Talk:geddup noise

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 23:31, 6 October 2005 by notstrongorbad (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


geddup noise techno

The Cheat stole my thunder! I made a bad techno song once that mentioned the Geddup noise. It didn't actually have the noise in it, though.

  • I had no idea that the Get up noise evan existed, I geuss I don't pay attention to detail. _24.62.243.222 01:25, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

steve buttz

dont you guys notice that the e-mail he was ansering when he got a phone call was from steve buttz? i think you should note that.-User:Timmy!

Um, yeah, we do that.
The email kids' book is on the Compy 386 when the Geddup Noise gets his phone call. Kids' book is the 84th email Strong Bad mentioned.
See? It's in the remarks section. - Joshua

corporate magazines

do we really need the strong sad/kurt cobain refernce in both remarks, and real world references? having it in one or the other would make more sense. - i know. can you believe it?

Taken care of. Thnks for pointing it out. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 14:10, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
In future it'd be easier for you to just fix it yourself. When an article comes out for something new like this, there's usually a lot of frenzied editing, everyone wants to get their point in. Duplicates do often turn up - just delete one, leave whichever one is more grammatical/detailed/in a more appropriate section. --phlip TC 14:23, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

OMG Kevin!

Homestar being called Kevin is referring to the bet, right? -MK and/or BurnBox 15:05, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Adding to the Cast

Shouldn't we add The Geddup Noise and Chairscoot to the cast for this email, since they're kinda referred to as characters throughout? --Tigz 15:17, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

No, we shouldn't. But we should make a page for the Geddup Noise. - Joshua 15:21, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Get Up Kids?

Does it seem likely/noteworthy to anyone that the e-mail (esp. in relation indie music) was vaguely referencing or inspired by the (recently broken-up) band The Get Up Kids? If so, someone should write that into the article in an elegant fashion. Perhaps. -Sinisterscrawl 16:41, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

As cool as the Get Up Kids are/were, I don't think there's any connection there. — THE SMOKING MONKEY

Cool! Mike visited the site! {does the h*r creator man dance} --Homfrog

OH MY GOODNESS. *stares at Mike's post with a =D face* If you're an imposter, I slap you. I doubt you are an imposter dude. Otherwise... HOLY CRAP MIKE VISITED THE WIKI! CASUALLY! --MrsCommanderson 21:24, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Um, no. —FireBird|Talk 21:30, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I doubt it's Mike... I mean, really, how hard is it to type the words "Mike Chap"... But who knows? - Camalex(talk) 20:54, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Shoshoni & Coches

I'm too lazy to do it myself, but ought there to be some Explanations for Shoshoni and Coches? A cursory, 5-minute search has failed to give me a good idea of where the latter are; just some ski resort sites in other languages. I assume they're a mountain range in either France or Spain or both, but if it's that far removed from common knowledge an Explanation might be in order. notstrongorbad

"coches" is spanish for cars. not sure if this is related. sarducci

"les coches" is a ski resort

Coach Z's Dance

_Not_ the one from folky tale. In folky tale, coach Z hops from foot to foot while pumping his arms up and down above his head. In the easter egg, he hops on one foot (his right) across the screen with his arms down at his sides, moving slightly up-and down. Deleted the "inside reference" claiming it was the same. -sarducci

It's similar, though. But still not the same. My first thought, though, was the 'I'm Just Me' song and dance from record book. --DorianGray
Oh, good catch. I does seem to be identical to the I'm just me dance, cept he's moving across the screen, not just up and down. Is this worth a mention? -sarducci
Might be worth a mention. I dunno. If people don't like it, they can always STUFF it. --DorianGray

Strong Mad said what?

