MAMAMOO – “Starry Night” Review

(Music Video)

MAMAMOO – “Starry Night”

Reviewed on March 20, 2018

More seriously, however, it is true I have not reviewed many of MAMAMOO’s recent songs. This decision was ultimately due to how the ladies already have excessive spotlight on this blog, but “Starry Night” changes this trend. Why? I was disappointed. And of course, bold stances oftentimes make for more interesting reviews and thus, I am reviewing MAMAMOO after quite a long time.

Continue reading “MAMAMOO – “Starry Night” Review”

Infinite – “Tell Me” Review

(Music Video)

Infinite – Tell Me

Reviewed on January 16, 2018

Specifically for what amazes me, it is not just—as many fans are currently praising—the vocals or even how the song itself is structured. What grabs my attention is how the composers purposefully crafted “Tell Me” so that its flow is that of short, choppy bits. Whether vocally or instrumentally, by slicing up the song in brief pauses, this gives the song an impactful effect: “Tell Me” is now able to adopt two contrasting positions. One position is that the song is able to give off a calmer, smooth flow but equally, the song is also able to possess an exciting, energetic and powerful style—all simultaneously as well.

Continue reading “Infinite – “Tell Me” Review”

IU – “Palette” Review

(Music
Video)

IU – Palette (ft. G-Dragon)

Reviewed
on July 9, 2017

Particularly
for this review, I wish to address why the vocal rating is seemingly low
despite the artist being IU, a vocalist who is oftentimes deemed as one of the
best in K-Pop, and more importantly, why a song being incredibly plain is
somehow garnering praise here while in a majority of cases this would warrant
much criticism from me. In other words: why is it that “Palette” is, in my
argument, appealing despite how it could easily be deemed a simple or even
boring song?

Personal Message:
I truly need to get back into the
habit of writing every day. Finally, after perhaps five weeks, I am getting to
the review that a personal friend requested. Quite obviously I am a good,
reliable friend. For other news, though, I will also be attempting to get back
into subtitling videos on a weekly basis along with more consistent reviews. To
explain my absence, once again, there is no actual reason: I admittedly have
been quite lazy. Even if I have an extraordinary amount of songs that I desire
to review (and even some Chinese Pop songs that I plan to review), I found
myself not able to turn that desire into action—until, of course, right now of
which is at a rather late time.

For what I hope will kick reviews
back into a more frequent schedule, I will be taking a major risk with how
actually write reviews. Rather than spending time on all the details, I will
experiment with highlighting the core, musical discussions at hand. Thus, this
might mean there are reviews—admittedly such as this one—where minimal time
will be spent on the fine details of the song. However, for key topics that
arise, I will definitely spend much focus there. After all, not only does it
become repetitive to dissect songs in such a systematic manner, but sometimes
there truly are more important topics to discuss than overly focusing on each
individual section in a song and the like. And, this all ties back into why I review songs in the first place:
it is not necessarily to reveal secret details and strategies in songs per se,
but it is to foster readers’ appreciation for pop music and to foster “active
listening” in readers. (“Active listening” is, in my use of the term, where
readers truly pay attention to the song and asks questions rather than
situating it as mere background, catchy noise.) Additionally, and for arguably
the most important part, I also hope to begin a discussion on music where
readers and fans have a space to disagree and agree with one another on a
song—after all, my reviews are merely my subjective
take to a song that should not be taken as an objective truth.

With all that, let us get right into
IU’s “Palette.” This song is perhaps one of the more interesting songs I have
reviewed: it structurally and sonically is perhaps one of the simplest songs I
have heard, but despite that it is rather effective and even appealing due to
the sheer simplicity. The issue this poses, sadly, is that this would make the
song difficult for a standard review in the sense of attempting to analyze all
of the sections and such. Thus—and once again to take a risk—I will not focus
so much on the individual aspect of the song but instead, the more important
discussions that arise. Particularly for this review, I wish to address why the
vocal rating is seemingly low despite the artist being IU, a vocalist who is
oftentimes deemed as one of the best in K-Pop, and more importantly, why a song
being incredibly plain is somehow garnering praise here while in a majority of
cases this would warrant much criticism from me. In other words: why is it that
“Palette” is, in my argument, appealing despite how it could easily be deemed a
simple or even boring song?

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 7/10
(6.50/10 raw score) – “Above average”


Vocals: 6/10


Sections: 6/10
(6.00/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Chorus, Verse, Chorus, Rap, Chorus, Chorus, Conclusion

1.     Introduction:
6/10

2.     Verse: 6/10

3.     Chorus: 6/10

4.     Rap: 6/10

5.     Conclusion: 6/10


Instrumental: 6/10


Lyrics: 8/10

[Introduction instrumental]

Strangely, these days
I like things that are easy
But still, I like Corinne’s music
Rather than hot pink,
I like a deep purple
I also like pyjamas
with buttons and lipstick
and jokes

I like it
I’m twenty-five
I know you like me
Oh I got this
I’m truly fine
I think I know a little bit about myself now

Rather than long hair,
I definitely like short hair
But still, I was pretty when I sang “Good Day”
Oh why is it this way?
I like things that are a little outdated
Rather than pictures I like filled
palettes, diaries, and the times I am asleep

I like it
I’m twenty-five
I know you hate me
Oh I got this
I’m truly fine
I think I know a little bit about myself now

Everything’s hard because you’re young
Getting upset when you’re being nagged
A child who used to only get scolded
barely passed twenty
Happiness seems just momentary
It hurts because you’re young
Jieun, oppa* just turned thirty
But I’m not ready,
but I’m an adult
Although I still have a lot more to go,
I’m only five years older than you
Past twenty, not yet thirty
In between, right there
Not a kid or an adult
You’re just you
That’s when you shine the brightest
So don’t get scared when darkness comes
You’re so beautiful that your flower will bloom
You’re always loved
(You)
Palette, diaries, the times I am asleep

I like it
I’m twenty-five
I know you like me
Oh I got this
(I got this)
I’m truly fine
I think I know a little bit about myself now
(Still have a lot to say)

I like it
(Like it)
I’m twenty-five
I know you hate me
Oh I got this
I’ve truly found–
I think I know a little bit about myself now

[Conclusion instrumental]

*Oppa literally means “brother” and it is how females refer to older males.
In this case, G-Dragon is referring to himself even if in English this
appears odd as it is “third-person,” but this is grammatically correct in this context as we understand “oppa” as a proper noun akin to “Brother.”

_______________________________________________________

Analysis: Before
perhaps the more “review”-like aspect of this very review takes place, I first
want to address the vocal ratings as I predict this would be the one aspect
that readers would want to contest. Now clearly, a six is definitely not a poor
score at all, but considering it is IU, this rating might be disappointing. The
first point to clarify is that the vocal rating is not based on an artist
individually and her vocal performance in an overall sense, but rather it is
based on his performance in the context
of the song
. Thus, a six here is not to say IU is merely a slightly above
average singer in general—I would highly disagree with that. However, in the
context of “Palette,” her vocals—while still solid—are not to the degree that I
am awed. First, already one problem is the lack of variety in the singing. Even
if the difficulty is quite high and thus the skill involved is quite impressive,
in terms of the actual results, we can merely summarize the vocals as this: higher
pitched beltings. Certainly there are more standard singing parts during the
verses, but given the choruses’ length, we can roughly agree that this is the
main point to the vocals in “Palette.” Unfortunately, having purely a softer vocal
delivery—especially when considering how the song is already structured to be
very straightforward—will hold the vocal rating back. Again, the singing is
still quite good sonically as we will get into, but the mundaneness that occurs
after multiple playbacks due to IU’s singing is why I decided to place a rating
cap on the vocals even if IU is oftentimes cherished as one of the better
vocalists in K-Pop.

All
that clarified, let us now address the song itself, particularly: why is it
that the song still miraculously scores well—ignoring the lyrics, that is. Obviously,
the lyrics are able to bring the overall score up by a huge margin and this is
due to how the lyrics are in fact incredibly detailed and function as a minor,
actual story. But ignoring that, we still have to acknowledge the song itself
is still slightly above average despite how it truly is one of the most
repetitive songs that this blog might have covered. Before continuing, though,
now would be the appropriate time to clarify another misconception: variety in
of itself is not automatically a positive point to a song. In fact, variety can
easily backfire: there have been songs that are far too chaotic and lack any
sort of cohesion, PRISTIN’s “Wee Woo” being an unfortunate example in mind (and
it has been reviewed for those curious on further details). In “Wee Woo,”
variety is in fact there—the issue, then, is not whether variety exists in a
song, but how said variety or lack thereof is used as a composition strategy.
Specifically with “Palette,” I find that the composers very much intended for
the song to lack variety as this opened up new, creative possibilities.

For
one, by lacking variety in both aural and structural components, the most
important effect that is created is how the attention goes less towards the
song’s tunes and raw sound and instead, attention goes to the song’s pure rhythm
and flow. Because IU’s vocals are not doing anything that is completely
captivating nor is the instrumental, the listening experience becomes less of
having a main, focal point but instead a generalized one that focuses on all aspects equally. This is definitely
a creative take to the song and I argue this intention works out very well as
listeners no longer focus on any traditional main points—whether that is the
vocals, instrumental, or section layout—but every easily meshes together and
the entire song becomes one solid unit. Overall, this sense of wholeness is why
“Palette” excels despite how, on the surface, it would appear to be a song that
was poorly composed and lackluster. Individually, the parts to the song are rather
dull, but once pieced together, “Palette” becomes an unusual aural experience
and is one that definitely differs from many pop songs and ballads.

Another
benefit to purposeful lack of variety is that we have to understand the song’s
very foundation is based upon that. If not for the song lacking variety especially
in a sonic sense, “Palette” would be unable to create its wholesome, signature listening
experience. A quick notice at the sections easily reveals this: it should be
noticed that quantitatively, the song lacks many sections; also, regarding
types, the song also lacks many types of sections. Most notably, the song
essentially consists of verses and choruses that occur back-to-back—though it
should be noted that the rap section takes on a significant portion and is also
a key component. On topic, however, the supposed dullness and lack of variety
to “Palette” is easily understood when we realize that, for the song to have
its incredibly linear progression—and hence the “wholesome” result—using merely
a verse-to-chorus structure is almost necessary (and also hence why the rap
section is quite lengthy and also extends the mere straightforwardness of the
song). Without a bridge or pre-chorus, a song will naturally lose much of its
diverse sounds as, after all, each section accounts for a new sound and style
in a song.

Overall,
IU’s “Palette” is admittedly limited by its very lack of variety; it is true—in
my argument and thus “true” in a loose sense—that the song being slower paced
and having minimal fluctuations throughout can very much deter some listeners.
However, when we consider that the composers were able to create a song that
challenged the very tradition of a song—that there is a focal focus be it the
vocals or instrumental or sections—by making it so that there is no focal point at all, I argue “Palette”
deserves some credit and is in fact quite appealing if viewed that way. Even if
I personally very much dislike the song’s style, it would be completely
disrespectful and silly to not acknowledge that, in a critical sense, “Palette”
is a decent song. And of course, with the lyrics being one of the better ones I
have heard, the song in an overall take is able to score quite well at a seven.
Besides, even if I do not grade the lyrics in a sentimental and emotional
sense, I still find that this song is a comforting one especially for those who
are becoming older and “adults.” (And I am relating very much now as I, too, am
slowly finding my “adulthood” and transitioning to that stage in life.)

_______________________________________________________

I
have finally finished this review. To my dear friend: thank you for being the
most patient person ever—and thank you for continually harassing me about this
as I very much deserve constant reminders of my hypocrisy and lies. For other
news, if correct, this review actually marks the third anniversary of this
blog. Three years ago I started with having no idea on where this would go, and
over the years I slowly found that reviewing K-Pop songs is one of the most
rewarding hobbies I have done. The only downside, however, is how every month I
continually look back and become flustered at how pathetic my writing and
thinking were. But, perhaps, this is also the beauty of this blog as readers
can literally see me grow in all ways: from slowly becoming better at writing;
becoming more analytical with reviews; becoming more concise; becoming more
critical in my thinking and more emotionally mature especially when it came to
discussing social topics (as much earlier discussions were actually very biased
and favored one perspective when, in reality, all social topics are incredibly
complex and I now favor a balanced, moderate view of social topics).

