The Mathematics of Suck
Sep. 22nd, 2006 08:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hafoc
America and, indeed the world, suffers from a blight of cosmic proportions. This is the dread blight of Music that Sucks. Around the world, untold millions of unsuspecting teenagers suffer taste-impairment, hearing loss, brain damage, and bleeding eyeballs from exposure to this scourge. If only there were some way to warn them in time to hit the off switch!
Unfortunately, suck is a mutable property. The simplest way to determine it would be to base it upon the performer, but this procedure is only partially effective. While it cannot be disputed that some musicians simply suck, many others produce a body of work covering a wide spectrum of suck levels. Thus, there is as yet no simple, certain, and reliable means of advance suck detection.
However, extensive observation by this researcher has led to the conclusion that certain features found in songs give a reasonable estimate of probable suck levels. These Suck-Inducing Factors (SIFs) in various combinations give rise to the final level of suck in the work in question. Thus, it should be feasible to assign suck levels to various SIFs, which could then be used via simple addition to arrive at a final suck level.
For purposes of discussion, this researcher proposes a Suck Scale in which fifty or more points would indicate that the work in question exceeds the LD50 (dose lethal to 50% of those exposed) for suck. Laboratory testing could determine the suck level for each song before publication.
It might be more prudent to simply prohibit songs with a suck level of 50 points or more. However, there are problems with this approach. In the first place, suck level assignments are by nature somewhat subjective, and therefore imprecise. Second, there are constitutional issues involved. But finally, it should be noted that certain portions of the general population (masochists and pre-teen girls, for example) have an extremely high tolerance for music that sucks, and may, strange as it seems, actually prefer it.
VOCALISTS
One of the strongest SIFs is the artist, or more precisely the vocalist, performing the song. The following list gives laboratory suckometer readings for some well-known bad vocalists. Other vocalists that suck will be assigned suck values as time and laboratory resources allow.
Suck Points Name
5 Elvis (Memphis)
10 Neil Young
15 Barry Manilow
20 Elvis (Gospel)
25 Geddy Lee (of Rush)
30 Elvis (Vegas)
40 Slim Whitman
50 Elvis (Vegas, Drugs, Booze)
65 Frankie Valli (of The Four Seasons)
80 Madonna
It can be seen from the above data that the mere presence of certain performers such as Frankie Valli or Madonna guarantees the song will suck. On the other hand, while performers with lower suck levels may irritate, their presence is not definitive. For example, while Neil Young's whining may induce nosebleeds in large doses, it has not prevented him from writing a few quite decent songs.
POMPOSITY
One common factor of songs that suck is their writers' failure to recognize their triviality. This shows itself in such features as grandiosity and boastfulness in all their myriad forms.
10 Big Orchestral Finish
15 Boastful Self Reference (per each verse or chorus containing it)
20 Leftist politics (protest)
25 Choir as Backup
30 Rightist politics (flag-waving)
35 Sanctimony, positive
45 Sanctimony, negative
COMMERCIALISM
One thing most observers would agree upon is that selling out is universally high in suck potential. Although there are myriad ways to sell out, only the following have yet been tested.
10 Covers (where band doing cover has less talent than original)
25 Dance craze
30 Phil Spector
40 Someone Else's Cultural Phenomenon (clueless)
45 Someone Else's Ethnic Group
65 Someone Else's Ethnic Group (offensive)
80 Madonna
MISCELLANEOUS
There are obviously myriad further categories to pursue, but for now, here are some other items tested.
10 Made-Up Studio Group (Monkees, Boy Bands, Girl Bands)
20 Jesus (casual)
25 Sound Effects
25 Death
25 “Teen ______”
30 Jesus (major)
50 Praise Jesus!
PRACTICAL EXAMPLES
Neil Young's “Like a Hurricane” doesn't really suck, as it only gains the 10 points from Niel's annoying voice. However, “Southern Man” combines his whiny voice, 20 points for leftist politics, and 45 points for Negative Sanctimony- self-righteousness directed as attack against a group of which one is not a member. This gives “Southern Man” a final suck level of 75, well into the danger zone.
Barry Manilow's “Miracle in You” is not too bad, as it only gains 15 suck points from Mr. Manilow's style. (Actually, Mr. Manilow is a unique case. His voice isn't bad. Unfortunately for him, he orchestrates his own works, and the ORCHESTRATION sucks.) His “I Write the Songs,” however, sucks badly (as if the pompous title wasn't itself enough to warn the observer). It racks up 15 points for his orchestration, 10 points for the pomposity of a Big Orchestral Finish, and 15 points per boastful self-reference; our meters recorded no fewer than 12 boastful self-references in this song before the motherboard caught fire. Thus, this song accumulated a staggering 205 suck points. This is, so far, the record.
Elvis's “That's All Right, Mama” rates only 15 suck points. Like all his early hits, it was a cover of a song first done by a more talented black artist, so it gains 10 suck points as a cover. Elvis in his Memphis stage barely sucked at all, bringing the total for the song to 15. On the other hand, “In the Ghetto,” done in his Vegas Drugs Booze stage, rates 50 personal suck points, plus 35 points for Positive Sanctimony and 25 for Choir Backup, for a hefty total of 110 suck points.
