Desert Island Part Deux?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
namkcuR said:
I think rule #3 is rubbish. A song that was desert island material last time may damn well still be desert island material this time.

I don't even know if I'm going to participate, but I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

Sure, it may be desert island material, but this is a different contest and using different material keeps it more interesting.

Plus, that rule gives preference to those who have not competed before, which I think is good. We want to let as many new people as possible compete.
 
KhanadaRhodes said:
ooh, it would be awesome if i could put unreleased songs on my thing :hmm:

The rule is that a song has to be officially released in some capacity for it to be included. It's a pretty lenient rule: a song only ever played live would be permitted if it were included on an official live release, and something like U2's The Fool would be permitted due to its iTunes release. However, U2 songs like My Time Hasn't Come or Mercy would be ruled out due to the lack of an official release. I hope no-one uses Wild Irish Rose, because that one could be tricky.
 
Axver said:
The rule is that a song has to be officially released in some capacity for it to be included. It's a pretty lenient rule: a song only ever played live would be permitted if it were included on an official live release, and something like U2's The Fool would be permitted due to its iTunes release. However, U2 songs like My Time Hasn't Come or Mercy would be ruled out due to the lack of an official release. I hope no-one uses Wild Irish Rose, because that one could be tricky.
yeah, that's fine with me. and you wouldn't have had to worry about me using mercy anyway. i'm not trying to drive everyone on the desert island to commit suicide :wink:

i'll start working on my compilation tonight :drool:
 
KhanadaRhodes said:
yeah, that's fine with me. and you wouldn't have had to worry about me using mercy anyway. i'm not trying to drive everyone on the desert island to commit suicide :wink:

:lmao:

I'm a bit concerned though, last.fm appears to indicate you've been playing U218. :tsk:

i'll start working on my compilation tonight :drool:

I've already made mine. :drool:

Though its tracklisting is shit, so I'm working on improving the flow now. Making mixes is too much fun.
 
Axver said:
:lmao:

I'm a bit concerned though, last.fm appears to indicate you've been playing U218. :tsk:
:lol: it was the first time i'd listened to the cd and i found it rather disappointing to be honest :shh:

I've already made mine. :drool:

Though its tracklisting is shit, so I'm working on improving the flow now. Making mixes is too much fun.
yeah, i love making them as well. sticking to one song per artist will be hard, but i love a challenge :drool:
 
KhanadaRhodes said:

:lol: it was the first time i'd listened to the cd and i found it rather disappointing to be honest :shh:

You should see how badly I slagged it off over on RateYourMusic.com :drool:

(Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Axver and scroll down to below my personal details to where it has 'recent', 'ratings', 'collection', 'reviews'. Click 'reviews' and it's the most recent one there.)

yeah, i love making them as well. sticking to one song per artist will be hard, but i love a challenge :drool:

I expected it to be harder than it was. I set myself some criteria to make selections easier and it gave me a tracklisting almost perfectly within the time limit! I didn't need to cut anything (though I did replace a few songs as the original selections didn't work).
 
Axver said:
You should see how badly I slagged it off over on RateYourMusic.com :drool:

(Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Axver and scroll down to below my personal details to where it has 'recent', 'ratings', 'collection', 'reviews'. Click 'reviews' and it's the most recent one there.)
:ohmy: wow, harsh! oh well, imo it's deserved.

I expected it to be harder than it was. I set myself some criteria to make selections easier and it gave me a tracklisting almost perfectly within the time limit! I didn't need to cut anything (though I did replace a few songs as the original selections didn't work).
yeah, i'm trying to decide if i want to do a theme or what.

:lol: i could be really uncreative and just pick my most played songs by each artist!
 
KhanadaRhodes said:

:ohmy: wow, harsh! oh well, imo it's deserved.

And I thought I was being polite. :wink:

yeah, i'm trying to decide if i want to do a theme or what.

:lol: i could be really uncreative and just pick my most played songs by each artist!

Haha, that would just be lazy!

I suppose I made life easier for myself by setting one rule: "no half hour long prog epics!"
 
Lancemc said:
I like those rules, and I'll have to count up my minutes exactly to meet the mark. I may have to drop a song or two afterall, which is no biggy.

And I have a question regarding the multiple tracks issue. Can I email you to talk about some specifics?

if you have iTunes, click where it says 2.6 hours and it will change to the 2:00:00 format.
 
OK, who's going to run this? I think it'd be helpful to sort that out. I've thought about it and I'd be happy to do it on two conditions:

1. I have a backup in case I do end up having a day where I have no Internet access and can't start the next round.
2. EVERYBODY FOLLOWS THE RULES! I can't emphasise that enough. Last time, I had to go through and fix the formatting of some submissions. This time, I won't have the time for that. Plus, it was boring as hell and I don't really intend to do it again anyway.

But LMP, do you want to do it?
 
Screwtape2 said:
I have just three questions:

1. Are we judged by the total presentation (mood, flow, theme, etc.) or by the song choices?

2. Can I title my playlist?

3. Does anyone have links to some of the threads from actual tourney?

1. It's however the voters choose to judge it. In my entry for the first competition, I tried to find a good balance between quality songs and cohesive flow.

2. Sure, go ahead.

3. Here they are: http://forum.interference.com/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=169339&sortby=&sortorder=
 
Axver said:
OK, who's going to run this? I think it'd be helpful to sort that out. I've thought about it and I'd be happy to do it on two conditions:

1. I have a backup in case I do end up having a day where I have no Internet access and can't start the next round.
2. EVERYBODY FOLLOWS THE RULES! I can't emphasise that enough. Last time, I had to go through and fix the formatting of some submissions. This time, I won't have the time for that. Plus, it was boring as hell and I don't really intend to do it again anyway.

But LMP, do you want to do it?