The
question I wonder now is how many more anniversaries will occur—and if I dare
say it, I hope to continue for as long as possible. Especially as I will not
stop listening to music until I literally am dead (and that K-Pop and C-Pop are
my cultural music lens and thus, this will not change the blog’s core content),
there would be no reason to necessarily stop reviewing songs even in the far
future as a busy individual. Let us see how far this blog goes and for all I
know, perhaps one day I will have an official site rather than relying on
Tumblr as the host. But, as I like to say, let us worry more about the “realistic
future” and not the far future where nothing is known at all.

Two
more requests are lined up and I will be reviewing them tomorrow: Monsta X’s “Beautiful”
and Day6’s “I Smile.” Look forward to those requests and many other songs and
even Critical Discussions that will occur. Until then, “I got this / I’m truly
fine”—even though deep down I am actually quite anxious as I might have overly
delayed these requests and fear I might go back to being unproductive. But,
considering this new reviewing style actually grabs my attention and motivates
me, I think we might see a post every other day which would be quite fantastic and
a way to prepare myself for the most difficult semester to soon come.

24K – “Only You” Review

(Music
Video)
/ (Dance Practice)

24K – Only You

Reviewed
on June 26, 2017

While
the song is far from being the best and admittedly does render—in my
argument—as somewhat generic, it still possesses solid points. Specifically for
what we will focus on in this review, I want to home in on how well the song
remains cohesive throughout its run. Afterwards, though, I wish to discuss the
problematic aspect of the song following a rather generic structure.

Personal Message:
Huge apologies to readers for delays
in reviews as mentioned in the prior, bonus one. While I am certainly not busy
at all due to summer break, I have been struggling to “get into the writing
zone” as I personally say. In simple terms: I am being lazy. But, for what is
the problem, I find that I write most comfortably and genuinely when I can
immerse myself in writing versus forcing
myself to write. Thus, this month has been relatively inactive as I,
unfortunately, have been leaning towards the latter. However, I am now finally
feeling motivation to write and more so as there are many comebacks and review
requests to cover. (In particular, I will skip MAMAMOO’s comeback as I have
excessively covered the ladies on the blog. However, Blackpink’s comeback is
one I plan on reviewing along with Girls Next Door’s “Deep Blue Eyes”—even if
they are merely a “project group” for Idol
Drama Operation Team
. Additionally, there are two requests to cover as
well.)

On topic with this review, this
request is perhaps the most special one I have received: it is from Choeun
Entertainment directly. Thank you to Choeun Entertainment for that and I feel
very grateful for this request. And, to clarify, this review will remain
genuine: I am not being compensated in any form to write a favorable review or
to suddenly begin advertising for 24K’s songs or the idols themselves. After
all, the purpose of song reviews are about the intellectual side; I write
reviews for the discussions that come and as a way of allowing readers to have
even  more respect for music as an art.

Regarding 24K in a general sense, as
readers might be aware of, the group is rather unpopular. Even personally,
prior to this review I was completely unaware of them. The most saddening part,
however, is that their lack of popularity is far from how the men are lacking:
it simply is just that they are overshadowed by other, prominent artists. They
are not the only ones in such a situation: Nine Muses and Stellar are other
groups who relate—though, even then, they are more popular than 24K. Overall, I
have expressed on numerous occasions my take to this and it is that achieving
popularity in the K-Pop scene is incredibly difficult. There are, without any
doubts, artists who are musically incredible or fantastic dancers, but many
will probably never be known as a mainstream artist. If time permits, I might end
June with a Critical Discussion post on this very interesting topic of
popularity in K-Pop as it is far more complex than many would intuitively
assume. Ending on an optimistic note, however, for fans of 24K who might
stumble upon this review or for readers who are fans of unpopular groups,
popularity in of itself is not important. Financially it certainly does
matter—and arguably this is the most
important factor as it determines if an artist can actually continue—but
assuming finances are not an issue, then popularity is not a concern at all. In
fact, smaller fan sizes can lead to many benefits: a closer, more loyal
community, and a chance for there to be more interactions between fans and
idols. For 24K, as long as the group is financially stable and is treated well,
fans should not worry about popularity—and this mentality, of course, applies
to other groups who might be lacking popularity.

Onto the review itself, “Only You,”
from what I am aware of, is their latest song. While the song is far from being
the best and admittedly does render—in my argument—as somewhat generic, it
still possesses solid points. Specifically for what we will focus on in this
review, I want to home in on how well the song remains cohesive throughout its
run. Afterwards, though, I wish to discuss the problematic aspect of the song
following a rather generic structure.

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 5/10
(5.25/10 raw score) – “Average”


Vocals: 6/10


Sections: 5/10
(5.00/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Verse, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Conclusion (Chorus)

1.     Introduction:
6/10

2.     Verse: 5/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 6/10

4.     Chorus: 3/10

5.     Bridge: 6/10

6.     Conclusion (Chorus): 4/10


Instrumental: 5/10


Lyrics: 5/10

Yeah
Oh
Listen

I’m falling, I’m falling
When I’m holding you, girl
I don’t need anything else
Your warmth that fills me up is my everything
The heart fluttering feeling I got when I first saw you
It won’t change, stay with me, always remember
Forever ever, forever ever
I see you every day but you’re always pretty,
even when you’re mad

Take me away with your beautiful eyes
Trap me with your soft touch
Only look at me, no one else
I can’t live without you, it has to be you

It’s only you
It’s only you
I see you every day but my heart flutters
It’s only you, so beautiful
It’s only you
It’s only you

Hold me, it’s only you, only you
You’re my scent of the day, only you
I’m falling more with time
Allow me to get in deeper
Awaken me from inside
Always stay like that
I’m falling, I’m falling
When I’m holding you, girl
I don’t need anything else
When I’m with you, it’s like Heaven

Take me away with your beautiful eyes
Trap me with your soft touch
Only look at me, no one else
I can’t live without you, it has to be you

It’s only you
It’s only you
I see you every day but my heart flutters
It’s only you, so beautiful
It’s only you
It’s only you

I’m drunk with your sweetness
So dangerous, so dangerous
I can’t escape, you and me
Addicted, addicted, falling for you

It’s only you
It’s only you
I see you every day but my heart flutters
It’s only you, so beautiful
It’s only you, stay by my side just like now
It’s only you

_______________________________________________________

Analysis:
To begin, the first aspect I wish to address with “Only You” is how cohesive
the song is. While the numerical ratings do not capture this as the ratings
focus more on the individual aspects, the song deserves credit for how well
each component links to the other. Already, one prime example is the vocals: if
we pay attention to the vocals in each section, we find that everything
ultimately relates. For example, the vocals at the verses begin typically with
a slower, calmer demeanor. However, with the pre-choruses, the vocals become
more gradually intense but even later during the vocal chants at the choruses,
the vocals remain at this heightened state as a simple way to show how each
section builds upon the prior. Even at the bridge this linking occurs: with the
bridge being placed between two choruses, the bridge does not adopt the
traditional form of being a dramatic pause in the song, but instead it
continues to be at a higher intensity in order to fit both its surrounding
choruses. Furthermore, the benefit here besides allowing listeners to easily
track the song’s progress is also that this allows the song to aurally vary:
each section gives its own style of vocals and instrumental.

That
said, we have to acknowledge the ratings: roughly, the song in its entirety
scores as merely average. I argue one of the most problematic features of the
song is simply how generic it is, but before continuing with this argument, we
first have to understand what I mean by “generic.” First of all, generic in of
itself is not bad; a song that sounds or is structured “generically” does not
mean it will automatically be bad at all. In fact, many pop songs are “generic”: this is why the pop genre
exists as its main foundation is that songs follow a predictable pattern—and
indeed, predictability is addictive and comforting to listen to. The issue,
then, is when said predictability is excessive and thus appeal is lost because
of such. With “Only You,” while the song follows a typical pop format—verse to
pre-chorus to chorus then a reset—the problem is that the composers appeared to
have overly relied on that very
format without adding even minute details that would create some distinctive
points. This is why the choruses have been graded the most harshly: they fail
to bring anything new structurally or sonically and as a result are completely
repetitive and come across almost as pure fillers—sections that are there for
the sake of that very section existing.

For
a better understanding, let us compare “Only You” to other pop songs to see
how, despite other pop songs following the typical pop formula, are still able
to have their own signature sounds or structures. One example is,
coincidentally, the recent comeback of Blackpink’s “As If It’s Your Last.” That
song’s composition aligns exactly with the generic format of pop songs, but it
does differ significantly with the choruses (which will be further discussed in
the respective review). Thus, Blackpink’s song may be sonically typical and
even structurally, but at the choruses the composers delivered an entirely new
take and even if a risk, it indeed was rewarding. Another example is TWICE’s “Knock
Knock” where, despite how incredibly “pop” that song is both aurally and
structurally, it manages to stand out via its unique composition strategy of
using contrast throughout the song. The choruses, for example, utilized catchy,
filler lines that contrasted to actual, vocally intensive lines. Returning to “Only
You,” this song does not have those distinctive marks that vary from the
typical pop song in either its sound—as “Knock Knock” does—nor does it deviate
with its structure—as “As If It’s Your Last” does. In fact, I find that EXO’s “Dancing
King” is another perfect example to compare “Only You” with as, on the surface,
“Dancing King” seems exactly like “Only You”: both are incredibly generic in
sound and format, and in fact both have a similar chorus with an instrumental
taking the forefront. And yet, I have greatly praised “Dancing King” in the past.
The difference, I argue, is that “Dancing King”—besides how the pre-choruses
are excellently composed and executed—still does have something to differentiate
itself: structurally, the choruses were not merely for a climactic peak. In “Dancing
King,” the choruses served as both a
climactic point but also as a form of resetting the song through slowing down
in pacing—and hence why the verses in that song were able to start off
energetically. In short, though, “Dancing King” even if sonically it sounded as
another pop song, was able to distinguish itself due to how the composers
handled the structural aspect of the choruses. Again, with “Only You,” it lacks
some deviation from the standard
formula. Should the song have either sounded more unique or if structurally it
functioned in a manner that was true to the pop genre but was not a “textbook
example,” the song could have rendered more favorably to me.

Overall,
it still needs to be clarified that 24K’s “Only You” is not a bad song at all
and I do not wish readers to interpret it as such. The song is average which is
not bad at all; the song is not “faulty” to the point of actually being a song
I would argue is deterring. Instead, the issue is that—and more so with 24K’s
situation of not being too popular—an average pop song easily blends in with
all of hundreds of thousands of pop songs out there. (Though that said, music
quality is only one factor out of many that help an artist gain popularity in
K-Pop; as said earlier, a future Critical Discussion will at least attempt to
make readers realize how many factors are at play.)

All
in all, while 24K’s latest song may not be stunning—in my argument, that is—they
still definitely deserve more attention and respect for their hard work. In the
future, I do hope 24K’s composers take a risk and create a song that remains in
the pop genre but is different so that there is a clear uniqueness to the song.
But, that is a high-risk and high-reward deal and certainly there should never
be a pressure to actually do such if other songs by 24K already fit the group’s
style. In the end, regardless of my own personal take to the song, I hope
readers and fans recall that the purpose of this review is not to bash the men
at all but is to merely begin a discussion. I hope fans and readers openly
disagree with me and each other in a respectful, thoughtful manner. For now, I
do look forward to 24K and the men certainly have my support for future
releases.

_______________________________________________________

Once
again, a huge thank you to Choeun Entertainment for requesting this review in
the first place. It is an honor. Likewise, thank you to fans and readers for
taking the time reading or skimming this review.

Regarding
the next review, IU’s “Palette”—despite more than a month’s delay—will finally
be reviewed. This is mostly due to the requester, a personal dear friend,
making me realize the blatant lies I have been saying with how the review will “soon
be reviewed.” Afterwards, we will then finish with Monsta X’s “Beautiful” as it
is another request and from there end June with either one last review or a
Critical Discussion post regarding popularity. Until then, “stay with me,
always remember / Forever ever, forever ever.” Interestingly this entirely
corny quote-lyrics-ending is something I have done ever since I started the
blog but is something I should perhaps change as it is becoming quite
embarrassing. But my entire being is an embarrassment. Jokes aside, look
forward to IU’s “Palette.”

