This is a forum where students can discuss and evaluate literature, film and writing.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Such Great Heights
Check out these two different versions of the same song. This is the original song by The Postal Service. Now check out this version of the same song by Iron and Wine. Which one is better. Why do you say this?
I like the first one better because it is in a faster tone and it is the original. For example: The first song Such Great Heights By The Postal Service it has a faster catchy kind of tone but,the remix is slower and has the kind of slow sad tone that doesn't make you want to get up and dance. Also I have always liked the original song better and this goes for all songs.For example: Dead or Alive made a song called You Spin Me Round I really liked this song, in fact I loved this song.Then Flo Rida came out with a song called Right Round which was practically the same thing but only Ke$ha sang it with him and it was very vulgar. This is why I do not like the second one better than the first make.
I think that the first songs better because it is faster, the beat is catchier and the song is just plain original! The second song is a copy of the first expect it is much slower and not as catchy. I believe that the first song is way, out of this world better and you should too! From: Pandagirl!
I liked the first song more than the second one. This is because the tempo went faster, had a catchy rhythm, and the singing is better. When the song plays slowly, it gets boring after a while. That's why I didn't even listen to all of the second one. With a catchy rhythm, people will actually get hooked to this song unlike the second. I also didn't like the second one because the person singing it had a very rough voice. I didn't want to listen when he was singing.
@Ghost I think that you are right about liking the first song better than the second because it's slow and it's the original. The slow, sad tone doesn't have any flair and is dull so most people would like the other song more. The original songs are the best because they aren't changed and is the real thing. There aren't different versions of the original song with famous people singing it. Those are the bad remixes.
Well, it depends on what you mean by 'better.' Because in a perfect world, there is no such thing as better. Both songs are good in their own way, like the first one is if you feel in the mood to dance. But the second one is for when you need to relax. So with all the homework I have nowadays, I'm leaning towards the second one.(just kidding)
songs are very original but i think that it is very cool in other ways the thing about is that i wish that everyone could be doing everything thatthey can to help express more and more music into the world
I thnk That the sewcond one is better because you can here the lyrics and waht they are saying and it is not just a big distructive mess like the firdst one
DR Bubblesquash said... I think that is wrong. Mr. Horvath said it is CORRECT. or Wrong.NOT both. please do not affdn mr. horvath. he is a verry smart man.
Neither of the songs are better because different people like different types of music. For instance, Mr. Horvath doesn't like Lady Gaga music, but Jillian Cervini does. They have different tastes of music. Therefore neither one is better because two people have two different opinions of music.
In opinion the first song is better than the newer version. This I think because it has a steady beat and is more of gregarious mood. Also it is has more vehement in the sense that it has a better hook in getting you to listen. So therefore I think it is a better song for the fact it has a better hook. So you listen longer where as the first I was fighting not to shut it down or scream of how boring it was.
NYRANGERS#1FAN I agree that does make sense. Ii is just like science you have to define a variable before you can do the experiment and which one is better cannot be defined as we all have different opinions in life. So therefore there is no better one.
I agree with ghost because I also think that the original song is better. The song sounds better when it is fast. Another reason it is better is that the voice and lyrics go better with the first song . These things make a song a hit that can’t be replaced.
I like the second version of the song better because the music was more like todays kind of music, it flowed very well, and in my opinion the singer sang better. In the song the singer sang more subtle and had a nicer tone in his voice. This says that the second song showed more movement in the music.
I respectfully disagree with you. I thought the first one was actually very hill billy like. In the first song it sounded to me like the singer was forcing his voice to sound hill billy like. Therefore I thought the second one sounded much more in date and sounded better!
I think that neither one is good. i think that this this is a much better song than either of them. i think this because it has a rock and roll beat and some humor and jack black. i think that this supports my opinion because your songs have 5977 likes and 5580 likes but mine has 6501.
I think the orginal is better. I thinks its better becuase its chatchy and sounds like a band i like called Muse. The other song sounds like i love sound i dislike the other song.
I think that the first song was better. This is because it has a fast heart pumping kind of beat to it. While the second song was very sad and depressing and it made me think of all of my relatives that died. Now I hate thinking of people in my family that are dead. The first song lust made me want to get up and dance rather than cry. That is why I liked the first song better.
@Ghost I agree. This is because the first song was WAY better and that slow remixes are sad. Also when you think of remix you think of some random famous person ruining the whole songs meaning and replacing every nice meaningful word with some VERY vulgar slang word. That is why I agree with you that the first song was WAY better than the second one.