It sounded to me like Strong Mad said "YOU SUCK!" instead of "BLUE SOCK!" Anybody else think so? ACupOfCoffee 19:17, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

It did sound like that a little, but "BLUE SOCK" definitely fits the context better. --DorianGray
But wouldn't that explain why Strong Bad was embarassed to have shown that "clip"? ACupOfCoffee 19:40, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I heard you suck at first, but a closer listen revealed blue sock to be true. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 19:43, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
No, it wouldn't. It showed Strong Bad selling out and imitating The Geddup Noise, which would be embarrassing to someone like Strong Bad, don'cha think? "Blue sock" definitely fits better. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 20:24, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Actually, to me it sounds like a mix: "YOU SUCK BLUE SOCK!", and the fact that HE did a ripoff is rather embarassing. --Ookelaylay 23:43, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I reckon he said "BLUE SOCK!". «Rob» 06:50, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
At first I thought he said "BLUE SUCKS!" but I soon realized it was "BLUE SOCK!" -- Homeschool Winner 02:51, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I had also thought he said "you suck". I didn't know until I saw the transcript. "You suck" would have been funnier though. Agentjs03 19:41, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that most people need to get better speakers. These agurments about lines are ridiculous since it's obvious what they said if you listen properly. Try headphones, they do a good job.

It's About Freakin' Time!

Anyone else find it weird that for almost 2 months, TBC diddn't do any SBEmails (almost all they do) to do two big toons, two shorts, multiple Lament updates, a new main page, a new navigation feature, and add several new products to the store? Plus several of the newer emails have sucked. I think the SBEmails are dying.---RatherAnnoying

-If you noticed, they said they were putting out a DVD of all the non Strong bad email stuff, so they were probably just rushing to get out all the ideas they had for toons before the DVD went to press......Nah...

-I think they were trying to fill up the site with newer stuff for a few possible reasons. A.) Trying to make sure that their site has things other than the SBEmail get updated. B.)Trying to get enough toons and shorts added so they can release a Toons DVD. C.) Perhaps they figured that all those updates might help boost the sites popularity. I do think it should be noted about how this is the first SBEmail in a while. 20X6 GEM

2 months without an e-mail And this is the demented result... I'll be happier when Stinkoman level 10 comes out (I hope)... Man, some of the e-mails I sent had such cool premises, and THEY ANSWER ONE ABOUT THE NOISE STRONG BAD MAKES WHEN HE GETS OFF HIS CHAIR... GUUH GUUUH GUH...

Signed, this may very well be my least favorite email. I-- it's... just not funny. 7omεpsilon

Definity. its the worst email ive seen. maybe it was good that they didnt have a new one in a while. the next one better be better. Darkstalker

I don't know about you guys but I liked this email. But to answer your theory about SB emails dieing it just seems like TBC are just trying to do new things like new shorts and toons as apposed to putting-up an email each and every week. Stinkoman Z

I second that. My sentiments exactly. --Stux 13:22, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

y'all are so whack! this e-mail was good! i know. can you believe it?

I did like this email (I categorize it as decent) but it was nowhere near as great as some others (i.e. the one referenced to in this email). Recent ones that simply were not good at all include, boring [really], and modeling. (I know people will disagree with me there, but it is not neccesary to bloat this page with your complaints).---RatherAnnoying

On a similar note, anyone notice how Pom Pom's appearences are becoming less and less. Wihile it sucks, it is perfectly understandable: Pom Pom's inability to talk makes him hard to use, and he lacks an additional "catch" that makes talking unnecessary like The Cheat and The Poopsmith have.
I would disagree that Pom Pom lacks a "catch," so to speak. It's just that his catch isn't as easy to work into the silly, fun nature of the cartoons. He talks to fine honeys on his cell phone(Pom Pom), he collects money from girls(3 Times Halloween Funjob), and in Homestarloween Party he adds hot bikini girls with beer to the car(or, rather, adds them sitting around the car). Pom Pom is the pimp jokes, from what I've seen, and in a universe as asexual as the H*R universe they're harder to work in. Bennedetto

Goofs and a Question

I have several points/questions:

  • In the part where Strong Bad immitates the Geddup Noise with the Git Outcha Seat Sound, if you notice, the chair his sitting on only has three legs! (And there's no way the perspective would hide the 4th leg)
  • I'm not sure if this counts as a goof: When you click on the notepad easter egg, you can click on the back pages (over where the stool is) and still get the Technochocolate easter egg.
  • Finally, I noticed that both of Bubs' eyelids closed when Coach Z was making his first impression of the Geddup Noise. I'm wondering, is this the first time he does that? I don't remember ever seeing him do that before.