Critical Discussion: “Whether Equal Line Distribution Matters for Groups or Not (ft. Sistar)”

“Whether
Equal Line Distribution Matters for Groups or Not (ft. Sistar)”

Posted on June 4, 2017

image

For
where I wish to take this Critical Discussion, I actually plan on challenging
the very notion that an equal line distribution is necessarily the best
distribution. I, on the other hand, actually argue that a line distribution is
most effective when it accommodates members—particularly
if we are to focus on vocal roles such as “main vocalist,” “lead vocalist,” and
“sub vocalist.”

Edit (June 6, 2017): Fixed many “mechanical” writing mistakes. This post had an absurdly high amount of typos and missing words. Apologies to readers who read this prior to this edit.

Personal
Message:
Before
starting this shorter post, I do wish to apologize to readers for not writing a
review in nearly three weeks despite being on summer break. To explain my absence,
it is not due to any unfortunate event at all; my short disappearance was
merely due to taking some time to truly relax and have fun for summer. With
having two to three weeks of not writing reviews or even subtitling videos for
that matter, I am now feeling refreshed and am definitely now desiring to cover
much content. There are many songs—both newer and older—that I plan to review,
and to make up for May having little content, I will aim to have nine posts for
June. That said, with soon having my wisdom teeth removed, this may or may not
be a realistic goal depending on my recovery time and if I am capable of
writing during that very time.

On topic, however, before getting
entirely back into reviews, I decided to instead cover a relatively brief yet
heated debate that oftentimes occurs in the K-Pop scene: line distributions for
groups. Specifically, as many readers might be familiar with, there is a
general take among fans that an equal line distribution should always exist for
groups. The lack thereof, then, is why mocking statements such as “Hyorin ft.
Sistar” or “Yuju ft. GFriend” are oftentimes heard—and indeed, I find that it is
best to discuss this very topic by using Sistar as an actual example. (And on
that note, I have much to discuss for their disbandment and even the legacy
they are leaving behind when I review their final song.) For where I wish to
take this Critical Discussion, I actually plan on challenging the very notion
that an equal line distribution is necessarily the best distribution. I, on the
other hand, actually argue that a line distribution is most effective when it accommodates members—particularly if we
are to focus on vocal roles such as “main vocalist,” “lead vocalist,” and “sub
vocalist.”

_______________________________________________________

Context:
Now, before getting right into my
perspective that challenges the current, main take to line distributions, first
we need to understand why many do hold onto the notion that an equal line
distribution is the best. Already, if readers are to look at the included
visual in this post, many should feel concerned: according to this source that
gauges time as a metric for line distribution, we can tell that in Sistar’s “I
Like That,” Hyorin is dominating a huge portion of the song. More than half of
the song consists of her singing, and that is definitely a reasonable concern
given that this means the rest of the members now hardly have time for their
own vocals to be heard. A group, after all, is meant to give spotlight to all of its members; thus, whenever one
member dominates a song even if on an aural level, it does appear problematic
and even unfair to the other members.

But, let us expand this argument
beyond merely emotional arguments that it is “unfair”; in other  words, let us critically examine on a musical level why having an unequal
distribution can be problematic. Readers who are familiar with this blog’s much
older reviews will know that I used to consider line distribution as its own
category worth grading akin to, for examples, the vocals and instrumental. The
rationale behind such is that, especially in larger groups, having an equal
line distribution allows a song to maintain a dynamic, active flow. Whether
from physically hearing new voices or how members’ lines are able to alternate from
each other in a fun, creative manner, there are some actual benefits at times
to having an equal distribution. However, indeed, I no longer gauge line
distribution as important for a song as, while it still is important, it is a far minor aspect to be concerned about. And
this is where we will now head for our discussion: my take on why an equal line
distribution is not necessarily the most beneficial.

_______________________________________________________

Analysis:
Overall, I argue there are two main
aspects that are worth considering when disagreeing with the view that an equal
distribution matters: vocal roles of members and whether time is a reliable metric—and
no, with the latter I do not wish to connote philosophical discussions on what
time even is. Jokes aside, let us first focus on vocal roles and why these
roles—official or not—matters.

With vocal roles, as stated earlier
in this post, here I am referring to the three main types that many fans are
familiar with: main vocalist; lead vocalist; and sub vocalist. To very briefly explain
what each are if readers are unfamiliar, these are essentially based on “levels”
with the main vocalist being the most vocally capable in her/his group while the sub vocalist is the least vocally
capable in her/his group. (Emphasis is added there as it needs to be reminded
that these roles are always in the context of a group. After all, despite for
example MAMAMOO’s Hwasa being the rapper and lead vocalist of her group, her
vocal capabilities exceed a vast majority of “main vocalists” in other groups
despite how, in MAMAMOO, she is arguably only just a lead vocalist. The point
is, these vocal roles are based in the context of a group and this needs to be
understood.)

Returning to the topic of why vocal
roles matters in relation to line distributions, we have to understand that it
is natural for distribution differences to exist based on these very roles. For
example, in Sistar’s case, it makes sense for Hyorin to handle the main bulk of
a song as she is vocally the most capable in her group—and even generally
speaking as she is a fantastic singer and even rapper. On the other hand, though
Dasom is still a solid singer, she is less adept than Hyorin. Thus, not only
would it potentially be out of her own comfort to handle a huge portion of the
song—and more so if considering vocally strenuous parts—but it might also begin
to hamper the song’s own audio appeal if Dasom delivers her parts less
effectively than if another member were to. As a result, it is understandable
on why in “I Like That” Hyorin would have a very high proportion of the song:
it is where the other members are comfortable with their vocal abilities, and
it allows the song to remain at its most appealing aural state given that
Hyorin is handling and delivering lines that require higher vocal levels.

Now of course, critical readers can
already easily disagree with this point: What about other songs where members do have equal line distributions but
said distributions themselves are based on the vocal roles? The best example in
mind is actually EXID’s “Up & Down”: in this song, if correct, the time length (distribution) per member is
actually roughly equal or at least at a reasonable share, but where there are
differences are merely in what the members sing. For example, Solji’s parts
involve more difficult, skilled singing but the time length is still
equal to Hani’s parts—even if Hani’s parts are less vocally intensive. As such,
readers and fans might argue this perspective that vocal roles should not
dictate the time length of
distributions but merely the vocal level
needed.

For my rebuttal, I admit: I do not
necessarily have one at all and in fact find this line of argument the most
convincing counter point to my argument. Theoretically, if this is always
possible for song, then indeed this is
the most practical, balanced solution: all members get an equal time length for
their lines, but vocal roles are still accounted for and utilized. That said,
the only disagreement here is not so much on the idea itself as it truly is one
of the better ideas, but admittedly we have to bear in mind that this is difficult to genuinely execute. When songs are composed and are then discussed
on how to be arranged per member’s lines, it is not always possible that both an equal distribution exists that
also accommodates for a member’s own vocal capabilities. Once again to use
Sistar’s “I Like That,” there are many points in the song where it simply is
most effective if Hyorin were to sing, even if this leads to her dominating a
large portion of the song. In other cases such as EXID’s “Up & Down,” it is far easier
to have roughly equal times all while fitting members’ abilities due to how the
song itself is structured. In summary, this counter argument to one of my
points is definitely reasonable and a solid one. The issue, though, is whether
this counter point is able to be consistently and realistically implemented in
many songs, and unfortunately I do remain pessimistic. If done, however, it
indeed is a perfect solution to the entire debate regarding line distribution.

But, even in the case that we can always
pair equal line distributions with vocal roles, I still find that there is actually a
problem: the assumption that time is the best metric for gauging line
distributions in the first place. Using “I Like That” as our main example, if
we look at the chart that is included in the post, we find that Bora has an erroneously
low share of the song. But, is that the case? Based on the metric of time and
even based on the metric of “section quantity” (how many sections a member is
involved in) that is true, but I argue these are not reliable forms of
measurements at all. The reason I bring these “units of measurements” into
question is that despite Bora having mostly a singular rapping section in “I
Like That,” I argue it is one of the most impacting and lasting sections in the
entire song due to what the rap brings to the song overall. Additionally, what
do we do with other songs where the rap sections are utterly fast despite the rapping
member potentially covering more words than all of the other members combined? Thus,
do we now count words as the metric
for line distributions or do we account for the “impact”—of which is already subjective
and impossible to quantify.

If this has confused readers in the
sense of realizing that there are too many variables on why line distribution
in of itself if a difficult aspect to track, then I have done my argument: it
is simply unrealistic and almost unreliable to be able to measure line
distributions and thus, the argument for having an “equal” distribution is
already at risk if one can never measure distributions in the first place.

_______________________________________________________

Conclusion:
So, what are we to make of this? Are
readers and fans to not care for line distributions at all, find a new
measurement for counting line distributions, or remain in debate forever?
Obviously the third option. But on a more serious note, this is ultimately what
readers need to take away: the answer is not one of the listed options but instead a combined, balanced view.

In the end, while we do run into
technical problems with accounting for line distributions, it is extreme to say
either line distributions do not matter at all or that it is the most important
aspect for groups. For example, with Sistar’s “I Like That,” I find that while
Hyorin should have had a larger portion than the other members, I find it more
disturbing that Soyou—the lead vocalist—had far less time involved when she is
a very capable vocalist as well. That said with Bora’s minimal amount, I find
that we have to be critical of the claimed 6.5% as her parts involved rapping—a
peculiar section that is not best measured in time length. All in all, then,
line distribution is worthy of critique to a certain extent, but when fans
examine such without being critical—such as without realizing that raps cannot
be reliably gauged in seconds or ignoring that some inequality is fine due to vocal roles—that is when this debate
truly becomes problematic. Yes, an equal line distribution is desirable, but
equally we need to realize why some disparity is natural and even beneficial
and that ultimately, gauging line distribution is already a complex task due to
many variables in place.

_______________________________________________________

Thank you to readers for reading
this whether in full or short, and thank you to readers for being quite patient
with reviews. More content will definitely be coming for June—unless, as said,
my recovery time with wisdom teeth removal ends up being miserable. But
assuming all is well, I plan to finish June with eight more posts whether
reviews or more Critical Discussion posts.

For the next post, IU’s “Palette”
will finally be reviewed—a review that was requested by a friend who, at this
point, joking teased that merely putting up the numerical ratings would suffice
by now. But of course, an actual review will take place. (And I am working on
being more concise with my writing, so readers can expect more reviews to come
out in the future.)

TWICE – “Only You” Review

(Audio—unofficial upload)

TWICE – Only You

Reviewed
on May 17, 2017

For
this review, while we will always look at both the strengths and weaknesses
involved, I find that a more productive discussion will come from heavily
focusing on why the song is, indeed
from my argument, good. In particular, I wish to tune into certain strategies
employed; specifically, we will discuss the role of the instrumental’s heavier
bass, the diversity of the vocals and how said vocals are accommodated for the
ladies’ vocal abilities, and how the song itself is structured and controls its
flow for certain effects.

Personal Message:
First of all, I do wish to make this
explicit: I will not be reviewing
“Signal,” TWICE’s actual comeback song. Now, should readers or TWICE fans be
incredibly curious, I am open to reviewing it only if a request is sent. That said, to share my thoughts on
“Signal,” it sadly is a disappointing song akin to—harshly stated—the rest of
TWICE’s title songs excluding “Knock Knock.” “Knock Knock” is still one of my
favorite songs in general, and even in a more critical lens, I argue “Knock
Knock” (as I did in my review of it) is incredibly well composed
especially for how the song adopts a very “stereotypical” pop style. But
regarding the original topic, indeed I find “Like Ooh-Ahh,” “Cheer Up,” and
even “TT” to all be weaker songs in general. In fact, I have already reviewed
all of them minus “Cheer Up,” and thus if readers are curious on my take, I
suggest readers reading the respective reviews. Unfortunately, while “Knock
Knock”—again, in my argument—broke
the chain of weaker songs, “Signal” is a return back into said weaker songs. JYP’s
composition of the song is, with all due respect, highly questionable. Even
more critically and to perhaps overstep my boundaries, I will even go as far as
to say JYP’s composition skills in
general
has tended to be weaker. I personally have yet to find a song
composed by JYP that has stunned me, and I am afraid “Signal” might be one of
his weakest works as of yet. (Again, this is not to say JYP is necessarily a
bad composer; he definitely is very knowledgeable and experienced, and quite
obviously, is far superior to I in this field. Thus, I hope readers interpret
my words as a form of a critical, bold critique rather than insults.)