I agree with NYRangers#1Fan because you can't really say which one is better. Everybody likes different things and has different tastes and not every single person has the same opinion. Therefore you can't say one is better than the other because that wouldn't be true.
I think both versions were equally good in there own ways. I think this because the first song was faster and had a better beat, but the second one was slower for more of a day that you might be tired. This is why I think they were both good versions
@ maia I disagree with you because I didn't think the second version was "hill billie ish" because even though it was slower than the first, it doesn't have a country style. Therefore, I think they were evenly good and the second version was not hill billie ish at all.
@ilovecheer , i do not think the song sounds hilly billy like because it has a retro sound with electronic instruments. i think this supports my evidence because if it is hilly billy like, it will have twangy string instruments not electronic beeping.
You can't really define better in this case because it depends on the 'mood' of the listener. For example if you wanted to get up and dance you would listen to the original. You would listen to the original because the original is upbeat and almost techno. On the other hand if you wanted to unwind and relax while listening to music you would listen to the second version by Iron and Wine. For example You and I by Lady Gaga doesn't exactly have a pumping beat to it and I wouldn't listen to it for the purpose of dancing. However the remix is to You and I has a fast upbeat sound and I defiantly wouldn't listen to it if I was trying to relax. Both songs have the same lyrics just have different beats and I like them just the same. Just as I like the two versions of Such Great Heights the same it just depends on the mood I am in.
@Ryan T. I disagree about what you said about the remix by Iron an Wine. I find that the remix is not about sad and depressing things at all. It is more of a love story. Due to the fact both the remix and the original have the same lyrics they are about the same thing. Iron and Wine just presents the song in almost a classier way then techno. I know techno can be enjoyable but I think the second version was enjoyable in its own way. The second version was quiet and peaceful and almost made you drift to sleep. The opposite of thinking of loss and death. Saying the remix makes you depressed is like saying the song Yellow by Coldplay is sad and depressing because Yellow is a love story like Such Great Heights and it basically at the same pace. The remix has the same message as the original it is just set at a different tempo and played with real instruments.
I don't prefer one song over the other because it depends on the mood I am in that day. Say I am in a very happy upbeat mood. I would listen to the original because it has a dance and techno quality to it and has many interesting instruments. Also it has in a way random sounds put together that make the overall piece amazing. If I was in a dreary mood and a sadder mood, I would probably listen to the 'remix' of the song because it has a relaxing and serene quality that makes you realize how nice it is to listen to something more held back musically. The original has many different instruments whereas the remix has an acoustic guitar that calms you down. I like both songs equally because they both have great qualities from either being a very upbeat song, or a song that helps you relax. It all depends in what I feel like that day.
@Isabelle G., I agree with you completely because like you and I both said, it all depends on what type of mood we re in. If we wanted a happy, upbeat song, we would listen to the original. But, if we wanted a calmer song, the remix is what we would listen to. We like to relate to a song in which our mood corresponds to. It is all depending on how we feel that day.
I like the first one better because it has a better tempo and it has the vibe that it is directed towrds anyone.The second version is slow, and boring. If it wasn't a homework assignment i woulden't of finished it, unlike the first one. This is my oppinon on the song Such Great Heights by the Postle Servive and Iron and Wine.
i believe that the version that The Postal Service made of Such great heights is better, because they were the original makers of the song. Even though some people may like the Iron and Wine song better, I believe that the band that came up with the song should get the credit. In 2003, The Postal Service put out it's album "Such Great Heights" with Iron and Wine doing only a cover of the song. Therefore, since The Postal Service came up with the song, with a later version made by Iron and Wine, I like The Postal Service's version better.
I think that the first version of Such Great Heights made by The Postal Service is a much better version than that of Iron and Wine's. I think this because it is more upbeat which makes you want to dance. The version of this song by The Postal Service is 175 beats per minute. However the Iron and Wine version of this song is approximately 72.1 beats per minute. This is clear proof that The Postal Service's version is faster and more upbeat. Therefore, I like the 1st version of "Such Great Heights" better.
I agree with CandyS. The reason i agree with him/her is because the faster and more intence the beat gets more people are gonna want to get up and start to dance. You can tell that the postal service has a bigger pace or beat is because the postal service has 174 bpm and the Iron and Wine has 72.1 bpm. The reason i say this is better cause more people are going to listen to a song with a better beat then a very slow or slower pace that will make them board.
I like song one better because of the upbeat tempo and good beat. I liked how in the verses they sang normally, and in the chorus they sang in a lighter tone. On the other hand, Iron and Wine sang the whole song in the same monochromatic tone. They had a robotic, pop beat which is the type of music I like. The techno beat was very catchy. Therefore, I like the original song by Postal Service. It was upbeat not slow, and boring like the other song. Personally I liked the first song because it had a better upbeat, dance beat.
