Re: Grading the ungradable

[simchik@cs.rochester.edu (Drew Simchik)]

In article <9407202107.AA09602@bugs.tqs.com>,
Steve Berlin <steve.b@TQS.COM> wrote:

>as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tree of Schnopia) blathers:
                                                  ^^^^^^^^
There's no need to be childish.

>I didn't mean *THAT*.  What I meant was that YMA (or any other KaTeSong,
>for that matter) is better than ANYTHING ELSE by ANYBODY ELSE. 

If "Passing Through Air" is better than "Yes Anastasia", then I'm
Doctor Who.

>ratIng kAtesongs aMoNgst themselves is an artfOrm That should only be
>performed by the bravest of souls In which Every nuance must be
>examineD.

But you play him on rec.music.gaffa, eh?

>Here's my own Rate Kate chart:
>
>A+ (Under the Ivy, Moments of Pleasure)
>A  (Army Dreamers, Ken)
>A- (James and the Cold Gun, Hammer Horror)
>B+ (Reaching Out, Running Up that Hill)
>B  (The Burning Bridge, You Want Alchemy)
>B- (Heads We're Dancing, And So is Love)
>C+ (Hounds of Love, Warm and Soothing)
>C  (Symphony in Blue, Rocket Man)
>C- (Never Be Mine, Fullhouse)
>D  (Experiment IV extended mix, I'm Still Waiting)
>F  (Eat the Music extended mix, Why Should I Love You?)

Nice to know we *roughly* agree everywhere else.

"But it's dipped in chocolate!"

Drewcifer