On topic for this review, I admit I am
doing acts that are quite peculiar: for one, I am reviewing a song despite not
letting at least three days pass in order to remove instances of extreme bias
taking place; secondly, I am reviewing a side-track—a song that is a part of
the album but is not the main title. Humorously, though, I argue “Only You” should be the title track; if this was
TWICE’s comeback for the upcoming summer, this would have potentially shocked
many people in terms of music quality. (To clarify, “Signal” is “marketing”
well; their comeback, despite me rendering it as a very poor song, is
surprisingly holding number one on music charts and is garnering many sales.
The issues, though, are that other music reviewers have rated it poorly and
that many listeners find it a weaker song—this being indicated by an absurdly high
dislike ratio on the music video.) The ladies, after all, are oftentimes
critiqued for poorer vocal execution and even having overly generic pop songs.
In fact, to some extent, even I also agree with these criticisms. That said,
“Only You” is—once again, in my argument—the best song TWICE has ever released
both in terms of composition but also vocal execution. It truly is an amazing
song that showcases TWICE’s vocal skills at their peak, and the composition is
one that drastically deviates away from the more generic pop style that group
has claimed as their signature sound and style.

Finally, before getting right into the review,
I will leave a disclaimer. If readers have noticed from the blog’s side
information, “Only You” is currently my favorite song of all-time. Without
getting into the critical aspect yet, I will share that “Only You” matches my
music preferences perfectly: it
follows an upbeat pacing all while remaining “linear” akin to ballads; the
vocals consist of both simple yet complex lines and have both rapping and
singing; the instrumental focuses on a heavier bass line; and so on. The point
being, even without focusing on the actual composition at hand, I admit I very
much biasedly enjoy this song as its sounds and flow are what I prefer in songs
and I do hope readers realize I could easily be biased within this review—more
so as I am not waiting for the excitement to die down via waiting at least
three days before reviewing. However, of course, with now feeling relatively
confident in analyzing songs in a critical manner—or more realistically
speaking, me being a foolish and arrogant boy—I believe that I can review the
song without entirely projecting my biases. Regarding the composers of this
song, while I seldom do explicitly give credit, I wish to do so here: David
Anthony Eames, Debbie—Jane Blackwell, and 72 are the composers of “Only You.” These
are the men and women who authored this very song. Their work has brought what
I argue is TWICE’s best song of all-time.

For this review, while we will
always look at both the strengths and weaknesses involved, I find that a more
productive discussion will come from heavily focusing on why the song is, indeed from my argument, good. In particular, I
wish to tune into certain strategies employed; specifically, we will discuss the
role of the instrumental’s heavier bass, the diversity of the vocals and how
said vocals are accommodated for the ladies’ vocal abilities, and how the song
itself is structured and controls its flow for certain effects.

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 7/10
(7.00/10 raw score) – “Above average”


Vocals: 7/10


Sections: 7/10
(7.13/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Post-Chorus, Rap, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Post-Chorus, Rap, Bridge
(Chorus), Chorus, Conclusion (Post-Chorus)

1.     Introduction:
7/10

2.     Verse: 7/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 8/10

4.     Chorus: 7/10

5.     Post-Chorus: 7/10

6.     Rap: 7/10

7.     Bridge (Chorus): 7/10

8.     Conclusion (Post-Chorus): 7/10


Instrumental: 7/10


Lyrics: 7/10

Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you

It’s weird, I didn’t imagine it at first
Just like a sugar rush
You slowly approached me
and knocked on the doors of my tired heart
Is that when it started?
I thought you were a good friend
Before I knew it, I kept thinking of you
My cheeks get red and I only smile
The love’s already begun

You’re sweet you’re just like chocolate candy
I can’t hide anymore,
I want to show you how big my heart has grown
Let’s go

Always stay with me, don’t leave me boy
Now I know with my heart I’ve got only you
Look into my eyes, boy, it’s full of hearts
No matter what anyone says I’ve got only, only you

Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you

I’ve got O-N-L-Y you
Don’t ask why
Real love has no reasons
Call me “jelly”
Call me every day
Our secret code fluttering love mode
Baby, baby, tell me, what do you think?
Why is it so complicated, you want me too
You pretend you don’t but I can tell,
I can tell that’s right
Now come here, kiss me, butterfly

Ooh
I tremble when we brush a little
Ooh
When we touch a little my heart goes
Kung*, kung, kung, it’s for sure L-O-V-E
Let’s go

Always stay with me, don’t leave me boy
Now I know with my heart I’ve got only you
Look into my eyes, boy, it’s full of hearts
No matter what anyone says I’ve got only, only you

Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you

Okay, let’s go
Don’t make me wait any longer, I’ve only got one answer
(Only you, always you)
Ticklish first love makes me feel like I’m gonna fly
(Only you, always you)
Hold my hand tightly, never ever let go
(Only you, always you)
You and me against the world, I’m not afraid
(Only you, always you)

Always stay with me, don’t leave me boy
Now I know with my heart I’ve got only you
Look into my eyes, boy, it’s full of hearts
No matter what anyone says I’ve got only, only you

Always stay with me, don’t leave me boy
Now I know with my heart I’ve got only you
Look into my eyes, boy, it’s full of hearts
No matter what anyone says I’ve got only, only you

Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only, o-o-only, only you
Only you

*Akin to how this same word was used in TWICE’s “Knock Knock,”
“kung” is the Korean linguistic representation of a “bam”-like noise.
English equivalents in this case would be, for examples, “pit-pat” or
that one’s heart goes “thump thump.”

_______________________________________________________

Analysis: Now
that all of the analytical work is actually done, I confess: I am surprised the
song in whole rates only at a seven. Not that that rating is bad at all;
indeed, if anything, getting an “above average” rating nowadays is almost a
feat when considering how I am now incredibly critical of pop songs. That said,
I personally anticipated “Only You” scoring an eight. Critically, of course,
this song does not come close to making it that far though this is not to
discredit how dazzling of a song it still is.

Onto
the review, as there are too many aspects to this song to discuss and in fact,
many of which we will not even have time for in this review (as, again, I am
focusing on being concise for reviews rather than sharing an entire dissection
of a song as I used to in the past), we will stick to what I established
earlier in the review. Already, one key element to “Only You” is its instrumental
and more specifically, how it cleverly and effectively manipulates its heavier
bass line. For example, with the bass line serving as the distinctive
foundation and even sound to the instrumental, it allows the song to easily
make core transitions. Let us take a look at the rap sections as these provide
an excellent background to why the instrumental’s heavier bass is vital. With the
rapping, they notably are somewhat odd sections in terms of not just the
initial transition, but also how the instrumental during these moments entirely
deviate from what has already been established. After all, the first rap in
particular seems to adopt a deeper and more distorted instrumental than the
rest of the song—of which features a lighter instrumental sound. While
listeners might view this as a possible point of critique, tying back to my
argument however, and we will actually find that how the composers manipulate
the heavier bass allows this moment to be saved. The first rap’s bass line—despite
its deeper sound and distortion—is still recognizable as being the same bass
line that is already at play throughout the song. Thus, this bass line serves
as reference point: it is the same bass line that listeners can easily seek
out, but merely changed in its sound. And especially if we scope out further,
we realize this bass transformation parallels the song in its entirety as the
first rap section is still following
the same flow, though with a changed sound. In other words, this example is
merely one that showcases how the instrumental—particularly the reliance on a
heavier bass line—is used by the composers in a structural sense of keeping the
song organized. Of course, though, sonic benefits exist as well such as how the
instrumental covers the lower range of sounds especially as TWICE’s vocals
focus more towards the higher end barring perhaps the pre-choruses. We will not
dive in much further details here, however.

Regarding the next focus, the vocals
and the diversity within this field are rather impressive. On a simplistic
level, there is praise for how “Only You” is able to incorporate both rapping
and singing, but more importantly, that within these very branches that there
are still variances within. For example, the first rapping focused more on
power and flow while the second rapping focuses on building up the song.
Similarly, the singing ranged from stronger vocal beltings such as at the
choruses to smooth, slower and rhythmic singing such as at the verses and
pre-choruses. Overall, then, especially as vocal variety tends to be a key
appeal in pop songs, we can already understand why “Only You” sounds great
vocally as it covers a wonderful range of styles that will very likely hold
listeners’ attentions.

All that said, this is the minimal
aspect that I wish for us to home in on. What I find more relevant for
discussion is when we actually analyze the vocals in the context of TWICE’s vocal roles and abilities. Particularly, I find
that “Only You” truly accommodates TWICE’s vocal strength and weaknesses in
perhaps the most effective way I have heard as of yet. First, though, we have
to understand what I connote when I say “vocal roles.” As some readers are
aware of, groups tend to be split with “main vocal,” “lead vocal,” and “sub
vocal.” The former, in short, are members who can handle more complex and
difficult singer while the latter are members who tend to be weaker singers.
The middle role is, quite literally, the actual middle ground between the
mentioned two. While I do not wish to necessarily begin a debate regarding which
member in TWICE has which roles (these are “official” but I personally have my
own mental list as I find this to be far more accurate than what official websites
claim), I do wish to focus on how in “Only You,” the sub vocalists are finally
singing in an appropriate context.

I think it first makes more sense to
discuss the opposite, however: discussing examples of when the sub vocalists
did not get to sing in their right
contexts. “Cheer Up” is one example in that Sana’s “shy shy shy” line, while it
is now a pop cultural phenomenon, is a very weak musical line that does not
showcase her vocal skills at all. Another example is how in “TT,” both Momo’s
and Sana’s pairing at the pre-choruses are also a moment of weaker vocals. What
is troubling—and to get to my main point—is that the sub vocalists in many past
songs have been delegated to lines that are not
musically-orientated at all per se. Finally, though, in “Only You,” the sub
vocalists have lines that are much more intensive and complex in comparison to
their other songs but most importantly, “Only You” ‘s lines that involve the
sub vocalists actually involve them singing as harsh as that may sound. And
indeed, they definitely can sing and the sub vocalists of TWICE delivered many
impressive, fluid and lower-pitched lines for “Only You” and that deserves
credit as their parts are as vital as, for example, Nayeon’s and Jihyo’s lines
at the choruses (and equally Jeongyeong’s beltings throughout the song). In
summary, “Only You” showcases not just vocal variety, but it also showcases
excellent vocal execution in the first place and that is highly emphasized due—especially
when contrasting prior songs—to how the sub vocalists finally have
musically-based lines rather than being restricted to catchy, filler lines as
they historically have been.

Lastly, for the last point I will
discuss, the song itself was brilliantly structured. Specifically for what I
wish to discuss, the composers’ ideas on how to control the song’s flow are
very impressive. Although I do wish to discuss each and every section,
realistically it would be best to discuss merely one: the pre-choruses. I will
even go to the extremes of claiming that the pre-choruses in “Only You” are the
best ones I have ever heard in any pop song. In terms of what actually occurs
during these parts, nothing mind-blowing happens at all despite how much praise
I am giving. Summarizing the pre-choruses, they follow this overall strategy: The
pre-chorus in this song, first of all, is the moment when the vocals and instrumental
begin to mix together—as indicated by the slower pacing and how the vocals are
now lower-pitched to suit with the bass line and that the rhythm becomes a
prominent feature. Structurally, though, the pre-chorus relaxes the song via
slowing down and, once again, switching focus to the beats and rhythm that soon
begin to accelerate and climax in the form of the choruses. Again, nothing is
unique at all for the pre-choruses, and yet I am very surprised. What I actually
find delightful is how the pre-choruses utilize two different types of build up: the pre-choruses both relax the
song, but equally within the same space and time, the sections soon build up
the song back into a heightened state in a very natural, seamless manner due to
how the aural component meshed both vocals and instrumental. Typically only one
type is used. Using “TT” once again as an example, in that song we find that
the pre-choruses focus on hyping up the song—but, quite clearly, the
pre-choruses in that song do not do both. Another example in mind is the recent
review of VARSITY’s “U R My Only One.” In that song, the pre-choruses “downgrade”
as its form of building up the song, and though it admittedly does heighten the
song back akin to “Only You,” it does so in a very rigid, explicit manner while
“Only You” is able to do this without even attracting attention to this very
strategy.

And, while I seldom critique lyrics
as of the late—perhaps, in once again a harsh manner, due to the fact that many
lyrics of recently reviewed songs are all average—“Only You” has solid lyrics. The
fact that the verse and raps are not repeats and that even the pre-choruses use
different details rather than typically just recycling the same section helps
bring the lyrics up in rating. Furthermore, though the following does not
account at all for the score as it is the variety of details I care for, I hope
readers also enjoyed the song’s lyrics in a romantic sense. The plot is quite
endearing and sweet and in the overarching view of “Only You,” the lyrics
holding up well serves as the final, pretty wrapping to the song.

