Don't get me wrong. I didn't have a problem with the author's rendition of the tune. I think I stated that clearly in my first post. I just don't think the instrument that was used quite fits the tune. That's just my opinion, nothing else. Doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. But, since we've now broached the subject, it doesn't sound to me like a very accurate rendition musically either.

Yes, those of us that frequent this forum are ALL aware that it was made with a style from arranger that wasn't tailor made for the song, but then again mostly everyone in a potential target audience won't know that or care about it. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't play my stuff for an arranger playing audience. Let's forget that it was made on an arranger for a minute and let the interpretation of the song stand on it's own merits. Play it for someone you know who doesn't understand, or even try it out on another musos forum, like HC or KVR for instance, and see what kind of response it gets. I think that might be a much better test.

That said.. It seems like quite a few folks get offended when someone offers their honest opinion about something that was put out there in public for critique in the first place. C'mon don't go with " he didn't ask for criticism " . That's just lame. You put it out there and you expect feedback, and feedback is exactly what you should get. Oh wait.. Maybe it should come with the disclaimer "Please don't comment if your opinion of the piece doesn't include a glowing review".


I also can't help feeling that..."There it is again".. That same lame argument or response of " Let's hear your stuff or rendition ", when the respondent doesn't offer a glowing commentary. Since I've never tried to play it in the first place, I guarantee you that I could not play this entire song accurately without some practice, but if I thought it was worth the effort ( and it isn't because I'll never play it.. it's just not my style ) I surely would get it down.

I don't get that mentality at all. Some here are musicians, other are composers, some ar primarily singers, perhaps others strongest suits have to do with engineering in the studio, some may be strong in all of these areas, while others are relative beginners in any of the fields of music. So tell me, exactly what qualifications does someone need in order to state what they like and don't like about a song, and who decided those rules in the first place ? Was it you Ian, and did you anoint yourself or did we collectively decide that you should be our group conscience ? Should anyone who offers any critique be required to have the ability to do a better rendition ? read ing what you stated I guess none of us should give any credibility to any of the pro critics either, realizing that many probably can't do a replication of a work that they might comment on ? I think Squeak has every right as a member of this forum to give his honest opinion without someone flaming him to shreds for it. Will you ask a non musician who potentially may not like it for their rendition as well ?

If it makes the G70 guys feel better, I don't think the Tyros version sounds like the original either, and this came from a midifile that should at least be fairly close to being musically correct. The guitar doesn't sound right to me, and the lead voice is definitely not analog sounding. I don't know what synth the original used, I'm guessing a Jupiter or Juno, but I pretty much know when something either uses a real or modeled analog ( Final Countdown certainly did ) or when it sounds like an accurate rendition of an analog, and that ain't quite it. There I said it... so now both groups can be p'o d at us Squeak ..lol


AJ


[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 01-15-2006).]