That's enough for now. I'm still new at this, so I appreciate your input! --Stux 20:13, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Also, I made a link addittion, but I cannot corroborate the change made by (in the Inside References section). Please double check. --Stux 21:14, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

BTW I think the ("cordless") phone deserves its own page. --Stux 23:22, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

It already has a page. --DorianGray
Oh! My bad! Thanks for the link! I saw where it's referred to in the page. --Stux 23:27, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Any time. Happy to help, etc. --DorianGray

Is This Correct?

The part about Marc's question being odd in because the Geddup Noise was in the previous email doesn't make sense to me. This is in Remarks. This email could have been easily sent before User:Catman87

It's possible, but I don't think they'd save an email for that long. Keep in mind how long ago the last email was. --DorianGray

Bubs' Basement...

"This is proof that Bubs Conncesion Stand does have a basement."

So, um, why exactly is that so important to note?--Spanky The Dolphin 23:43, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I thought that was an interesting observation about the movie Real Genius... after all, the lights do go off except for that light over his head. I thought that was totally strange (not TBC strange, but strange as in it was meant to be like that for a specific reason). Doesn't the elevator in the movie also have a light like that? I haven't seen the movie in so long. --Stux 20:07, 2 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Corporate Homestarloween Still Sucks Still Sucks

We have redundant links to Homestarloween Party. I was about to delete one, but it raises a question: Should Real-World References that have already been referenced in another toon be regarded as Real-World References, Inside References, or both? notstrongorbad 00:10, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)


Didn't anybody else think that when the King of Town did his own rip-off of the gettup noise, he was booing himself in the background, like how he did in impression when Strong Sad appeared? I definitely heard it, and I think that was the joke at that point, and not him randomly saying "doooooo." His mustache doesn't even move at that point, anyway.

Yeah, I think so too. Should we add that on the fun facts? --— talk Bubsty edits 02:07, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't think "Dooo-ooo" made any sence, and I heard "Booooo" They should change this. -JesseLangham

I agree, but it was instantly changed back when I tried modifying the wiki. -sarducci

Yep, it's definitely "Booooo"

I once reverted it from "boooo!" to "dooo!", but I can now hear that that is clearly wrong. The only problem I will have with changing it to "boooo!" is if people interpret it as an offscreen KOT jeering the onscreen KOT. No, it's not a reference to the "Boooo!" in impression. You can tell from the pitch that the KOT is adding vocal SFX to glorify the Standing Up Noise. —BazookaJoe 01:40, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I also hear a /b/ sound at the beginning. I don't know, however, what the best spelling would be. Obviously, "booo" is a choice. "Buhooo"... hmmm... "B'oooo"... Anybody else have a suggestion? — It's dot com 01:54, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

People, the entire e-mail is about a personified sound effect. Wouldn't it make comical sense that the KoT's boo in impression is also a personified effect? It's not him on-screen that's saying it either, because his mustash doesn't move, so that invalidates the "Adding SFX" argument.

Yeah, I'm sure it's a reference to Impression. The general idea would be that the Standing Up Noise is so lame that the King himself booed it...from off screen. Yeah, that would mean there are two KoTs in that scene, but it's supposed to make comical sense, not logical sense.Rocketlex 02:21, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Ehh... this is getting a little strained. The simple fact is that there are many tiny details in TBC 'toons which can't be completely linked to causes and/or meanings—and this is one of them. The only objective facts we have to go on are:
  • We hear a sound; we all agree that it's the KOT's voice and that it involves the "oo" sound.
  • His mustache doesn't move.

Further speculation about who or what makes the sound and what the sound means are just that—speculation. (Note that his immobile mustache doesn't necessarily mean he's not making it; when someone's mouth is hidden by a mustache, they can make small mouth movements without it moving visibly.) --notstrongorbad 02:29, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Oh my dear god. I hate to break it to you guys, but this is not reality, its a cartoon. In real life, yes people can make small mouth movements with moving visably. In a cartoon, you need moving mouths to indicate speech. The KOT's mustash wasn't moving, e.g. he was NOT MAKING THE SOUND.

This argument can be settled by asking which is more likely: The KOT being booed by himself for such a lame rip-off attempt, in a reference to the off-screen boo in impression or the King saying "Dooo" without his mustache moving and looking off to his right for no reason.