Praises aside, however, I still find
it crucial that we discuss the faults of the song. The main fault I have is how
the last rap and final portion of the song begin to create a tedious sound. With
the last rap, we find it alternating between rapping and chanting, and though
this makes sense on a structural level, chanting in songs are always at risk
due to how they can easily create a mundane sound if not balanced appropriately
with some other factor. Now, the composers did attempt that very act of
balancing via using the chorus as the bridge—thus, it counters the chanting’s
stale phrases through a very delicate, tuneful section. However, the somewhat
comical aspect is that this solution now creates another problem: that a
follow-up chorus—the regular one—is used to get the song moving again. The
issue here, of course, is that given the nature of the choruses in that they
are lengthier and rely on a linear flow, having two back-to-back choruses
becomes overly dragging of the song. While ultimately these faults are not
significant in the main view of the song, it still is noteworthy as “Only You”
starts off impressive but begins to languish as the song runs. It is always desirable
for songs to get better the further it gets, such after all is the
iconic structure of ballads, and thus the fact that “Only You” does the
opposite can definitely be concerning.

All in all, “Only You” is an amazing
song. It personally is my favorite song of all-time, and I expect it will stay
that way for many months if not even at least a year. Additionally, regardless
of what my favorites are, I personally argue it is TWICE’s best song. Should
fans ever desire to mute the mouths of those who are critiquing the group’s
music without being critical (emphasis: without
being critical
; it is fine to critique TWICE’s music as I do because I am
being critical and respectful), the song should be self-explanatory and can easily
be used to defend the ladies. What upsets me the most is how this song is not
the title and comeback track; it possesses a “summer sound” that would fit the
upcoming months, and with its style of infusing ballad-like elements while
containing the usual pop sound of TWICE, it truly astounds me that “Signal” was
chosen over this song. (But given that “Signal” is composed and produced by
JYP, their CEO, it perhaps makes sense on why that song is privileged as the
title song.)

As for final remarks, TWICE is a
group that does have music potential. Understandably, TWICE has been
historically a weaker group musically speaking as, I argue, all of their title
tracks are poor excluding “Knock Knock.” But, especially with extreme hate
spewed at the ladies on a personal level, I wish to remind readers—whether fans
or non-fans of TWICE—that criticism can only be kept in an art-based context. In other words, their dances, music
videos, and songs can be and should
be critiqued. What is not ethical is when listeners decide to attack the ladies
personally (especially as some might
feel that, understandably, it is “unfair” that TWICE is quite popular despite being
relatively musically weak). Never should the ladies themselves be attacked
unless if that genuinely is a case, though the likelihood is already near
impossible. (For example, if Jihyo is found to be an abusive leader and
constantly physically beats the members, then of course she can be personally
critiqued. But of course, this is a silly fake example and Jihyo would never do
such, but the point is that TWICE can only be critiqued musically and not
personally as, from my understanding, they truly are upright women who attempt
to always do as much good for the world as they can.)

Overall, while I personally will
forever remain critical of all of their title tracks barring “Knock Knock,”
TWICE is a group I would consider myself a fan of. They do have a lot of music
potential—this we hear in “1 to 10” or in “Only You” for examples—and I hope we
will hear more of a musical TWICE and less of a “generic pop group” TWICE. It
is a tough situation, however, as sheer popularity appeal via catchy songs is
what made TWICE get this far (and, pessimistically said, music quality in the
pop scene does not get as much respect as it should be as fans care more about
the aesthetic pleasures instead—which, again, is understandable). But indeed, I
remain optimistic that TWICE will head towards a more musical-orientated side
soon. And I remain optimistic and mostly delusional that Jihyo will one day get
down on one knee and propose to me. This, though, is probably irrelevant to the
review.

_______________________________________________________

Horrible
jokes aside, thank you for reading this review whether in full or short. I
appreciate it and hope, most importantly, that it sparks some deeper thinking
about music or K-Pop for readers. That is why I write reviews; I do not write
for the popularity and attention (after all, writing music reviews is a
horrible way to get attention), but that I hope I can begin discussions and
actively engage readers to being more critical to K-Pop.

For
the next review, I have received an indirect request: IU’s “Palette.” I claim it
is an indirect request as a dear friend is the one who personally asked me.
Thus, in some ways, it still is a request even if not sent in officially via
the blog. Nonetheless, that will be the next song we focus on. Afterwards, I
have mixes of Critical Discussion posts and artists that have yet to be
reviewed at all (though IU is interesting an artist I have yet to review) that we
will cover. Until then, “[a]lways stay with me, don’t leave me boy/girl”—because,
quite obviously, I am a rather clingy boy. Jokes aside, look forward to IU’s “Palette.”  

VARSITY – “U R My Only One” Review

(Music
Video)
/ (Dance
Practice)

VARSITY – U R My Only One

Reviewed
on May 11, 2017

Admittedly,
while for a debut song “URMOO” is definitely impressive especially as—unsurprisingly—debut
songs tend to be artists’ weaker songs given that artists are still
significantly learning and improving (and are not prepared to perhaps handle
more complex song compositions), “URMOO” in a general sense is rather average. Certainly
the song has its strength in terms of the men’s vocals and also in how the
composition cleverly handles the song’s flow and intensity, but ultimately the
sonic aspect to the song is far too basic. That shortcoming is what greatly
limits the potential to “URMOO.”

Personal Message:
As stated in the prior
post
—one that focused on musical technicalities via challenging assumptions
about “MR Removed” videos—I am now on summer break. This means I will have
plenty of free time to catch up on reviews and particularly for this summer, I
truly wish to hone my writing skills in the sense of writing more efficiently.
(And for a fun side note, I am also honing my driving skills and hope to
acquire my license soon.) After all, some readers might have noticed that overtime,
reviews on this blog are slowly becoming shorter in length while, I hope, still
maintaining worthwhile content. One my writing weaknesses is that I simply
write unnecessary, excess details and thus, I will spend this summer break
attempting to ultimately bring reviews down to perhaps three or so paragraphs
on average. Of course as said, the content within the reviews will not change;
rather, I will now be directly
getting my points across without relying on massive paragraphs to do such. And,
if this works out, this will also mean readers can expect consistent reviews.

On topic with this review, however, first
I would like to thank the requester for sending this song in. The requester did
give an option of choosing VARISTY’s “U R My Only One” or “Hole in One,” and
indeed I have opted to review their debut song (“U R My Only One”) as I find it
would bring a more interesting discussion than their recent comeback. Nonetheless,
thank you to the requester for sending this in. As always, requests are very
helpful as it allows me to review songs that readers want, and it allows me to
stay updated on which releases are currently trending and that people are
curious about in a critical sense.

Now, before getting right into VARSITY’s
debut song, there are two clarifications I need to make. One is, from here on
and forward, I will refer to the song as “URMOO”; typing out the usual title is
proving to be more laborious than necessary and hence this abbreviated form.
Thus, I hope readers do not become confused and assume I am somehow talking
about cows. Horrible joke aside, for the more serious clarification, there
appears to be—from my perception—an audio fault with this song. By “audio fault”
I refer not to the composition of the song—in other words, how the song was
created via intentional sounds,
sections, layout, and so on. Instead, I am referring to how the audio that
appears in the music video (and in other sources on YouTube) seem to be of a
poorer quality than usual. This was the case with Girls’ Generation’s Seohyun’s
“Don’t Say No,” and I do wonder if the same case applies to “URMOO.” Specifically
for what is wrong, the song sounds “pushed down”; a simple example is that the
song sounds akin to what one hears if they were under water. In other words,
the audio seems muddled versus of the usual crispness that one would expect in
a song. (In technical terms, if I am correct, I think there is too much reverb.)
For why this matters and why I even bring this up, I will assume this sound
effect is unintentional. Should it actually be intended then readers should
know that I personally view it as detrimental. Of course, however, since I am
making a bold accusation, I will assume the song is “innocent” and thus will
not be using this aspect as a point of critique.

All that covered, let us finally
discuss “URMOO.” Admittedly, while for a debut song “URMOO” is definitely
impressive especially as—unsurprisingly—debut songs tend to be artists’ weaker
songs given that artists are still significantly learning and improving (and
are not prepared to perhaps handle more complex song compositions), “URMOO” in
a general sense is rather average. Certainly the song has its strength in terms
of the men’s vocals and also in how the composition cleverly handles the song’s
flow and intensity, but ultimately the sonic aspect to the song is far too
basic. That shortcoming is what greatly limits the potential to “URMOO.”

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 5/10
(5.25/10 raw score) – “Average”


Vocals: 6/10


Sections: 5/10
(4.75/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Post-Chorus, Rap, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Chorus,
Conclusion

1.     Introduction:
5/10

2.     Verse: 5/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 4/10

4.     Chorus: 4/10

5.     Post-Chorus: 5/10

6.     Rap: 5/10

7.     Bridge: 5/10

8.     Conclusion: 5/10


Instrumental: 5/10


Lyrics: 5/10

[Introduction instrumental]

Never again
I said that it’s really over
Try again
You got me, you got me
(Please)
Cut by a blade
My heart will not heal
I’m not fine
I’m trying, the more I do,
I cry

If only I can turn back time
I wouldn’t lose you,
who was too good for me
I don’t think I can go on without you
Come back to me

You’re my only one
You’re my only one
You’re my lover
But time is over
You’re my only one
You’re my only one
I need you, baby
I want you, lady
(Woo) I didn’t know the answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one
(Woo) I realized my answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one

[Post-Chorus instrumental]

Yesterday, I told you to go
Today, come back to me
My broken heart needs you
Tell me the way to find you
When you’re not next to me
(Hold up)
Everything stops
I don’t need anything but you
Besides you, nothing’s better

If I can turn back your heart
I could give you all my love that I couldn’t before
I don’t think I can go on without you
Come back to me

You’re my only one
You’re my only one
You’re my lover
But time is over
You’re my only one
You’re my only one
I need you, baby
I want you, lady
(Woo) I didn’t know the answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one
(Woo) I realized my answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one

You always learn love after saying goodbye
I can’t erase you
You remain in my head
I’m looking for you, I can’t take it anymore
(Driving me crazy)

You’re my only one
You’re my only one
You’re my lover
But time is over
You’re my only one
You’re my only one
I need you, baby
I want you, lady
(Woo) I didn’t know the answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one
(Woo) I realized my answer
(Woo) Just, you’re my only one

[Conclusion instrumental]

_______________________________________________________

Analysis: One
of the main weaknesses to “URMOO” is simply how the aural aspect to it is far
from enticing. Now that said, it should be clarified that the song’s overall
sound suffices; it is not an unappealing
sound. The issue, though, is the opposite holds true as well: neither does the
song have an appealing sound. It
hovers in the middle—and hence the common five ratings littered throughout the
review.

For
an actual example to focus on, the instrumental provides insight on the song’s
overly basic sounds. With “URMOO” adopting a predominantly electronic-based instrumental,
one of the issues at hand already is how the song will prevent itself from
sounding mundane especially as electronic sounds ultimately all still sound
similar to each other. There are various solutions to this, and “URMOO”
definitely does have some—namely its usage of traditional instrumental sounds
(such as a piano) and “distorting” the electronic instrumental. Unfortunately,
I argue these strategies are still insufficient. For example, the composers’
usage of the two, differing sound styles—electronic versus “traditional”—are not
emphasized enough to truly leave listeners with a sense of variety. We find
this by how these two types of instrumental sounds are used less for their
actual sonic values and more for their structural values: the traditional
sounds reside during calmer sections while the electronic instrumental occurs
during the more intensive parts. Thus, the effect we get out of these two
instrumental types being contrasted is less on creating an aural effect and
simply more for listeners to be able to identify the song’s flow and intensity.