I agree with CandyS because when I listen to music I want it to pump me up and make me want to dance. She said, " The first songs beats was 120 beats per minute, and the second song was only 72.1 beats per minute." When I listened to the second song it almost made feel relaxed, which I don't want. I use music to make me fell energized and ready to go. THe second song was much better for that. In the future I will remember to listen to Such Great Heights by The Postal Service before a soccer game or a Gymnastics meet because of its upbeat tempo!
I think that the first song was better because it had a faster pace. The beat and the lyrics flowed faster. If the beat and the lyrics flowed faster then it is a fast paced song. Therefore the first one is better.
I think that the first one was better because it had better singing. In the second song the singer sounded like he was in pain and like he was dying. The first song made me want to listen to the entire song. The second one made me want to skip through it. If I wanted to skip through the second song because of pained singing then, the first song diffidently had better singing.
I agree with @DR bubblesquash. Better is a strong word. I listen to a very wide version of music. At parties i won't listen to anything other than dancing songs. But when I'm home i might listen to Whitney Houston or Avril Lavigne. Depending on which mood I'm in i might want to listen to either one. Overall I'm torn.
I think the faster version is better because it is catchy. The lyrics and melody fit better with a faster and upbeat tempo. Although the slower song is relaxing, it is far too slow for my liking. And after a while it got boring. The upbeat tempo fit the song much better. I like the original version by The Postal Service.
@i.love.cheer. I disagree with you. I don't think the second version was better because I thought it was too slow. The tempo was so slow that the song became boring, and I couldn't even finish listening to it. I think the first song was better because the lyrics and singer fit the song better. The remake was not as good.
The first song was better. I think the first song is better because it has a better beat and melody and it is fast. In the song, the melody, beat, and words were sung faster than in the second version. I know this because when you listened to it, the beat was at least five times faster than the second song which was slow and doesn't have much of a beat. The tempo was slower than the first one also.
I agree with you Muffin Man 101 because I too thought the first song was better since the first song had more of a beat and made you want to listen to the whole thing but the second song was slow ans made you want to skip and end it like you said before.
The first one is better because it is faster. But the second one is easier to hear what their saying.Also the first one is catchier.The second one makes me feel like I'm at a slow dance. The first one feels like a dance party going on.
I personally like the first one better. This is because it's faster and more dancier than the second one. Therefore, people who like more faster songs would like the first one more.
@Maia I agree with you that the second one sounds sort of hill billy-ish. The song has acoustic guitar playing countryish kind of music. Therefore the song is hillbilly-ish.
I think the second version of the song is better because of the guitar (or other instrument) in the background and the singer. The first song has a bad singer and the techno background noise was annoying and I couldn't finish it or tell what he was saying. The chords playing in the background were calming and provided a cathing tune. Also the singer of Iron and Wine was much better. Therefore, the second song is better because of the soft melody in the backgound and its singer.
I like the first better because I feel that the second one kinda brings me down. With the uplifting beat, it gives the song a whole new meaning. People think that slower songs are better because there more about love. The first version is way better because so many people do remixes as they completely lose the meaning if the song/lyrics.
@Kayleigh I agree with you. Yes, you can understand what they're saying better in the second one, but I also think is kinda like being at a slow dance. I think that the first one brings more life to it.
I like the first one alot better. I like this one the best because it's tempo is alot faster then the first one. So is the beat and melody. the vocals on the first one sounded alot better then the second one. the second one was very depressing and gloomy. I prefer the first one over the second one.
I like the original song better because it's more upbeat. The cover by Iron and Wine is just to slow and I don't think they got the feel for the song right. I think the feel for the song was supposed to be Folk/Country but Iron and Wine recieved it as a love song.
I think Such Great Heights by The Postal Service is better because it is has a good dance beat. I love songs that make you want to just get up out of your seat and bust a move. The complex beat levels out the simple singing. Such Great Heights by Iron and Wine is too cliche in my opinion. The guitar beat was used before in many other love songs. Unlike The Postal Service, Iron and Wine make me depressed because both the singing and the beat are calm. I like Such Great Heights by The Postal Service is better because it features a great dancing beat and its not depressing.
@AnnaDance2485 I agree with you because the first song is more enjoyable. Like you, I like songs with a good beat and the first song has that. I also think that the second song is kind of sad. The first song is better because it has a better, peppier beat.