Or a third option: The KoT is being booed from offstage by someone else who happens to sound like KoT. Matt has said he's bad at making generic character voices, and after making so many characters there's only so many new voices you can make. Having (presumably) just recorded the KoT's line, it makes sense that his generic character sounded like the KoT. Whenever a fun fact comes up elsewhere that says "new character X has a voice similar to old character Y" it's always chalked up to "Matt's running out of different voices". Admittedly few are as close as this one, but I still believe it comes under the same header. Besides, even if it is the KoT booing, there's no reason for it to be a reference to impression... it could just be the same absurdism that gave rise to having two Homestars on screen at once (though people still tried to explain that away with "Main Page 23 is actually Fabrosi, you can't see his moustace because he's facing away from the screen, yada, yada...")... Seriously - random absurdism doesn't have to reference something to be funny. --phlip TC 17:36, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Now THATS a stretch. Matt is more creative than to incorporate two different voices that sound similar in the same scene. He could have used a canned boo if that were the case (like a live studio audience). The reason the voice sounds like the KoT's and is saying boo, is because it IS a reference to impression.

Corporate T-shirts Still Suck

There are two references to one thing for Strong Sad's T-shirt. Which is it? Because right now, it looks like a TTATOT, or at least the beginnings of one. — It's dot com 01:41, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Fortunately, it's taken care of. --— talk Bubsty edits 02:06, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Didn't Strong Bad call it the "get up noise"?

In the email "the bet" Strong Bad's closing line is "And now, the get up noise." He now claims it's called "the geddup noise." Also, that was email 95 so should it be noted that "chairscoot" hadn't replaced "the geddup noise" yet?

Well, for all we know, the Geddup Noise was replaced with the get up noise and THEN the Chairscoot. I wouldn't worry about it. - Joshua
However, his seeming confusion at the phrase "get up noise" at the beginning of the email would seem to counterindicate this. You know, this sbemail does funky stuff with the fourth wall and reality that are going to make arguments difficult--hold it, this deserves a separate heading... notstrongorbad 05:10, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Bubs sinking into the floor?

Is this an inside refrence to anything? Crazydog My changes 04:36, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but if you want to sign your post, you could just simply type 4 tildes, like so:~~~~. It's alot easier than typeing in your entire name. Homestramy20|Talk 04:17, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

You could call it a real-word reference to those mimes people do behind benches. You know, going down stairs, elevators, escalators and so on.

It's seems to be a slight reference possibly to Blast from The Past Chatboy 91 22:28, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I think it's just a joke, in that it's a funny image. I mean, just look at it; Bubs is facing right at you and slowly sinking through the floor with a single light overhead. I thought it was visually funny. --Der Pepper

I think its a reference to basic UFO crap. Nothing in particalur. - Joshua 23:12, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Rant Re: Reality