Nonetheless,
I argue this is quite problematic as the song does end up running through its
stagnant points: the electronic sounds do become dull no matter how distorted
and exciting it can get, and equally the traditional sounds follow suit.
Furthermore, if we also account VARSITY’s vocals, we also find that the
composers seem to separate this aspect as well. VARSITY’s singing is heavy on
precise tunes with the bonuses of slower moments or rapping, and though the
vocals are definitely the song’s best aural point, in the entirety of the song
we find that all these three sounds—vocals, electronic, and traditional
instrumental—do not work together. Instead, each aspect is used in their own
situation—and this we can literally hear by how the electronic-based choruses
only have “fillers” (lines of humming “woo”). Overall, if the composers at
least made it so that each distinctive sound group—vocals, electronic, and
traditional instrumental—was able to hold on its own, this composition idea
would have worked out. However, given that each one seems to rely on the other despite
clear divisions in place—such as the post-chorus having its solo electronic instrumental—it
leads “URMOO” sounding somewhat disorganized in an aural sense. That said, the
sounds in the song are not bad per se; if anything, it is the messier setup
that is the true problem as, if all three sounds were able to directly complement
each other, the song would sound
great. But, as is, “URMOO” sounds far too plain especially when all of the “sound
types” end up working on their own instead of one cohesive unit.

Regarding
where “URMOO” shines, even if the song in an aural sense is a bit stale, one
unique aspect is how the composers handle the song’s flow. Ironically, though,
the way the composers handled the song’s flow is by not handling it at all—in a somewhat figurative sense, of course,
as the composers seem to have very much intended this. Specifically for what I
am referring to, I wish for readers to notice how the song’s intensity plays
out. “URMOO” follows the usual pop music binary format in the sense of how
there is a buildup that is met with a climax, but what is quite interesting is
how the intensity naturally fades out rather than direct action taking place to
control that very fading. For example, the post-chorus best highlights this.
This section is placed right after the chorus—the typical climaxing point of
pop songs, and indeed this is the case for “URMOO.” The effects from the
post-chorus, though, is that it allows “URMOO” to relax its heightened, upbeat
state in a manner that perfectly suits with the song’s sonic component—in other
words, a chance for an electronic solo. Likewise, even on the side of hyping up
the song, we find some subtle strategies implemented. The rap is another solid
example: this moment follows right after the post-chorus, and given that the
rapping followed a quicker and strong pacing, it easily allowed “URMOO” to flow
right back into the pre-chorus—a section that begins hastening the song. And
so, even if the song’s sounds lack chemistry, we have to acknowledge that on a
structural level the song is definitely linked. Each section manages to flow to
the next fluently, and with the rapping and post-chorus, I argue their roles
were well developed and are rather effective in action.

All
in all, “URMOO” is a song that has potential. Structurally, the composers created
a very cohesive song. Unfortunately, though, when it comes to the actual sounds
used, besides already using a rather typical concept of being heavily electronic-based,
the composers come short with making all of the sounds work with one another.
As it stands, the song lacks variety in terms of its physical sounds
particularly because each distinctive sound—be it the electronic-based
instrumental or traditional instrumental or even vocals—is used merely to
indicate where the song is in a
structural sense. If the composers were able to make the electronic sounds work
directly with the vocals or at the very least so that the electronic sounds in
of themselves had more of a value besides indicating that a listener is at the
choruses, perhaps “URMOO” would be much stronger.

Overall,
VARSITY’s debut song holds as average. While fans might be disappointed as they
expected this song to be much stronger, we have to bear in mind this is their debut song. In my personal experience
and opinion, many—many—debut songs
are weaker than usual and are never a fair gauge to a group’s music qualities. This
is expected as idols are still developing their vocal skills; companies are
still experimenting with appropriate song concepts; and ultimately that more
complex song compositions—the “better” songs—are saved until artists are ready
for them. For some examples off the top of my head, here are a few debut songs
that I would review as “weaker”: MAMAMOO’s “Mr. Ambiguous”; GFriend’s “Glass
Bead”; TWICE’s “Like Ooh-Ahh”; Infinite’s “Come Back Again”; Red Velvet’s “Happiness”;
and so on. For why I am specifically mentioning these artists, despite me
supposedly calling their debut songs weaker, a majority of readers will easily
recognize that these groups are definitely now at the top and do have many solid songs. The point is
this: debut songs tend to be already weaker songs and thus, I hope fans realize
that VARSITY’s debut song being held as average is already very impressive, and
furthermore that improvement will
come. VARSITY can only improve from here and onwards, and while I am not
reviewing their latest comeback of “Hole in One” to see if any significant
improvements have occurred yet, I hope fans do not feel “discouraged” by this
review’s rating should that be the case.

_______________________________________________________

I
personally find this to be one of my weaker reviews yet. That said, it perhaps
is more concise than usual reviews as I focused not on analyzing each section
in fine details, but instead focused more on the main points I wanted to make
about the song. To the requester, I hope this review provides new insights to
the song and that the review encourages all readers to be critical of it. Once again,
thank you for sending in this request.

As
for future reviews, I definitely plan to review LABOUM’s “Hwi Hwi” and perhaps
even IU as a friend did suggest I give her latest song a review. There are
definitely a lot more artists to cover besides these, of course, but the list
will begin here and more so as I have yet to review these artists. Look forward
to most likely “Hwi Hwi” as the next review. Until next time, “You’re my only
one”—which makes absolutely no sense except depicting me as an overly clingy
and desperate reviewer. Then again, that is partially true. Jokes aside, look
forward to “Hwi Hwi” and many more reviews to follow especially as I am on
summer break.

Critical Discussion: “Analyzing the Cult of MR Removed Believers: Understanding the Truth Behind Lip-Syncing and Vocal Skills (ft. TWICE)”

“Analyzing
the Cult of MR Removed Believers: Understanding the Truth Behind Lip-Syncing
and Vocal Skills (ft. TWICE)”

(AtrocityCL’s Video and Commentary)

Posted on May 8, 2017

image

(In fact, I came across a blog post that went into the technical aspect and why MR Removed in of itself is already a process with major faults and unreliability. My video in particular focuses more on understanding the physical limitations of simultaneously singing and dancing and why focusing on MR Removed is a waste when it comes to the analysis of vocals and even pop music in general.)

Personal
Message:
Indeed,
for once I am making a video to present my ideas and discussion. There are many
reasons for this sudden change—besides the fact that I am on summer and thus
have the time to be creative and have fun. (And I am currently working on a
review request, to clarify. Apologies for the delay; I hope to finish the review by May 9.) One reason for this video format is I desire to
reach the broadest audience possible; admittedly with videos, they garner many
more views than would a blog post. This is understandable given how videos
address more types of learning other than reading as it includes audio,
visuals, and the like. And as an upcoming educator, I entirely embrace this: I
am willing to definitely address all types of learning styles, and with this
Critical Discussion possessing an education-like tone, I decided a video format
would serve the best purpose. Furthermore, having actual audio and visuals for
this discussion is crucial as readers should be able to hear what I am discussing rather than hypothesizing and taking my
sheer words as truth. Additionally, this will also be the first time readers can hear
my physical voice—though this is definitely a downside and I wish I was
soft-spoken and sounded akin to the men in dramas who have the typical
charming, clear and crisp voices that everyone envies. I, on the other hand, was gifted with a less pretty voice.

Self-deprecating jokes aside, please feel
free to click the link and enjoy the video and discussion that comes with it. Finally
for a last point, readers should bear in mind this is a “simplistic” analysis
of MR Removed as I do not go into the heavy technical
aspects of why even the process of MR Removed is worthy of questioning. (In fact, I came across a blog post that went into the technical aspect and why MR Removed in of itself is already a process with major faults and unreliability. My video in particular focuses more on understanding the physical limitations of simultaneously singing and dancing and why focusing on MR Removed is a waste when it comes to the analysis of vocals and even pop music in general.)

_______________________________________________________

Context:
*
Refer to the linked video.

_______________________________________________________

Analysis:
*
Refer to the linked video.

_______________________________________________________

Conclusion:
*
Refer to the linked video.

_______________________________________________________

*Refer to the linked video.

PRISTIN – “Wee Woo” Review

(Music Video—Dance Version)

PRISTIN – Wee Woo

Reviewed
on April 29, 2017

image

Regarding how the review will go,
despite how many fans might appreciate “Wee Woo” as being catchy and unique or
that it merely needs extra playbacks to be deemed good as many fans have
claimed, I disagree that the song is satisfying or even unique. Harshly said, I
find that “Wee Woo” is a highly generic pop song if we focus on certain
strategies the composers have employed, and furthermore, while the song’s
generic, bubbly musical concept appears as unique we still ultimately have to
realize it is just that: generic.

Personal Message:
It is currently “dead week” for my
university—a term that refers not to the fact that professors are no longer
assigning work due to the week before finals, but rather to the fact that
students are mentally dead. Morbid humor aside, I do want to clarify to readers
that I am indeed alive—although finals are actually happening right on May 1.
This semester has been quite busy and thus, reviews for April were essentially
nonexistent. In fact if correct, April saw only one review—if excluding the April’s Fool prank: EXO’s “Call Me Baby.”
For this summer break, while I will be finally learning how to drive and taking
up a few non-official jobs, I expect it to be quite free and thus I will spend
a lot of time catching up on reviews. Furthermore, I feel inspired to finally
begin learning how to write much more concisely and effectively. As a result,
readers might be seeing a review every other day during summer, and even once
the next semester comes around—one that will be the most challenging and busy—I
would at least be able to review a song every four days versus the current
school schedule of a review per week or two weeks.

And so, let us already begin
focusing on PRISTIN and less on technical updates. As readers might have
noticed, the prior post did involve PRISTIN: I wrote a Critical Discussion post
regarding an incident the ladies and their staff had with a rather questionable
“fan.” Readers who are curious should refer to the post itself as I will no
longer comment on it directly. But indeed, the topic regarding genuinely
obsessed fans is one that should be addressed and cared about and thus, I hope
readers spend some time either reading the post or at least pondering over it.

On topic with PRISTIN, however, in a
musical sense, I have planned to review “Wee Woo” at least three days after it
was released. Quite clearly, three days somehow became two months or so. However,
even if “Wee Woo” is no longer trending in the sense of being a recent
comeback, I find that the song’s composition is fascinating and is perhaps one
that entails not just a discussion on the song in of itself, but also a
discussion on debut songs in general.
For what I mean, especially if we bear in mind PRISTIN’s first album and those
other songs that have been composed and executed, “Wee Woo” is—in my opinion—a
far inferior song than many of the other songs within the ladies’ first album. “Wee
Woo,” then, is what I personally term a “high-risk; high-reward” song—and in
the context of how this is PRISTIN’s debut song, it actually makes sense on why
a potentially weaker song would be used over much stronger songs that exist in
their album.

Regarding how the review will go,
despite how many fans might appreciate “Wee Woo” as being catchy and unique or
that it merely needs extra playbacks to be deemed good as many fans have
claimed, I disagree that the song is satisfying or even unique. Harshly said, I
find that “Wee Woo” is a highly generic pop song if we focus on certain
strategies the composers have employed, and furthermore, while the song’s
generic, bubbly musical concept appears as unique we still ultimately have to
realize it is just that: generic.

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 3/10
(3.00/10 raw score) – “Below average”


Vocals: 3/10


Sections: 4/10
(3.86/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Rap, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Conclusion (Chorus)

1.     Introduction:
6/10

2.     Verse: 3/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 3/10

4.     Chorus: 3/10

5.     Rap: 5/10

6.     Bridge: 2/10

7.     Conclusion (Chorus): 5/10


Instrumental: 3/10


Lyrics: 2/10

Wee woo, wee woo, wee
We are Pristin
(Hello)

I’m princess of our house
I like adventures
I want blow the balloon that is you
Pop
When it pops,
what will be there?

There are boys who like me lined up
Oh why, why?
But why aren’t you in that line?
Oh why, why?
Dazzling, my heart is crumbling
You’re my super, super hero
Dazzling, my heart is crumbling
You’re my super hero
Ring ring, hello?
Can you send an ambulance here?
When our eyes meet, I get dizzy

I like you, I like you, boo boo
My heart is pounding
I like you a lot, boo boo
When I look at you, my heart goes
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
It’s dangerous
Wee woo, wee woo, wee

I’m waiting, I go crazy when I see you
My heart is going at 100km
I made up my mind, I want you
Right now, stay right where you are

There are boys who like me lined up
Oh why, why?
But why aren’t you in that line?
Oh why, why?
Dazzling, my heart is crumbling
You’re my super, super hero
Dazzling, my heart is crumbling
You’re my super hero
Ring ring, hello?
Can you send an ambulance here?
When our eyes meet, I get dizzy

I like you, I like you, boo boo
My heart is pounding
I like you a lot, boo boo
When I look at you, my heart goes
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
It’s dangerous
Wee woo, wee woo, wee

I’m rubbing the lamp baby
Casting a spell so I can have you
Sun, moon, stars, I’m asking them all
to cast a spell
Did the spell work?
Let’s check

I like you, I like you, boo boo
My heart is pounding
I like you a lot, boo boo
When I look at you, my heart
(spills out)
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
It’s dangerous
Wee woo, wee woo, wee
Wee woo, wee woo, wee

_______________________________________________________

Analysis: Sometimes
I do wonder if my current university-related stress is making me overly critical. But, I hope with my
reasons and arguments, readers can see where my position comes from and of
course, I definitely encourage readers to openly disagree with my reviews as
the very purpose of them is that: to start discussions. With the review, as we
can tell, the song scores disturbingly low: a three for below average. This has
definitely not occurred in quite some time, but unfortunately “below average”
serves as the appropriate term I would use to describe “Wee Woo.”