I like the first one better because it was an origional product, which are performed the way the singer intended it. I know this because in the second song it is performed a lot slower and softer than the origional song. If the artists had intended that song to be like that, they would have made it that way in the first place. This proves that the origional product is better.
@kyledeegen I do not think that Kesha is dumb because she is actually very smart. I know this because on one website* it says she got a 1,500 on her SATs and an IQ of 140. When your IQ and SATs are that high, it means you are a certifiable genius, not just plain smart. This proves that Kesha-however obnoxious her songs may be-isn't dumb.
i think that the one by Iron and Wine is better because i like the acoustic version better. i know that this was played by the acoustic guitar because it has more of a hollow, natural sound that isn't perfect. this proves that this is an acoustic version because in the other video it was perfect, louder,and sounded solid.
I think that the first version by The Postal Service is better because it has more of a fast beat while the song by Iron and Wine is slow, depressing, and boring. Therefore, the first version is better because of it's faster beat.
@crazyme123 I disagree with you because the version by Iron and Wine is boring and depressing. The version by the Postal Service was fast and upbeat. Therefore, I disagree with you because the secong version is boring and depressing.
I liked the first one better because it was a fast groovy tempo. The remix was really slow and kind of sad. I think the first one is better because it has a solo.
@PeterP I think that you are right I like the fast,groovy,catchy beat is way better than the slow depressing beat that makes you think "oh lookout its a sad song"
@PeterP I think that you are right. I like the fast,groovy,catchy beat way better than the slow depressing beat that makes you think "oh lookout its a sad song".I listen to music because some songs remind me to do something or help someone.
@ pandagirl I disagree with you because what if i like slower music rather than fast. I know some people like slower music because it says on Answers.com that MOST people prefer faster music. this means that some of the population does like slow music which could mean they like the remake of this song.
I think the first one was better because it had a beat and the second one sounded like it should be in commercial not a regular song. The fist was better because the beat made you listen to the whole thing and not just part like the scecond. I also think most people prefer faster music so it would appeal to more people.
@ Peter P. I agree the first was better because it has more of a fast beat while the song by Iron and Wine is slow, depressing, and boring. This is why its better and I would never buy the song from Iron and wine.
I think the second song was better. that is because it was quieter and had less music in the background so I could hear the words better. I prefer quiet music because then I don't get a headache from listening to it. I don't want to have a headache because it messes up my thoughts and I can't work.
@cheerextremelover11 I did not mean to affend Mr. Horvath who is so awesome that Chuck Norris is his secretary. What I merely meant to say is that both songs are good in their own special way, 1 if you feel like dancing, 2 if you're trying to relax or something.
I think the first song is better. Not only is it the original, but it has a faster paced tempo and less of a sad song's soft, slow beat. Personally, I like the 1st song better.
I think the first version of the song is better because it has more of an upbeat sound. The PostalService's version has more background music and more enthusiasm in the song, which I like. The second song by Iron and Wine is very slow and those type of slow acoustic type of songs remind me of a weird lullaby. The first one had more feeling when the person sang it, which made it more interesting and entertaining. Therefore, I believe the Postal Service version of Such Great Heights is much better.
I like the original song by The Post Service because it has a better tone than the slower version. The original song has a faster pace and i like the tone of the singer. The second version is too slow and i like fast songs. This is my opinion on the two songs compared!
Anonymous, I disagree with you because like i said in my comment, i like faster songs. i don't like slow songs and i didn't think it was a good slow song. i only like good slow songs.
I think that the remake was better than the original beacause I like slow songs better that up beat ones. For example, I like skyscraper by demi lavato more than I like sexy and I know it by lmfao. Another example it that I like up by justin bieber more than I like backseat by new boyz. This cleary shows I like slow songs better so I would have chosen the new version which was slow.
@Jessica T. i disagree with you because i thought the the new version sounded better. The new song you are able to fall asleep to and the original was to up beat for my likeing. this is why i liked the new song better.
I think that the first song is better because it is faster, the beat is catchier and the song is just plain original! The second song is a copy of the first expect it is much slower and not as catchy. I believe that the first song is better.
86 comments:
I like the first one better because it is in a faster tone and it is the original. For example: The first song Such Great Heights By The Postal Service it has a faster catchy kind of tone but,the remix is slower and has the kind of slow sad tone that doesn't make you want to get up and dance. Also I have always liked the original song better and this goes for all songs.For example: Dead or Alive made a song called You Spin Me Round I really liked this song, in fact I loved this song.Then Flo Rida came out with a song called Right Round which was practically the same thing but only Ke$ha sang it with him and it was very vulgar. This is why I do not like the second one better than the first make.