     I can foresee difficulties in discussing the events of this email in absolute terms--"Bubs has a basement," "Geddup Noise was succeeded circa #84 by 'get up noise,' who was succeeded by Chairscoot, post-#95"--due to the fact that the entire thing is a huge breakage of the Fourth Wall. Marc's email sets it off right from the start, by referencing a prior 4th-wall-break in email 95. From there we progress to a reality in which not merely an inanimate object but a sound is personified. Of course it's heard when Strong Bad hands it the phone, and is able to manifest itself in radio and game show studios--it's being treated as a person.
     All of which casts into serious doubt the "reality" of the events depicted. Does Bubs have a basement? More to the point, does "Bubso?" Did the Cheat in actuality create an indietronic remix? Strong Bad simply tells us with a straight face that these things happened, and his word is ultimately the only arbiter of reality within sbemails. I understand the flexibility that's always characterized the "H*R Universe"--but if we accept these events as literal it's a universe in which real estate in prestigious European ski resorts can be purchased--and inhabited--by disembodied sounds.
     And yes, I'm aware that another email-closing icon, The Paper, has been consistently personified. I guess my uneasiness is simply with the fact that the modus operandi of this whole wiki seems to be to rebuild the Fourth Wall as much as possible--to try to pull the H*R corpus into an ordered unity, to speak of it in declarative sentences as if Strong Bad and Free Country USA were real people and places--an attempt which is hampered by the fact that it is, in fact, a work of creative art in continual production and transformation. To that extent, any argument over putative changes or discrepancies in characters or settings can simply be reduced to: "Today TBC said x. In the past they have said y." We are describing nothing so much as a chronology of artistic statements.
     This is simply amplified by the H*R Universe's (or TBC's) ambiguity towards the Fourth Wall, throughout. The whole notion of sbemails as an "email show," the new "backstage" main page, and several DVD commentaries where characters speak of their "performances" as though they had memorized, rehearsed, and finally filmed them, makes our perception of H*R reality uncertain. When are they aware of an audience? When are we watching their "actual lives," and when is it some show they've produced? Do they know?
     I don't know why I felt the need for this rant, or why I've gone on so long now. I'm not recommending, by any means, that the wiki be converted to some kind of "book report" mindset; I guess I'm just suggesting that, when we try to make the realities presented in an email like this one agree, we keep reminding ourselves that we're discussing characters who may or may not be presenting a fictitious reality within their own "fictitious reality," all of which is subject to the whims of its human authors. I'm suggesting that we draw a line somewhere, preferably somewhere before discussing how sound effects can have "cousins," or what the names of the sounds in Strong Bad's employment were, and in what order.
     Perhaps Geddup Noise will enter the cast of characters like Senor Cardgage (another 4th-Wall-Break made flesh); it just weirds me out because unlike the Paper he's not merely inanimate, he's immaterial. But hey, so are Homestar's arms. So there. notstrongorbad 06:42, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

