comes along
Now that I've rated so many tunes, I also not that the process started in wich I lower and raise ratings to both the center and to the extremes, which causes me to enter the 4..6 rating more often.
We'll see what the future brings.

Silly song.

It sounds as if the artist needed to fill in some time to wrap up the project and was too lazy to work on a real song.

This is just an epic, heartfelt, teriffic song. Made me stop what I was doing and flip over to the RP page. Isn't that the test?

DMay wrote:
DMay - You make ridiculous posts.

You have also given "Godlike" ratings to bands such as Eels, Squirrel Nut Zippers, Cake, and James McMurtry. Not "Quite Likeable", not "Outstanding", but "Godlike". Hmmmm. It might be best if you move out of that glass house if you insist on throwing stones.

Edit1: You've posted your professed "philosophy" (he says generously) as this: "How do you vote when rating songs? I always do a 1 or a 10 and never anything in between. I just figure I either do or don't like it." Good for you. That is as simplistic as most DCforC songs.

And one more thing: this song goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on. And on.

Edit2: props to Tux. We may disagree on some things musically, but his post nails it when it comes to "taste".

Definitely a bipolar tune, in terms of listener opinion anyway. Guess I can agree with the overly long "outtro"...but overall I really like this song.

i guess it could be a little shorter - skip some of the repetitive "so much closer" part to the "c'mon" harmony. solid anyway. :goodvibes:

The RP police has spoken.

DMay wrote:
No he has not. He might have a different taste of music than you have.
nobody has a bad taste in music, except maybe if you do not listen to music at all, since you can't have any taste for music at all, which might be considered bad taste.
I however do not consider DCFC to produce music. In my taste it's pure noise.
Auto-muted noise that is, which makes it beautiful again: pure silence.

This is the same group that does that," Ooh-wah-hoh!" tune isn't it?
I think I like...

Are there any other words in this song? "I need you so much closer........I need you so much closer " Alright already !!

I like this stuff....

Aye, that I do.

8)

(new relevance)

phineas wrote:

Phineas - You have bad taste in music.

LOVE IT!

phineas wrote:

Like, the complete opposite of everything you said. With each repetition the singer's anguish is more apparent. It is a beautiful song.

Just goes on and on and on and on and on and on. And on.

Otto wrote:

i don't think i'll ever be able to hear this song again without thinking of that episode... :D

The hypnotic repetition at the close is reminiscent of 10CC's "I'm Not in Love," which I've enjoyed since it first hit the airwaves. RP is a lot like weather systems in Cleveland, OH -- if you don't care for what's going on, come back in five minutes.

God, I love this song. Probably my favorite moment of an incredible album. Yeah, it's long and plodding, which makes it horrible background music, but it's one of those where you just need to put the headphones on, close your eyes, and go where it takes you. Love it. 9.

Beautiful song from a really good album by the same name.

bluesfan wrote:
:) righto: a 2

ScottFromWyoming wrote:
??? The song doesn't warrant its length, simple as that. It's not elegant in its simplicity, just simplistic.

And damn if the thump.thump.thump.thump.thump.thump drumming isn't annoying as hell.

Welcome to Short Attention Span Theater. :verymad:

MikeWC wrote:
It works well in the ads because they're 20 seconds long.