I'll do it, only if you don't want to.

What do I need to do?
 
Hey Axver and LemonMacPhisto,

I'm going to be doing a lot of research for school over the next two weeks which means a lot of time on the computer. So I'll have time to handle the duty of gathering and sending/ uploading the files if you want to leave that task to me. It might be faster and more efficent to have more than one person running the whole thing.
 
LemonMacPhisto said:


I'll do it, only if you don't want to.

What do I need to do?

How about we split the duties? I'll handle the organisation side of things, which I should have time to do, then I'll hand it over to you? That means you'd be the one making the threads for each round and stuff along those lines, while I'll set up the contest, get the master list organised, make sure no-one's broken the rules, etc. I did all of that last time and it's fairly mundane work.

How does that sound to you?
 
Screwtape2 said:
Thanks.

I've put together my playlist and I'm 99% sure that you'll love it. The mood is pretty similiar to that of The Dark Third.

I'm looking forward to this. :drool:

Also, I really need to send you the PRR songs from their EP. I keep forgetting. :reject:

Screwtape2 said:
Hey Axver and LemonMacPhisto,

I'm going to be doing a lot of research for school over the next two weeks which means a lot of time on the computer. So I'll have time to handle the duty of gathering and sending/ uploading the files if you want to leave that task to me. It might be faster and more efficent to have more than one person running the whole thing.

That could be helpful. Last time, we had everyone upload their own compilation and send me the links, then we (well, hippy) set up a master page linking to all the compilations and that link was distributed to everyone who left an e-mail address on the threads.

After the 15th of this month, I may find myself rather limited on the up/downloading front, so I'd not be the person to handle duties there.
 
KhanadaRhodes said:
btw, just to be clear, remixes and the like are okay, right? just so long as they're commercially released and everything?

I don't see why not.
 
OK, here's my idea for a new format. As I said earlier, I'd like repechage rounds. So I'm thinking of something like this:

24 contestants. 12 qualifying rounds, with two tracklistings competing in each round. The 12 winners qualify automatically for the main competition's heats. The 12 losers qualify for four quick-fire repechage rounds, with three tracklistings in each repechage. The winner of each repechage qualifies for the four remaining places in the main competition's heats.

The main competition then begins and it's sudden death. 16 contestants, thus 8 heats. Winners advance to the quarter finals, then semis, then grand final.

Thoughts? How long should each round be? Should the repechages all be held at once and try to get them straight out of the way, or just make them shorter than normal rounds but following each other consecutively? Could the repechages be done another way? We just need to maintain the pattern of 2 people in the grand final, 4 in the semis, 8 in the quarters.

Or does somebody have a completely different format they want to propose? I'm open to new ideas.
 
KhanadaRhodes said:
btw, just to be clear, remixes and the like are okay, right? just so long as they're commercially released and everything?

Absolutely. If I could legitimately acquire a song somewhere, then it's eligible. It doesn't matter if it's an album track, a remix on a single, a track off an official live release, an iTunes bonus track, or even a free track from the artist's website. Ineligible material is mainly just live tracks from bootlegs (not counting "official bootlegs" from the likes of Pearl Jam) and unreleased tracks/demos/whatnot, e.g. Axtung Beibi tracks.
 
Axver said:
OK, here's my idea for a new format. As I said earlier, I'd like repechage rounds. So I'm thinking of something like this:

24 contestants. 12 qualifying rounds, with two tracklistings competing in each round. The 12 winners qualify automatically for the main competition's heats. The 12 losers qualify for four quick-fire repechage rounds, with three tracklistings in each repechage. The winner of each repechage qualifies for the four remaining places in the main competition's heats.

The main competition then begins and it's sudden death. 16 contestants, thus 8 heats. Winners advance to the quarter finals, then semis, then grand final.

Thoughts? How long should each round be? Should the repechages all be held at once and try to get them straight out of the way, or just make them shorter than normal rounds but following each other consecutively? Could the repechages be done another way? We just need to maintain the pattern of 2 people in the grand final, 4 in the semis, 8 in the quarters.

Or does somebody have a completely different format they want to propose? I'm open to new ideas.

Wait, different tracklistings each round?
 
LemonMacPhisto said:


Wait, different tracklistings each round?

No, absolutely not! Maybe I should have written 'contestant' instead of 'tracklistings'. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
 
I just had a thought. Why not separate all of the playlists into four or six groups? The groups are made of similiar sounding playlists or something like that. When the schedule is setup, why not pull a name out of four separate hats. That way the albums seem fresh when put up against different sounding playlists.

Example:
Group One: Happy
Group Two: Sad
Group Three: Angry
Group Four: Calm

Happy # 4 vs. Angry # 2
Sad # 6 vs. Calm # 1

So you end up randomly picking something out of each group. This way two similiar playlists don't meet until the semifinals.

Good idea or bad idea?
 
That's an interesting idea, Screwtape. I'm not sure if it would work, if we'd be able to find a convenient way to group the compilations, but it could make things a bit more interesting and avoid a couple of unfortunate match-ups that we had last time.

Here's a VERY ROUGH(!) outline of what I described in my earlier post. I hope this makes sense. Tell me if anything's still not clear.

DesertIslandproposedbrackets.jpg
 
Axver said:
How long should each round be?
two months.

lol no for real, like maybe two days? everything sounds good to me :up:

and yay for allowing remixes! i figured they would be fine, but i wanted to be sure. because one of the songs i'm thinking of including is on a studio album (as in not a compilation), but it's a remix. and it's not a bonus track. go figure! :wink:
 
Ok, I just shaved my playlist down to 2:39:16 :drool:.

I'm damn proud of it, and I think there's only 1 track on there that may or may not be elegable...I need to research it a little more to be sure...if not, it's no problem to choose another song.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom