Album: MegafaunAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 1865
Length: 4:46
Plays (last 30 days): 1
share
tweet
Sing along, walk inside, get it before it goes away
To break your stride
They want to know
They tell you when to get here
They tell you where to go
Sing along, walk inside
Take a seat, watch the show
Take your time when everyone knows
If it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Days of wine, windless road
People come from house
Just to take a seat and watch the show
And nobody leaves
Goes through the door
Songs that you sing
Are the songs that you've sung before
They broke your stride
They had to know
They told you how to get there
Then they told you where to go
Make a wrong turn and you end up
On the dead end road
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
Take your time 'cause everyone knows
That if it starts too fast it's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow
It's gonna end real slow, real, real slow
And they say; "how ya doing?'
See, that was easy.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
RP gives you four indications of the relative values of the decile scoring values:
Numbers
Descriptors
Colors
Relative Location
Since they all mean the same thing, just use the one that works for you. If you don't like the descriptors (and it seems that you do not) and numbers aren't your thing, just think: I like this, I will give it a #84f800.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Does anyone else find "Really, very, very" also very redundant?
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
We need something that has multiple dimensions to provide complete contexts for our ratings. I could see ratings along the lines of 9-7-3-6-8-8-5. Each number would have an assigned meaning in its own context. Then perhaps a combinatoric description that captures the rating in a single pithy word, phrase, or paragraph. For example, a rating of 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 would boil up to "Nickelback".
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
To answer your question in the first sentence, I think the answer is "No"
I gave this a 9 rating. Here's another good Megafaun tune:
Edit: Links not allowed? Search for "The Fade" at YouTube then
this is a feel good slow down chill out enjoy a beer with friends at a bbq kinda song…
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
same exact thing for me.
i hear the dead and pink floyd influences, but that's not why i like it. there's just something calming about this one.
i want to hear more.
feel the same way as i did 10 years ago. (particularly like the little half-step in "you had to know"
Edit: Links not allowed? Search for "The Fade" at YouTube then
Dude, this is a little harsh. Pretty sure that Bill/William has commented elsewhere that he does look at song ratings, like maybe he considers them more important than individual song comments. (Sorry I don't have a reference.)
Anyway, it's amusing that one rant led to an even more emotional counter-rant. Lighten up indeed.
Does anyone else find the RP rating categories to be really, very, very poorly conceived? Seriously people, it is moronic. ...
1. intro (1-10)
2. songwriting/lyrics (1-10)
3. musicianship/arrangement (1-10)
4. want to listen again and give it more time (T/F)
5. Thought this was new but it is over a decade old (T/F)
6. Should be a national anthem (T/F)
7. Can't Rate GODLIKE (T/F)
;-)
Unnecessary rant. One might even say puerile and annoying.
Heartily agree! If this guy has nothing better to do, at least go somewhere else! Jeez!
Very enjoyable.
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
Hey friend,
What is your plan for a rating system?
I'm sure this station will consider it.The content does not cost you a dime if you
don't want to contribute.
Please pick up your hat at the door sir!
The criticism is a bit too long maybe, but I've also had similar thoughts. However, 1-10 is 1-10. You can use it to mean whatever you want.
I wish Bill would add another selection or two so we get a better feel for Megafaun.
Get a streaming service and its at your finger tips
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Speaking of which...
Of all the things to get upset over.
Shades of the Dead....
Very much so: really the best Garcia guitar since he died. Sadly, the rest of the album isn't nearly so good. Gave the song an 8.
I wish Bill would add another selection or two so we get a better feel for Megafaun.
I was just wondering what other megafaun sounds like!
Your entire post quite well explained the system. I give it a 9.
I also like the addition of labels to the numbers. Often, I have hesitated between two numbers, trying to decide if a given song is truly "most excellent" or merely "pretty good".
I give the system itself a 10.
This song I gave a 3. It's ok, it doesn't make me want to hit the "skip" button but it doesn't sound that interesting to my ears. I'm willing to hear more music from Megafaun.
scrubbrush wrote:
... or one might say the rant is sucko-barfo.
============================
Dear fredphoesh (if that is indeed your real name):
The Radio Paradise rating system has been functioning satisfactorily for a decade or more.
Your comment is timely and appreciated. I expect BillG will act on it as quickly as he acts on comments to remove certain songs from the playlist.
Have a nice day!
unclehud
I agree that the words chosen, like most adjectives, are based on one's subjective opinion of one adjective versus another, but I think you've missed the point.
With this attempt to apply labels to point ratings, we are provided with some guidance as to what each score means. I am absolutely sick of ratings where anything less that 9 means crap. By saying "5 means pretty good" we are guided to give 5s and not feel like we're disparaging the song. Applying a definition of "outstanding" to 9 also prevents the over-application of 10s, and a definition of ho-hum to 3 means we can even give songs 3s with relative impunity.
Applying these adjectives to scores also removes some subjectivity on the meaning of numbers. I give ratings of 4 stars frequently on tripadvisor for good meals/activities, as to me 4/5 means very good. However, to most vendors, 4 stars can feel like a condemnation. I really wish they'd only let you give one 5 star rating for every nine other ratings you've given of 4 stars or less.
RP's system allows for a much greater range of scores and a much more meaningful scoring system, despite minor ambiguity in the selection of categories. I'll take this scoring system over the broken scoring system of tripadvisor or amazon any day.
P.S. Most excellent DOES NOT mean THE most excellent. It is a common construct in British and American English to say "most [adjective] [noun]" to mean "very [adjective] [noun]". See this discussion for guidance:
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/a-most-excellent-choice.68121/
Also, the word marginal in isolation lacks an adjective, I agree, but the etymology of the word is from the Latin margo meaning edge. Therefore I take it to mean on the very cusp of sucko-barfo - it is marginally better than the worst possible rating.
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
I agree, no need to correct the dog with a sledgehammer. Such tools are often counterproductive. However, I too would prefer a simplified rating system. A five point system from "Hate it" to "Gotta have it" might do the job more efficiently.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Dude, lighten up! The ratings don't mean shit, they're a totally arbitrary, personal reaction to art. It has no effect on ANYTHING except evidently to annoy you, which I personally find a good thing...
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Unnecessary rant. One might even say puerile and annoying.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Methinks that someone got up on the wrong side of bed, or is spending too much time in their head, or both. Just appreciating the great music mix on RP might very well be the cure for these ailments.
Firstly, the top 3 are more or less the same
10-godlike 9-outstanding 8-most excellent
FFS, MOST excellent is the most excellent something can be, so how is "outstanding" better than something that is already "most" something? And if it is "most" something, it might be your "godlike" level of greatness too, so there is no distinction of note here.
Then the second bunch of 3 are interchangeable too
7-quite likeable 6-pretty good 5- decent are all saying pretty much the same thing, that the music is OK. Just OK. None of these ratings are necessarily better or worse than the other, so another stupid bunch of ratings.
The third bunch of similar ratings are 4-acceptable 3-ho-hum 2-marginal
They are all saying the music is not terrible, but is not great either. Acceptable in that you will not turn it off, but it is a bit boring perhaps (ho-hum) and on the verge of not being worthy of a listen.
Then we go from something that is marginally acceptable to completely "sucko barfo". Seriously RP, this is a really rubbish rating system. I think it would be much better if the numbers 1-10 did not have some daft attempt at making sense out of a 1-10 rating system. People rate something 7/10 for different reasons. You may love the song, but find that version to be a bit disappointing. That is completely different from someone who gives it 7/10 because though they don't like the song that much, they love the artist and also the musicianship is excellent....
So please remove the nonsense score descriptions, they are puerile and annoying.
Many thanks,
Amy
Me too....in fact I almost had an acid flashback during that trippy little meandering bit they did there :^ /
Very nice.
It reminds me of all sorts of things, which I can't point out exactly. Either they stole a lot of elements from everywhere, or it's just one of those unique songs with genuine catchy elements.
Dead Pink Phish
I like salmon.
Dead Floyd?
Dead Pink Phish
I like both. I'll give "Grateful Floyd" the vote though. : )
Dead Floyd?
Or Pink Dead. You decide.
Stand in line.
Follow Megafaun's "Slow" with Jerry Garcia's "The Wheel" and you've made my day...or night as the case may be. I rarely if ever post in here but after Bill played us some rather tasty Hot Tuna these past few days I finally have to voice my appreciation! Thanks Bill!
P.S. If you happen to be browsing around for info about Megafaun out of North Carolina know there is a similarly named band called Megafauna out of Austin. Both are cool bands and now you are aware.
Follow Megafaun's "Slow" with Jerry Garcia's "The Wheel" and you've made my day...or night as the case may be. I rarely if ever post in here but after Bill played us some rather tasty Hot Tuna these past few days I finally have to voice my appreciation! Thanks Bill!
P.S. If you happen to be browsing around for info about Megafaun out of North Carolina know there is a similarly named band called Megafauna out of Austin. Both are cool bands and now you are aware.
Yeah it sure does! Like it...
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
Then go PSD off!
I can't imagine a set more likely to drive me to the PSD.
I'm in line with you ....
Stand in line.
and they say that baby is kinda slow...
also, that band logo looks like that of some snow ski area....
With Paul McCartney on bass
Yeah, thought it was Phish at first.
With Paul McCartney on bass
i was just wondering, 'is the only PF song that sounds like GD?'
RIP Jerry. 08.09.1995
so very Dead-ish that i had to check who it was...
just not as exciting!
I agree! It's like Barefoot Jerry vocals with the Grateful Dead backing them up. Could be Mother Nature's Way Of Saying High?
Agree with the album cover comment, but not with the eager hope of song ending; kind of enjoyed this this evening.
just not as exciting!
Yup. Me too!
4 —> 3
Great tune.
Thanks RP.