I think that the first songs better because it is faster, the beat is catchier and the song is just plain original! The second song is a copy of the first expect it is much slower and not as catchy. I believe that the first song is way, out of this world better and you should too!
From: Pandagirl!
?
I liked the first song more than the second one. This is because the tempo went faster, had a catchy rhythm, and the singing is better. When the song plays slowly, it gets boring after a while. That's why I didn't even listen to all of the second one. With a catchy rhythm, people will actually get hooked to this song unlike the second. I also didn't like the second one because the person singing it had a very rough voice. I didn't want to listen when he was singing.
@Ghost
I think that you are right about liking the first song better than the second because it's slow and it's the original. The slow, sad tone doesn't have any flair and is dull so most people would like the other song more. The original songs are the best because they aren't changed and is the real thing. There aren't different versions of the original song with famous people singing it. Those are the bad remixes.
Well, it depends on what you mean by 'better.' Because in a perfect world, there is no such thing as better. Both songs are good in their own way, like the first one is if you feel in the mood to dance. But the second one is for when you need to relax. So with all the homework I have nowadays, I'm leaning towards the second one.(just kidding)
I liked the first one more because it didn't sound hill billie ish like the second. Also i liked it better because it was quieter and more subtle.
songs are very original but i think that it is very cool in other ways the thing about is that i wish that everyone could be doing everything thatthey can to help express more and more music into the world
i agreee with ghost
I thnk That the sewcond one is better because you can here the lyrics and waht they are saying and it is not just a big distructive mess like the firdst one
DR Bubblesquash said...
I think that is wrong. Mr. Horvath said it is CORRECT. or Wrong.NOT both. please do not affdn mr. horvath. he is a verry smart man.
I like the first one better because I thought it was a little faster
Neither of the songs are better because different people like different types of music. For instance, Mr. Horvath doesn't like Lady Gaga music, but Jillian Cervini does. They have different tastes of music. Therefore neither one is better because two people have two different opinions of music.
In opinion the first song is better than the newer version. This I think because it has a steady beat and is more of gregarious mood. Also it is has more vehement in the sense that it has a better hook in getting you to listen. So therefore I think it is a better song for the fact it has a better hook. So you listen longer where as the first I was fighting not to shut it down or scream of how boring it was.
NYRANGERS#1FAN I agree that does make sense. Ii is just like science you have to define a variable before you can do the experiment and which one is better cannot be defined as we all have different opinions in life. So therefore there is no better one.
I agree with ghost because I also think that the original song is better. The song sounds better when it is fast. Another reason it is better is that the voice and lyrics go better with the first song . These things make a song a hit that can’t be replaced.
I like the second version of the song better because the music was more like todays kind of music, it flowed very well, and in my opinion the singer sang better. In the song the singer sang more subtle and had a nicer tone in his voice. This says that the second song showed more movement in the music.
I respectfully disagree with you. I thought the first one was actually very hill billy like. In the first song it sounded to me like the singer was forcing his voice to sound hill billy like. Therefore I thought the second one sounded much more in date and sounded better!
I think that neither one is good. i think that this this is a much better song than either of them. i think this because it has a rock and roll beat and some humor and jack black. i think that this supports my opinion because your songs have 5977 likes and 5580 likes but mine has 6501.
I think the orginal is better. I thinks its better becuase its chatchy and sounds like a band i like called Muse. The other song sounds like i love sound i dislike the other song.
@Ghost I agree with you the first was faster tone and better then the other song.
I think nether song was good because it wasn't very catchy or even up to date but thats just my opinion.
I agree with @NYRangers#1Fan
I think that the first song was better. This is because it has a fast heart pumping kind of beat to it. While the second song was very sad and depressing and it made me think of all of my relatives that died. Now I hate thinking of people in my family that are dead. The first song lust made me want to get up and dance rather than cry. That is why I liked the first song better.
@Ghost
I agree. This is because the first song was WAY better and that slow remixes are sad. Also when you think of remix you think of some random famous person ruining the whole songs meaning and replacing every nice meaningful word with some VERY vulgar slang word. That is why I agree with you that the first song was WAY better than the second one.
I agree with NYRangers#1Fan because you can't really say which one is better. Everybody likes different things and has different tastes and not every single person has the same opinion. Therefore you can't say one is better than the other because that wouldn't be true.