“Leader of the Pack”-- Girl Group, 10 points. Phil Spector, 30 points. Sound effects and death, 25 points each. Total, 90 points.
As they both employ the Somebody Else's Ethnic Group (Offensive) ploy, “Kalija” and that god-awful thing about “Running Bear loved little White Dove” suck on the face of it. Researchers have not yet determined whether or not these songs' use of B-movie Indian drums and war whoops constitutes sound effects, for additional suck points.
DISCUSSION
There is, of course, various degrees of certain SIFs, and some unmeasurable variables. Certainly the jet airplane in The Beatles' “Back in the USSR” are not as offensive as the shrieking tires, screams, and car crash in “Leader of the Pack.” Also, talent is not measurable in the laboratory, and can have strong effects on the total suck points of a work. In particular, the quality of the Beatles' playing on that particular song is good enough to largely or completely compensate for the sound effects, leading to a zero suck point score.
Parody induces difficulty in suck-ratings. According to the conventional factors above, all of Weird Al Yankovic's songs should suck-- as indeed they do. However, since they were deliberately written to suck, it can be questioned whether they suck at all. They have, after all, achieved their intended purpose (for good or ill). It has been decided to leave parody songs out of the suck rating system, as those who listen to such songs presumably know what they're getting, and have only themselves to blame.
Parody is all the more complicating as it is possible to write parody songs that don't suck. One example of this is Jimmy Buffet's “Why Don't We Get Drunk.” There is in fact some question whether this song is parody at all; it may be a Clued-In Somebody Else's Culture, a country song written by a pop-rock star who actually has some understanding and appreciation of country music. As opposed to the suckiferous “Back in the Country” by Neil Young, which is an example of Clueless Somebody Else's Culture, with a few offensive stereotypes thrown in.
As a final note, the reader may wonder why the researcher assigned suck point totals in excess of 100 to several songs. After all, 100 points is Nothing But Suck. How is it possible to have a higher score?
The answer has to do with the physics of suck, specifically the effect (the discoverer of which is not certainly known, but is believed to be N. Rafferty) of the Swirling Vortex of Suck. Sufficient amounts of suck concentrated in a small region of space can overload the space-time matrix, causing suck-scavenging from the surrounding region of space-time.
In layman's terms, what this means is that a song with more than 100 suck points actually absorbs suck from the songs you hear after it. Or in simpler terms, after hearing “In the Ghetto” or “I Write the Songs,” ANYTHING they play on the radio is going to sound great.
This phenomenon appears to explain the commercial success of Madonna, a state of affairs which the researcher believes the reader will agree is otherwise inexplicable.
Unfortunately, suck is a mutable property. The simplest way to determine it would be to base it upon the performer, but this procedure is only partially effective. While it cannot be disputed that some musicians simply suck, many others produce a body of work covering a wide spectrum of suck levels. Thus, there is as yet no simple, certain, and reliable means of advance suck detection.
However, extensive observation by this researcher has led to the conclusion that certain features found in songs give a reasonable estimate of probable suck levels. These Suck-Inducing Factors (SIFs) in various combinations give rise to the final level of suck in the work in question. Thus, it should be feasible to assign suck levels to various SIFs, which could then be used via simple addition to arrive at a final suck level.
For purposes of discussion, this researcher proposes a Suck Scale in which fifty or more points would indicate that the work in question exceeds the LD50 (dose lethal to 50% of those exposed) for suck. Laboratory testing could determine the suck level for each song before publication.
It might be more prudent to simply prohibit songs with a suck level of 50 points or more. However, there are problems with this approach. In the first place, suck level assignments are by nature somewhat subjective, and therefore imprecise. Second, there are constitutional issues involved. But finally, it should be noted that certain portions of the general population (masochists and pre-teen girls, for example) have an extremely high tolerance for music that sucks, and may, strange as it seems, actually prefer it.
VOCALISTS
One of the strongest SIFs is the artist, or more precisely the vocalist, performing the song. The following list gives laboratory suckometer readings for some well-known bad vocalists. Other vocalists that suck will be assigned suck values as time and laboratory resources allow.
Suck Points Name
5 Elvis (Memphis)
10 Neil Young
15 Barry Manilow
20 Elvis (Gospel)
25 Geddy Lee (of Rush)
30 Elvis (Vegas)
40 Slim Whitman
50 Elvis (Vegas, Drugs, Booze)
65 Frankie Valli (of The Four Seasons)
80 Madonna
It can be seen from the above data that the mere presence of certain performers such as Frankie Valli or Madonna guarantees the song will suck. On the other hand, while performers with lower suck levels may irritate, their presence is not definitive. For example, while Neil Young's whining may induce nosebleeds in large doses, it has not prevented him from writing a few quite decent songs.
POMPOSITY
One common factor of songs that suck is their writers' failure to recognize their triviality. This shows itself in such features as grandiosity and boastfulness in all their myriad forms.