Already,
one significant problem to “Wee Woo” is how the vocals are executed. The
choruses provide the best example: much of the vocals follow an overly
strained, higher pitched sound and at the choruses themselves, auto-tune has
been used in the production stage to create a robotic sound. Now before further
expanding that point, a clarification is needed: contrary to the belief that
auto-tune is automatically used to “fix” singing, auto-tune in a majority of
situations is purposefully used for merely its sound effects. After all,
auto-tune rarely “fixes” singing and—as in “Wee Woo” ‘s case—it arguably does
the opposite with breaking singing.
Thus, it is the effect the composers are seeking out and indeed, PRISTIN are
all very capable vocalists as seen in other album songs. But on topic for why
this matters, the auto-tune used here and equally the overly strained, high
pitched singing are detrimental to the song in whole. All of this creates an
excessively mundane sound in the song as there are minimal deviations in the
physical sound itself: everything—barring perhaps moments at the
pre-choruses—is sung in this strained, robotic-like sound. That is definitely
not beneficial if the song itself does not manipulate that for other purposes.

To
compare “Wee Woo” to a song that does arguably use auto-tune to a beneficial
effect, T-ARA’s “Sugar Free” is the song that comes to mind. In “Sugar Free,” the
auto-tune part is to build upon the instrumental’s already robotic sounds, and
additionally, the important feature in “Sugar Free” is that the auto-tuned
singing is used to contrast to standard, highly tuneful vocal beltings that
occur at the choruses. In “Wee Woo,” though, we do not see any of those
strategies implement; rather, we merely hear auto-tune for its individual sonic
appeal—and sadly, that is an unwise decision in my view as auto-tune is best
used on a structural and strategic sense rather than an appealing sound. But
before “Wee Woo” ‘s auto-tune is completely disregarded as useless, I do admit
it has its strength in the song’s structure: the auto-tune singing and the
overly strained singing create a distinctive, highlight point in the choruses
and that serves as an easily identifiable climax to the song. However, this is
a marginal benefit as the downside to this idea—the loss of vocal appeal and
even overall sonic appeal in general—is far more significant.

As
for other problems we encounter, I find that many of the song’s sections are
questionable composed—even if, indeed, there are some brilliant thinking in
mind. Let us examine the pre-chorus for an example. One interesting aspect to
this section is how it essentially builds upon itself; in other words, the
pre-choruses almost have a pre-chorus within themselves. We notice this by how
the pre-chorus initiates with an upbeat, tuneful style but later transitions to
a dramatic, slower style. That, though, is then used as a foundation for the transition
point to send “Wee Woo” to its choruses. Quite obviously, on a superficial
level, this is very creative composing—and indeed, it is and I do not wish
to deny this. The composers do deserve credit for this creative and new
take to pre-choruses. What is not foreseen, however, is how the pre-choruses
ironically undermine themselves. On a general layer, the pre-chorus builds up
the song but when the “second” or “inner” pre-chorus arrives, it ends up taking
away that generated hype and instead starts the whole process right from where it began. This, though, does not create more
hype in the long run. It is a method that is rather inefficient, if anything. If the song took
the pre-choruses’ inner pause but then made such pause work in a manner so that when hype was built up again that the build up would then be perceived as even more intense, then this pre-chorus
form would be quite beneficial. But in this case, it literally undermines its
own work as any generated hype is simply removed.

Furthermore,
this is also problematic when we consider how the instrumental is quite absent
and plays a very passive role. Now, certainly it is typical for instrumental
sounds to take a silent stance during pre-choruses as the return of said
instrumental sounds can serve as a form of building hype and then reaching a
climax, but in “Wee Woo,” the choruses return with a stereotypical, bouncy pop
instrumental. In other words, the instrumental’s disappearance was not in hopes
of creating hype as, if that was the case, the choruses would have had a much more impactful and exciting
instrumental rather than the current instrumental that is plain. Thus, the expected trade of not having an active instrumental during the
pre-choruses for a stronger chorus did not occur; instead, there is merely a
loss of, in this case, having a stale pre-chorus for the sheer sake of it. (And
of course to clarify, this is not to say all pre-choruses must have an active instrumental at play. Each review focuses on a
song’s individual context, and in our case, “Wee Woo” ‘s main weakness of
having minimal variety is why this structure to the pre-choruses is troubling.)

Finally,
for another section worthy of mentioning—in a negative manner, that is—it would
be the bridge. This section lacks in all areas: both sonically and
structurally. On an aural level, the singing follows, as established throughout the song, a robotic
and lifeless singing style. Structurally, the bridge’s dramatic pause fails to suit
in with the rest of “Wee Woo,” and this sudden change was not gradually hinted
throughout the song and thus, the bridge’s form is even more unsuitable to the
song in whole.

And
so, fans might be wondering if there are any possible strengths at all to “Wee
Woo.” My answer: of course there are—every
song has its strengths and weaknesses, after all. One strong point to “Wee Woo”
is the rapping. Even if it is not the best per se, it is definitely a highlight
of the song and is fluently transitioned to. Additionally, though, despite “Wee
Woo” seemingly being a weaker song, we can argue that it ultimately still
succeeds in a commercial sense—and this is what I hinted at earlier in this
review regarding a discussion on “high-risk; high-reward.” With that cliché
phrase, I hoped to capture the idea that “Wee Woo” is somewhat poorly composed
not due to composers lacking the skills and knowledge or that PRISTIN are weak
singers; instead, this was done to manipulate the attention PRISTIN would
receive. Where the risk comes in is that, should this plan work—and I argue, it
actually does—then it would be a huge success as PRISTIN would get more attention. On the other hand, should it
fail, PRISTIN is left with minimally gained popularity and are rendered as a
musically weak group.

To
explain why the manipulation was a success and even what this “manipulation” is, for a debut song, we have to
understand that the main goal is truthfully not musically orientated at all;
rather, the truth is that debut songs are intended to garner as much attention
as possible. Now of course, there are two main ways to approach such: through
raw musical appeal or through merely getting attention such as through
conceptual ideas of a comeback (examples being “cute,” “sexy,” “powerful,”
“cool,” and the like). Pledis Entertainment chose the latter method with “Wee Woo”:
getting attention not through music, but through sheer attention itself. This
explains why the song is incredibly catchy and even excessively pop-like as all of these, even if musically unenticing,
will gather attention—both good and bad. And if we follow this speculation, it
also might explain why the rest of the album possesses the seemingly more
complex and better composed songs: “Wee Woo” is the comeback to get attention;
the rest of the album songs are for actual musical appeal.

Coming
to the end of this review, what are fans to make of “Wee Woo,” then, and its
relation to PRISTIN’s musical skills? Given that “Wee Woo” has led PRISTIN to
gaining more popularity (and with how two members are former members of I.O.I),
I do encourage fans to interpret “Wee Woo” less as a genuine musical piece and
unfortunately more as a financial tool—even if this, indeed, is quite
pessimistic and personally goes against what I consider music to stand for. More
pessimistic individuals might claim that all
pop music is composed with the intent of purely making profit, but I find that
while money is of course in mind and necessary with creating music, it should
never be the first priority. With “Wee Woo,” I critically believe that its
intent was in fact to make money and gather attention, but at least the rest of
the album songs appear to be composed with actual music appeal in mind.

All
in all, while “Wee Woo” is by far one of the weaker songs I have heard in
general, given that it has served its financial role, I hope future releases
focus less on gaining attention and more on producing excellent songs—of which
would, in turn, gain more fans for PRISTIN. Thus, fans should continue
supporting the ladies regardless of their comeback song’s quality, and that
those who are interested but repelled by “Wee Woo” ‘s weaker composition
continue to stay interested as future releases will most likely be
improvements.

_______________________________________________________

As
always, thank you to all for reading whether in full or skim. I miraculously
did manage to write this review in only one and a half hours—a record, perhaps.
But, given that all the analytical work was done even weeks prior, this is not
too surprising. Once summer break begins, readers can look forward to many
reviews returning. May currently has many new artists lined up to be reviewed,
after all. Until then, I will be finishing a ten-page essay (which is not too
bad given I have already outlined the essay) and asking readers: “Can you send
an ambulance here?”

EXO – “Call Me Baby” Review

(Music Video)

EXO – Call Me Baby

Reviewed
on April 15, 2017

Nevertheless,
despite how creative and effective the instrumental is to the song and even
despite the song’s massive popularity during its promoted era, I argue the song
in its entirety is not as strong as people perceive it to be. In particularly, while
the song efficiently and effectively establishes a rhythmic, smooth and
coherent style towards the beginning, near the end of the song completely contradicts
itself but not in an augmenting
manner.

Personal Message:
For a fun fact: as of this sentence,
I have spent six hours in the library at my university catching up on work, and
miraculously, I am now relatively caught up with everything I was behind on.
The best part? No caffeine involved. For readers who are students—whether at the
university or high school level (or perhaps even younger; again, I welcome all
readers)—a tip I have is that working in a “productive environment” truly makes
a huge difference. Personally, working in the library makes it so that I am not
suddenly procrastinating via watching a marathon of Fiestar and TWICE videos—of
which is why I sometimes am drastically behind work. But that aside, before
getting into today’s review and updates, I do hope that readers enjoyed the
horrendous April Fool’s joke I wrote. Admittedly compared to previous years
where I was able to convince readers an artist made a comeback when they did
not, this year’s prank is much more disappointing. Nonetheless, given that the
prank was actually me addressing in a subtle manner my current thoughts on the
state of the blog, it is at least a productive prank—and indeed, saying
“productive prank” is relatively rare.

On topic, huge apologies to the
requester for the delay—a delay that is as long as a month. This is completely
shameful on my end and I sincerely apologize for the review taking this long. With
my university semester soon ending, the workload has become quite large. Furthermore,
coupling that with time I spent preparing informal lessons (as my “cooperating
teacher”—the teacher I am working with—is such a wonderful person and allows me
to have the chances to practice teaching) and we find that my time is quite
limited. When my summer break comes around, however, I intend to make a very
strong return with reviewing very frequently given that I have no summer
classes and desire to begin “stockpiling” reviews as my next semester will by
far be the most difficult as of yet. (Though, I hope, the most interesting.) In
terms of where readers can find me during times where I am incredibly busy,
there is one place where I most likely still exist: subtitling videos for
Fiestar. As noticed, while reviews have been scarce, I have been able to upload
lengthier videos of Fiestar. Now this does sound like a poor excuse or even a
subliminal way to advertise videos of Fiestar (which admittedly is not a
complete lie; Fiestar deserves more popularity), but the point is this: if I am
not writing reviews, readers can find me subtitling and uploading videos; if I
am not subtitling and uploading videos, readers can find me writing reviews.
And if neither of those are
occurring, I am most likely crying and drowning in homework and then attempting
to stay mentally healthy via watching an unhealthy amount of, as of the late,
TWICE videos.  

Pitifully (and humorously) shared,
the only reason I am not completely mentally broken down is because I have
lately been watching many videos of TWICE and have developed a delusional crush
for the ladies’ leader, Jihyo. She is personally one of my “ideal types” (along
with SPICA’s Boa) as, perhaps as readers have been able to gauge over time, I
find myself highly attracted to older (Jihyo is five months older than me) “womanly
women”—or to not be hypocritical as I constantly challenge readers to not use
gender-based labels (such as “manly men”), I am connoting “strong women.” To
explain what I mean (and once again, in a delusional manner though I obviously
am still waiting for Jihyo to propose to marry me), Jihyo provides a sense of
security and comfort. After all, her leadership as seen for TWICE is proving of
such. She is overall incredibly caring, funny, hardworking, and unlike the
general—and pathetic—consensus that she is apparently not physically attractive
particularly because of her weight, I personally find her very beautiful both
physically and non-physically. And, despite her not having, say, SPICA’s Boa’s
husky, deeper voice, I still find Jihyo’s voice very charming. Quite obviously
I am very delusional but a boy can dream, can he not? Thus, in my delusional
world, indeed one day Jihyo will get on her knees and propose to me and we will
live happily-ever-after. I suspect readers are now questioning if I truly am
still mentally healthy because of university.