I think both versions were equally good in there own ways. I think this because the first song was faster and had a better beat, but the second one was slower for more of a day that you might be tired. This is why I think they were both good versions
@ maia
I disagree with you because I didn't think the second version was "hill billie ish" because even though it was slower than the first, it doesn't have a country style. Therefore, I think they were evenly good and the second version was not hill billie ish at all.
i really don't think i like this comic
i think kesha is dum
@ilovecheer , i do not think the song sounds hilly billy like because it has a retro sound with electronic instruments. i think this supports my evidence because if it is hilly billy like, it will have twangy string instruments not electronic beeping.
You can't really define better in this case because it depends on the 'mood' of the listener. For example if you wanted to get up and dance you would listen to the original. You would listen to the original because the original is upbeat and almost techno. On the other hand if you wanted to unwind and relax while listening to music you would listen to the second version by Iron and Wine. For example You and I by Lady Gaga doesn't exactly have a pumping beat to it and I wouldn't listen to it for the purpose of dancing. However the remix is to You and I has a fast upbeat sound and I defiantly wouldn't listen to it if I was trying to relax. Both songs have the same lyrics just have different beats and I like them just the same. Just as I like the two versions of Such Great Heights the same it just depends on the mood I am in.
@Ryan T.
I disagree about what you said about the remix by Iron an Wine. I find that the remix is not about sad and depressing things at all. It is more of a love story. Due to the fact both the remix and the original have the same lyrics they are about the same thing. Iron and Wine just presents the song in almost a classier way then techno. I know techno can be enjoyable but I think the second version was enjoyable in its own way. The second version was quiet and peaceful and almost made you drift to sleep. The opposite of thinking of loss and death. Saying the remix makes you depressed is like saying the song Yellow by Coldplay is sad and depressing because Yellow is a love story like Such Great Heights and it basically at the same pace. The remix has the same message as the original it is just set at a different tempo and played with real instruments.
I don't prefer one song over the other because it depends on the mood I am in that day. Say I am in a very happy upbeat mood. I would listen to the original because it has a dance and techno quality to it and has many interesting instruments. Also it has in a way random sounds put together that make the overall piece amazing. If I was in a dreary mood and a sadder mood, I would probably listen to the 'remix' of the song because it has a relaxing and serene quality that makes you realize how nice it is to listen to something more held back musically. The original has many different instruments whereas the remix has an acoustic guitar that calms you down. I like both songs equally because they both have great qualities from either being a very upbeat song, or a song that helps you relax. It all depends in what I feel like that day.
@Isabelle G., I agree with you completely because like you and I both said, it all depends on what type of mood we re in. If we wanted a happy, upbeat song, we would listen to the original. But, if we wanted a calmer song, the remix is what we would listen to. We like to relate to a song in which our mood corresponds to. It is all depending on how we feel that day.
i dont perform thing over another. somethings might have more that others. so i can't choose between 2 different things.
I like the first one better because it has a better tempo and it has the vibe that it is directed towrds anyone.The second version is slow, and boring. If it wasn't a homework assignment i woulden't of finished it, unlike the first one. This is my oppinon on the song Such Great Heights by the Postle Servive and Iron and Wine.
I agree with shy wolf 32 because it sounds better,hipper, and all around the better version
i believe that the version that The Postal Service made of Such great heights is better, because they were the original makers of the song. Even though some people may like the Iron and Wine song better, I believe that the band that came up with the song should get the credit. In 2003, The Postal Service put out it's album "Such Great Heights" with Iron and Wine doing only a cover of the song. Therefore, since The Postal Service came up with the song, with a later version made by Iron and Wine, I like The Postal Service's version better.
I think that the first version of Such Great Heights made by The Postal Service is a much better version than that of Iron and Wine's. I think this because it is more upbeat which makes you want to dance. The version of this song by The Postal Service is 175 beats per minute. However the Iron and Wine version of this song is approximately 72.1 beats per minute. This is clear proof that The Postal Service's version is faster and more upbeat. Therefore, I like the 1st version of "Such Great Heights" better.
I agree with CandyS. The reason i agree with him/her is because the faster and more intence the beat gets more people are gonna want to get up and start to dance. You can tell that the postal service has a bigger pace or beat is because the postal service has 174 bpm and the Iron and Wine has 72.1 bpm. The reason i say this is better cause more people are going to listen to a song with a better beat then a very slow or slower pace that will make them board.
I like song one better because of the upbeat tempo and good beat. I liked how in the verses they sang normally, and in the chorus they sang in a lighter tone. On the other hand, Iron and Wine sang the whole song in the same monochromatic tone. They had a robotic, pop beat which is the type of music I like. The techno beat was very catchy. Therefore, I like the original song by Postal Service. It was upbeat not slow, and boring like the other song. Personally I liked the first song because it had a better upbeat, dance beat.