10 Big Orchestral Finish
15 Boastful Self Reference (per each verse or chorus containing it)
20 Leftist politics (protest)
25 Choir as Backup
30 Rightist politics (flag-waving)
35 Sanctimony, positive
45 Sanctimony, negative
COMMERCIALISM
One thing most observers would agree upon is that selling out is universally high in suck potential. Although there are myriad ways to sell out, only the following have yet been tested.
10 Covers (where band doing cover has less talent than original)
25 Dance craze
30 Phil Spector
40 Someone Else's Cultural Phenomenon (clueless)
45 Someone Else's Ethnic Group
65 Someone Else's Ethnic Group (offensive)
80 Madonna
MISCELLANEOUS
There are obviously myriad further categories to pursue, but for now, here are some other items tested.
10 Made-Up Studio Group (Monkees, Boy Bands, Girl Bands)
20 Jesus (casual)
25 Sound Effects
25 Death
25 “Teen ______”
30 Jesus (major)
50 Praise Jesus!
PRACTICAL EXAMPLES
Neil Young's “Like a Hurricane” doesn't really suck, as it only gains the 10 points from Niel's annoying voice. However, “Southern Man” combines his whiny voice, 20 points for leftist politics, and 45 points for Negative Sanctimony- self-righteousness directed as attack against a group of which one is not a member. This gives “Southern Man” a final suck level of 75, well into the danger zone.
Barry Manilow's “Miracle in You” is not too bad, as it only gains 15 suck points from Mr. Manilow's style. (Actually, Mr. Manilow is a unique case. His voice isn't bad. Unfortunately for him, he orchestrates his own works, and the ORCHESTRATION sucks.) His “I Write the Songs,” however, sucks badly (as if the pompous title wasn't itself enough to warn the observer). It racks up 15 points for his orchestration, 10 points for the pomposity of a Big Orchestral Finish, and 15 points per boastful self-reference; our meters recorded no fewer than 12 boastful self-references in this song before the motherboard caught fire. Thus, this song accumulated a staggering 205 suck points. This is, so far, the record.
Elvis's “That's All Right, Mama” rates only 15 suck points. Like all his early hits, it was a cover of a song first done by a more talented black artist, so it gains 10 suck points as a cover. Elvis in his Memphis stage barely sucked at all, bringing the total for the song to 15. On the other hand, “In the Ghetto,” done in his Vegas Drugs Booze stage, rates 50 personal suck points, plus 35 points for Positive Sanctimony and 25 for Choir Backup, for a hefty total of 110 suck points.
“Leader of the Pack”-- Girl Group, 10 points. Phil Spector, 30 points. Sound effects and death, 25 points each. Total, 90 points.
As they both employ the Somebody Else's Ethnic Group (Offensive) ploy, “Kalija” and that god-awful thing about “Running Bear loved little White Dove” suck on the face of it. Researchers have not yet determined whether or not these songs' use of B-movie Indian drums and war whoops constitutes sound effects, for additional suck points.
DISCUSSION
There is, of course, various degrees of certain SIFs, and some unmeasurable variables. Certainly the jet airplane in The Beatles' “Back in the USSR” are not as offensive as the shrieking tires, screams, and car crash in “Leader of the Pack.” Also, talent is not measurable in the laboratory, and can have strong effects on the total suck points of a work. In particular, the quality of the Beatles' playing on that particular song is good enough to largely or completely compensate for the sound effects, leading to a zero suck point score.
Parody induces difficulty in suck-ratings. According to the conventional factors above, all of Weird Al Yankovic's songs should suck-- as indeed they do. However, since they were deliberately written to suck, it can be questioned whether they suck at all. They have, after all, achieved their intended purpose (for good or ill). It has been decided to leave parody songs out of the suck rating system, as those who listen to such songs presumably know what they're getting, and have only themselves to blame.
Parody is all the more complicating as it is possible to write parody songs that don't suck. One example of this is Jimmy Buffet's “Why Don't We Get Drunk.” There is in fact some question whether this song is parody at all; it may be a Clued-In Somebody Else's Culture, a country song written by a pop-rock star who actually has some understanding and appreciation of country music. As opposed to the suckiferous “Back in the Country” by Neil Young, which is an example of Clueless Somebody Else's Culture, with a few offensive stereotypes thrown in.
As a final note, the reader may wonder why the researcher assigned suck point totals in excess of 100 to several songs. After all, 100 points is Nothing But Suck. How is it possible to have a higher score?
The answer has to do with the physics of suck, specifically the effect (the discoverer of which is not certainly known, but is believed to be N. Rafferty) of the Swirling Vortex of Suck. Sufficient amounts of suck concentrated in a small region of space can overload the space-time matrix, causing suck-scavenging from the surrounding region of space-time.
In layman's terms, what this means is that a song with more than 100 suck points actually absorbs suck from the songs you hear after it. Or in simpler terms, after hearing “In the Ghetto” or “I Write the Songs,” ANYTHING they play on the radio is going to sound great.
This phenomenon appears to explain the commercial success of Madonna, a state of affairs which the researcher believes the reader will agree is otherwise inexplicable.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-09-23 03:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-01 07:57 am (UTC)