Now for a serious point if readers
feel that I have cheated time and intellectual points out of them and this
review, for an interesting topic that even I am still attempting to reconcile
that I sure readers might also be curious on, the topic of race when it comes
to dating is a peculiar one. Sure, while readers might desire to praise me for desiring
to one day marry an older, “strong woman” and not feel emasculated at all
because of such, there is still a controversial component to my ideal type: I
admit I strongly prefer to not date and
marry an Asian woman. I would prefer, as the phrase is, to “date outside of my
race.”

Now obviously race would never be a
deciding factor—and neither would, say, age—but race does go along with my ideal
type preferences akin to age. The main reasons behind this “race preference”
are that, for one, I personally cherish raising a family that has multiple
cultural views within the family and I have a desire to learn cultures beyond
what I was raised with. Furthermore, I desire to share my own cultural values
with someone who equally desires to learn more about my culture. Nonetheless,
the tension as readers can tell is this: am I being racist or not? Personally I
do acknowledge both perspectives, and again while these preferences in the end
would never be deciding factors, these are still biases in mind that are worthy
of critically examining. But, in the end, these preferences can only go so far:
for example, if Jihyo proposed to marry me—and even if she were a few months
younger than I—indeed readers can expect me to be a married boy. All in all, I
am sure a few readers have pondered this topic before (and I know many of my
older cousins have as their partners are all non-Asian) or might even feel a
desire themselves to “date outside one’s race(s)” (this term can be problematic
for those who are multi-racial and I do apologize for such). There are no easy
answers at all, but consider this a social topic to ponder in addition to the
following musical discussion.

All that aside and onto the review
itself, before receiving this request, a year ago (or two), I did plan to review
“Call Me Baby.” It definitely was a very popular comeback during its time—after
all, this is EXO and their popularity is enormous in general. In terms of the
song itself, however, I did want to review it as it is a slightly peculiar one:
as even the requester of this review noted, the song incorporates a lot of
interesting components especially in terms of how its instrumental is
functioning for the song in whole. Thus, this review will indeed focus a lot on
particularly the rhythm at play and what functions it serves and we will
speculate what the composers had in mind when creating the song. Nevertheless,
despite how creative and effective the instrumental is to the song and even
despite the song’s massive popularity during its promoted era, I argue the song
in its entirety is not as strong as people perceive it to be. In particularly, while
the song efficiently and effectively establishes a rhythmic, smooth and
coherent style towards the beginning, near the end of the song completely contradicts
itself but not in an augmenting
manner.

_______________________________________________________

Song Score: 5/10
(5.25/10 raw score) – “Average”


Vocals: 6/10


Sections: 5/10
(4.83/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Chorus, Verse, Chorus, Bridge, Rap, Chorus, Conclusion (Chorus)

1.     Introduction:
6/10

2.     Verse: 6/10

3.     Chorus: 4/10

4.     Bridge: 3/10

5.     Rap: 5/10

6.     Conclusion (Chorus): 5/10


Instrumental: 6/10


Lyrics: 4/10

This street is completely crazy
Strangers in between people
Every moment that we’re together,
like boom boom boom boom boom
What up?

Hey girl, that one moment felt like eternity
(The fate-like moment)
When you pierced into me in just one moment
(Like lightning, in this world)
You called my name and came to me
It’s amazing, like a flash of light,
you fill me up the moment I see you, oh my
Sit here comfortably and listen to my story now
Oh I don’t care
Even if I have to go far,
I’ll be the one man to be by your side
You seeped into my dry lips
and woke me up
The time’s wasting, girl
So don’t wait, don’t wait too long

There are many who shine,
but look at what’s real among them
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
My heart grows bigger for you
and it closes its door for everyone else but you
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
Even if it’s many times, call me, girl
You make me exist as myself
You’re the only one in my world
You’re the one, you’re the one
There are many who shine
but look at what’s real among them
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
Even if it’s many times, Call me girl

Baby girl
Even among all the greed
and all the words
You showed that you believe in me
Even if everyone changes and leaves me,
you are my lady
All I need is for you to hold my hand

There are many who shine,
but look at what’s real among them
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
My heart grows bigger for you
and it closes its door for everyone else but you
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby

I was once trapped in a dark maze
(In the darkness)
But I hear your voice that woke me up
You made me be born again, yeah
E-X-O
Listen

Say my name
(Louder)
If you become my light and
pull me through this chaotic place,
(What up?)
I’ll hold you and never change
I’ll hold you and face those who left me
Don’t ever mind about a thing
You came into the big emptiness in my heart

In this shaking world
You were the only one who became my light
There are many who shine
but look at what’s real among them
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
(I’ll be your baby)
You make me exist as myself
You’re the only one in my world
you’re the one, you’re the one
Girl, you’re the one I want
There are many who shine,
but look at what’s real among them
Call me baby, call me baby,
call me baby, call me baby
Even if it’s many times, call me, girl

_______________________________________________________

Analysis:
First of all, before getting right into the function and effects of the
instrumental, we first need to realize “Call Me Baby” follows what I term a “linear-based”
song—or at least, for the first portion. In other words, rather than containing
various shifts in terms of pacing or intensity, the song—even if by default is
already at a more energetic state—remains relatively stable. After all, already
readers should notice there are no explicit pre-choruses in this song—a section
of which oftentimes is when songs go through a significant shift (a buildup).
Because the song lacks that traditional, transformative section (as again, the
pre-choruses are oftentimes a “spike” in a song’s flow), “Call Me Baby” is able
to run a more straightforward path with going from the verse and right into the
chorus.

With
this in mind, let us now discuss the importance of the instrumental. Already, one
strong function of it and especially with the stronger, heavier beats is that the
instrumental serves as core transition piece for the song. Especially as there
are no pre-choruses, it is vital for an aspect of the song to still handle the
role as a hastily recognizable transition piece. In the song, the stronger
beats serve this role—prominent, obvious examples include the introduction to
the first verse, and that verse to the chorus. But, besides just serving as
transition points, what the instrumental deserves much praise for is how it
shapes the entirety of the song—or,
once again, at least the first portion of the song. For example, one aspect to
notice is that unlike many pop songs where the vocals are clearly overriding
the instrumental be it by being more active or intense, in “Call Me Baby” I
argue it is the opposite: the instrumental are, interestingly, at the forefront
while the vocals are backing up said instrumental. I make this claim as we need
to notice the beats’ volume and impact come off much harder and—quite literally—louder
than even the singing. This is especially emphasized whenever the members are
providing beltings versus chunked, singular singing. Oftentimes, the opposite
holds true where vocal beltings, for example, are louder and more prominent
than the instrumental. Furthermore, the vocals’ rhythm is very much based on following
the instrumental’s pacing and seldom do
the vocals necessarily deviate away from strictly doing such—this being something
we seldom find as the opposite oftentimes holds true instead: vocals are the
ones to first change with the instrumental then adapting.

And
so, why does this all matter? For one, as discussed in perhaps a few prior
reviews—one in mind is BTS’ “Spring Day” to some extent—having a highly
coordinated instrumental and vocals combination allows a song to maintain a
strong sense of cohesion. Predictability, for example, is possible when a
listener is able to clearly track what is occurring on both ends and thus, this
aids in making a song “make sense” versus it sounding as if the song had no
structure to it. Besides that, though, with the instrumental essentially
leading the song, we have to credit the composers for this as this in of itself
is already a creative idea. As even the requester noted, it seems that the
rhythm and instrumental in this song is particularly
important—this distinction is something I argue can be found rooted in how
the instrumental is in fact the leading aspect of the song, and again, this is
a creative take as traditionally it is the vocals—the tune—that lead a pop
song. And as I have addressed before, having a creative aspect to songs is
highly beneficial and to some extent almost necessary if a pop song is to stand
out among the hundreds of thousands of existing pop songs.

All
this praise aside, however, “Call Me Baby” still carries many flaws and
unfortunately, it seems that these flaws almost entirely overshadow the stronger
aspects to the song. To already discuss what the major flaw to the song is, it
is the fact that towards the end of the song—from the bridge and after—the song
abruptly steers away from its established, linear and rhythm based flow, to one
that is far too erratic and different. And while this is not necessarily a
weakness—and in fact, some songs can turn such contrasting points into strengths
as noted in my review of TWICE’s
“Knock Knock”
—the issue is that the song does not resolve this tension. Therefore, listeners are left with a
song that, in perhaps a harsh statement, collapses itself. Let us examine and “actively
listen” to the bridge and rap for examples.

With
the bridge, right from the start we come across a bridge that, though suiting
in a traditional sense of pop songs “needing” to have a bridge, the section’s
form is one that highly contrasts the rest of the song. It is a dramatic pause
to “Call Me Baby,” and most distinctively, the instrumental becomes an
incredibly light, minimal aspect as the vocals are in the spotlight—and of which
already contrasts what the song initially established in its entire run prior
to the bridge. Additionally, even when the bridge transitions to the rap, we
have to notice the note belting that occurs and likewise how “E-X-O” in its
rough, segmented delivery once again ruins the linear, smoother flow
established. And to finish this all, the distorted instrumental and vocals that
follow up as the transition point to the rap once again highly conflict with
the song’s original, intended sound. Regarding the rap, similar critiques can
be said as—even if sonically it is viable—the distortions throughout the rap
and more so how intensive the rap is all go against what “Call Me Baby” set up
at the beginning.

Overall,
while the song is certainly strong in terms of its creative take to having an
instrumental-led song and that the instrumental is very effective at doing
such, the composers’ decision to have the song undergo drastic changes to its
established concept is where my main criticism lies. Now, it is understandable
on why the composers most likely opted to do so—after all, composers are very
intelligent, diligent women and men. I believe their idea with this sudden
change in the song is to address one main problem linear-based songs have: a
strong sense of monotony. Given that “Call Me Baby” is an incredibly
straightforward song, lacking points of a shift in the song’s overall flow
could, indeed, deter away listeners. Thus, a simple solution to that is to in
fact include points of shifts that would make the song predominantly linear, but also inclusive of more diverse aspects.
Unfortunately, I argue the composers failed with that goal: especially because
of how strongly established the song is with its original flow and given that
the rhythm is the driving force of the song, there could have been ways to add
more variety without necessarily compromising the song’s concept towards the end.
For example, at the choruses—in other words, at moments that are still within
the song’s established, smoother flow—there are still some issues with a
mundane sound occurring. Therefore, if some changes or additions were made so
that the choruses in of themselves were more varied, then the pressure for
drastically different bridge and rap might have disappeared.

All
in all, EXO’s “Call Me Baby” is still a song worthy of listening especially as
it is unique to hear such an instrumental-orientated song, but it does possess
a multitude of weaknesses that come from solutions that went, I argue, awry. Nevertheless,
as this song is very much “performance based” with having a very charming
choreography, it still deserves much respect on that end even if musically I
find that it comes short.

_______________________________________________________

It
has been almost a month and a half since this request was sent in. For readers
who wish to send in requests, it might be best to wait until May as that is
when I will be on summer break and have time to quickly review requests. For
the requester of this review, I greatly apologize for this delay. University is
truly quite rigorous as of the late.

In
terms of upcoming reviews, PRISTIN’s “Wee Woo” is in mind along with Day6’s “I’m
Serious.” Both songs will provide not only new artists on the blog—as both of
them are relatively new groups if correct—but also new, insightful reviews as
both songs are quite different from the many I have reviewed in the past. Thank
you to readers for being patient with me, and thank you for reading this
review. I know summer break will be perhaps my most active reviewing period
yet, so look forward to such but until then, I expect to wrap up April with those
two reviews and a few Critical Discussions regarding “MR Removed” and even line
distributions. Until then, “My heart grows bigger for you”—especially for the
requester who had to wait far too long for this review. Look forward to PRISTIN’s
“Wee Woo.”