I agree with CandyS because when I listen to music I want it to pump me up and make me want to dance. She said, " The first songs beats was 120 beats per minute, and the second song was only 72.1 beats per minute." When I listened to the second song it almost made feel relaxed, which I don't want. I use music to make me fell energized and ready to go. THe second song was much better for that. In the future I will remember to listen to Such Great Heights by The Postal Service before a soccer game or a Gymnastics meet because of its upbeat tempo!
I think that the first song was better because it had a faster pace. The beat and the lyrics flowed faster. If the beat and the lyrics flowed faster then it is a fast paced song. Therefore the first one is better.
I think that the first one was better because it had better singing. In the second song the singer sounded like he was in pain and like he was dying. The first song made me want to listen to the entire song. The second one made me want to skip through it. If I wanted to skip through the second song because of pained singing then, the first song diffidently had better singing.
I agree with @DR bubblesquash. Better is a strong word. I listen to a very wide version of music. At parties i won't listen to anything other than dancing songs. But when I'm home i might listen to Whitney Houston or Avril Lavigne. Depending on which mood I'm in i might want to listen to either one. Overall I'm torn.
I think the faster version is better because it is catchy. The lyrics and melody fit better with a faster and upbeat tempo. Although the slower song is relaxing, it is far too slow for my liking. And after a while it got boring. The upbeat tempo fit the song much better. I like the original version by The Postal Service.
@i.love.cheer. I disagree with you. I don't think the second version was better because I thought it was too slow. The tempo was so slow that the song became boring, and I couldn't even finish listening to it. I think the first song was better because the lyrics and singer fit the song better. The remake was not as good.
The first song was better. I think the first song is better because it has a better beat and melody and it is fast. In the song, the melody, beat, and words were sung faster than in the second version. I know this because when you listened to it, the beat was at least five times faster than the second song which was slow and doesn't have much of a beat. The tempo was slower than the first one also.
I agree with you Muffin Man 101 because I too thought the first song was better since the first song had more of a beat and made you want to listen to the whole thing but the second song was slow ans made you want to skip and end it like you said before.
The first one is better because it is faster. But the second one is easier to hear what their saying.Also the first one is catchier.The second one makes me feel like I'm at a slow dance. The first one feels like a dance party going on.
Maia, I agree with you the second one does sound "hill billie ish". THe first one is more upbeat.
I personally like the first one better. This is because it's faster and more dancier than the second one. Therefore, people who like more faster songs would like the first one more.
@Maia
I agree with you that the second one sounds sort of hill billy-ish. The song has acoustic guitar playing countryish kind of music. Therefore the song is hillbilly-ish.
I think the second version of the song is better because of the guitar (or other instrument) in the background and the singer. The first song has a bad singer and the techno background noise was annoying and I couldn't finish it or tell what he was saying. The chords playing in the background were calming and provided a cathing tune. Also the singer of Iron and Wine was much better. Therefore, the second song is better because of the soft melody in the backgound and its singer.
I like the first better because I feel that the second one kinda brings me down. With the uplifting beat, it gives the song a whole new meaning. People think that slower songs are better because there more about love. The first version is way better because so many people do remixes as they completely lose the meaning if the song/lyrics.
@Kayleigh
I agree with you. Yes, you can understand what they're saying better in the second one, but I also think is kinda like being at a slow dance. I think that the first one brings more life to it.
I like the first one alot better. I like this one the best because it's tempo is alot faster then the first one. So is the beat and melody. the vocals on the first one sounded alot better then the second one. the second one was very depressing and gloomy. I prefer the first one over the second one.
I like the original song better because it's more upbeat. The cover by Iron and Wine is just to slow and I don't think they got the feel for the song right. I think the feel for the song was supposed to be Folk/Country but Iron and Wine recieved it as a love song.
I think Such Great Heights by The Postal Service is better because it is has a good dance beat. I love songs that make you want to just get up out of your seat and bust a move. The complex beat levels out the simple singing. Such Great Heights by Iron and Wine is too cliche in my opinion. The guitar beat was used before in many other love songs. Unlike The Postal Service, Iron and Wine make me depressed because both the singing and the beat are calm. I like Such Great Heights by The Postal Service is better because it features a great dancing beat and its not depressing.
@AnnaDance2485
I agree with you because the first song is more enjoyable. Like you, I like songs with a good beat and the first song has that. I also think that the second song is kind of sad. The first song is better because it has a better, peppier beat.
I like the first one better because it was an origional product, which are performed the way the singer intended it. I know this because in the second song it is performed a lot slower and softer than the origional song. If the artists had intended that song to be like that, they would have made it that way in the first place. This proves that the origional product is better.
@kyledeegen
I do not think that Kesha is dumb because she is actually very smart. I know this because on one website* it says she got a 1,500 on her SATs and an IQ of 140. When your IQ and SATs are that high, it means you are a certifiable genius, not just plain smart. This proves that Kesha-however obnoxious her songs may be-isn't dumb.
(at that last comment:
http://www.mygossip565.com/2010/10/kesha-covers-seventeen-magazine.html)
i think that the one by Iron and Wine is better because i like the acoustic version better. i know that this was played by the acoustic guitar because it has more of a hollow, natural sound that isn't perfect. this proves that this is an acoustic version because in the other video it was perfect, louder,and sounded solid.
I think that the first version by The Postal Service is better because it has more of a fast beat while the song by Iron and Wine is slow, depressing, and boring. Therefore, the first version is better because of it's faster beat.
@crazyme123
I disagree with you because the version by Iron and Wine is boring and depressing. The version by the Postal Service was fast and upbeat. Therefore, I disagree with you because the secong version is boring and depressing.
I liked the first one better because it was a fast groovy tempo. The remix was really slow and kind of sad. I think the first one is better because it has a solo.
I agree with you ny rangers#1fan because each person has a different way of looking at these songs. So each is equally as good.
@PeterP I think that you are right I like the fast,groovy,catchy beat is way better than the slow depressing beat that makes you think "oh lookout its a sad song"
@PeterP I think that you are right. I like the fast,groovy,catchy beat way better than the slow depressing beat that makes you think "oh lookout its a sad song".I listen to music because some songs remind me to do something or help someone.
@ pandagirl
I disagree with you because what if i like slower music rather than fast. I know some people like slower music because it says on Answers.com that MOST people prefer faster music. this means that some of the population does like slow music which could mean they like the remake of this song.
I think the first one was better because it had a beat and the second one sounded like it should be in commercial not a regular song. The fist was better because the beat made you listen to the whole thing and not just part like the scecond. I also think most people prefer faster music so it would appeal to more people.
@ Peter P. I agree the first was better because it has more of a fast beat while the song by Iron and Wine is slow, depressing, and boring. This is why its better and I would never buy the song from Iron and wine.
I think the second song was better. that is because it was quieter and had less music in the background so I could hear the words better. I prefer quiet music because then I don't get a headache from listening to it. I don't want to have a headache because it messes up my thoughts and I can't work.
@Evan F
I disagree with you. I prefer slower quieter music. Music that is fast and loud makes my head hurt, so I cannot agree with you.
@cheerextremelover11 I did not mean to affend Mr. Horvath who is so awesome that Chuck Norris is his secretary. What I merely meant to say is that both songs are good in their own special way, 1 if you feel like dancing, 2 if you're trying to relax or something.
I think the first song is better. Not only is it the original, but it has a faster paced tempo and less of a sad song's soft, slow beat. Personally, I like the 1st song better.
I think the first version of the song is better because it has more of an upbeat sound. The PostalService's version has more background music and more enthusiasm in the song, which I like. The second song by Iron and Wine is very slow and those type of slow acoustic type of songs remind me of a weird lullaby. The first one had more feeling when the person sang it, which made it more interesting and entertaining. Therefore, I believe the Postal Service version of Such Great Heights is much better.
I like the original song by The Post Service because it has a better tone than the slower version. The original song has a faster pace and i like the tone of the singer. The second version is too slow and i like fast songs. This is my opinion on the two songs compared!
Anonymous, I disagree with you because like i said in my comment, i like faster songs. i don't like slow songs and i didn't think it was a good slow song. i only like good slow songs.
I liked the first one better only because of the way that it sounded it was a lot better then the second one.
I agree with pandagirl because of the way of how it was faster and that is was a catchier tone too
I think that the remake was better than the original beacause I like slow songs better that up beat ones. For example, I like skyscraper by demi lavato more than I like sexy and I know it by lmfao. Another example it that I like up by justin bieber more than I like backseat by new boyz. This cleary shows I like slow songs better so I would have chosen the new version which was slow.
@Jessica T. i disagree with you because i thought the the new version sounded better. The new song you are able to fall asleep to and the original was to up beat for my likeing. this is why i liked the new song better.
I think that the first song is better because it is faster, the beat is catchier and the song is just plain original! The second song is a copy of the first expect it is much slower and not as catchy. I believe that the first song is better.
Post a Comment