     First of all, and this is off the subject, but anyone who would write such an eloquent, lengthy, and insightful essay on the nature of the H*R universe is doing us a disservice by not having a user space to speak of. That is to say, you may be neither strong nor bad, notstrongorbad, but I can tell when someone is my kind of person, and you're it. So get on that user page, why don't you. I for one would like to get to know you.
     Second, I really like the notion that TBC break the fourth wall, but then we just build it back as best we can. That is by far the best explanation of how we here cope with information that doesn't fit our established patterns. I believe this is a very necessary reaction, because we are essentially writing a straight-faced encyclopedia of a fictitious universe, and the only way we can do that is to take the subject matter as seriously as possible (which is of course incredibly ironic). I think (and if I read you correctly, you agree with me) that most people here operate in terms of what the characters themselves would do if they were real, rather than what TBC are having them do. In my own mind I imagine Strong Bad and Homestar as distinct personalities separate from Matt Chapman. This is partially delusional, but at least I'm aware of it. Again, it makes it easier to write this wiki if one approaches it on those terms.
     Note that we are not even close to the first to do this. The most notable example that comes to mind is the Star Trek universe, whose fans have had to incorporate the whims of hundreds of writers into a cohesive canon. In that regard, we're lucky we only have to deal with a handful of contributors.
Back to the topic at hand, even though the Paper is personified, it is still an item, not a character, and I don't see the Geddup Noise as a character, either. At least not with more to go on. I agree that we must be able to see a line between the fictitious reality and fictitious realities within it. Unfortunately, it's very late as I type this, and my vision is a little blurry.
     Wrapping up, I will remark on how I like that certain things can cross the line. Senor Cardgage is the perfect example. He began as the so-called Creppy Comb-over Strong Bad, but as he gained more and more appearances, TBC were forced to admit to themselves that Senor Cardgage had become bona fide separate character, and (to me this is the best part) that status was conferred retroactively all the way back to his first appearance in kind of cool. In other words, TBC didn't know it at the time, but the dumpy character with the beer belly and a comb-over has always been Senor Cardgage.
     I don't know if anything I've written here constitutes rational thought. Like I said, it's too late for me to even proof-read it closely, so forgive any typographical or logical mistakes. And I meant what I said about your user page. ;) — It's dot com 07:47, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Well, notstrongorbad, you're seriously pushing the envelope of talk pagery here. And like dot com said, that's a very good thing. I myself have similar thoughts about the reality/non-reality status of the Universe (H*R and our own), but there's seldom any cause to put them down. Talk pages are such a place for this.
Sometimes, I'm a fiction writer. When I made the step from short stories to my novel, I was a bit overwhelmed with the amount of characters, idioms, and qualities I was imparting into a true vacuum. From nothing, came something, and before long, that something grew so large certain elements were at odds. Continuity, or lack thereof, became one of my chief editing headaches.
But my novel was a one-shot affair for the consumer of art - you read it, it's done. You could go back, but it's meant as a cohesive whole (with room for the sequel, of course!), and the reader will either buy into the woven fabric or find fault in it. H*R is a different artistic animal, one that is constantly being added to, constantly being meddled with. This meddling manifests itself in heavy doses of self-referential trickery. It rewards the fan who returns to see what has changed, and challenges that person to make sense of it. And therein lies the greatest joke of all - there really is no sense, or "truth" to be found. In a world of invisible arms, personified noises and disconnected telephones, TBC regularly present an incongrous, even inconsistent, format from which to indulge their comedic leanings.
But they restrain themselves from complete incongruity, complete inconsistency. There are threads, and there are themes. From these tenuous strings and strands of their imagination, we, the devoted (and quite possibly obsessed) and computer-literate fans of the cartoon try to record it, standardize it, and glorify it. When TBC foist the concept of a personified noise on the viewer, we naively accept it; we want to accept it. As dot com related, thinking of the characters as "real" (and not just the product of Matt doing a funny voice and Mike writing funny dialogue) is simply more satisfying. Thinking too deeply about the underpinnings of these dumb animal characters dilutes the fantasy, and leads to troubling issues such as whether everything we see is the complete fabrication of Strong Bad.
I close with three words: suspension of disbelief. If anything deserves it, it is H*R, for not only making us laugh but then compelling us to explain it. And please, get a user page and tell us a little about'cha self. — THE SMOKING MONKEY 11:22, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
This conversation++. -- Tom 19:04, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
What. The. Crap. This is a frigging long discussion over a petty thing... —Gafaddict Image:Gafaddict sigpic.gif (Talk | Contribs.) 19:24, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
You should know how to sign your posts by now, Gafaddict. I surely hope you read some of their discussion. I enjoyed reading every word of it myself, so much so that I printed it out (on paper sans green and white bars.) It shows you who's really thinking deeply on the subject. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'd also like to get to know notstrongorbad better. Add me to the list of people who want him/her to create their own user page! —THE PAPER PREEEOW 19:22, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, I forgot about the sign thing. I'm not particularly just taking a look at the discussion and going "whoah its way too long," I've read over it, but I just feel that whether or not what Strong Bad says about E-mail #84 merits a discussion this long. —Gafaddict Image:Gafaddict sigpic.gif (Talk | Contribs.) 19:24, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Please understand, Gafaddict, that although the mention of email #84 prompted this discussion, the topic is not merely about what Strong bad says about that particular email, but it's about the bigger picture: what drives us members of the HRWiki community to keep our eyes glued to the monitor day in, and day out, waiting for the messages "NEW Toons!", "NEW downloads", "NEW SBEmails!", and "Updated Today!" -- and then, like eager little children we tell everyone else the incredible things we discovered in this marvelous little made-up universe. Even, if we're <insert an unspecified age> years old. It's cool stuff. Oh, yes and guys, I enjoyed reading the shpeals! (Is that how you spell it?) --Stux 22:01, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I know, I was merely using that as an example. —Gafaddict Image:Gafaddict sigpic.gif (Talk | Contribs.) 00:50, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I don't have anything that philosophical to say, but I think it's spelled spiels. small_logo.pngUsername-talk 22:05, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Reprinted from Talk:Fourth Wall Breaks:

        I may have a way out of all this: Strong Bad is running
a small operation inside the homestar-verse for the benefit of those
within it. That is to say, Strong Bad is an internet star inside the
world of Homestar and Friends, which is why The Cheat can watch on
his computer (or Strong Bad do the show from The Cheat's computer).
In this context, we are not watching Strong Bad answer email for our
benefit, but for those inside; we just get to watch, explaining why
we can follow Strong Bad around when he leaves his computer. -- The
Real Zajac 10:08, 11 May 2005 (PDT) 

-- The Real Zajac 16:00, 27 Sep 2005 (PDT)

     I should clarify that I don't feel that my impromptu essay was in any way warranted or even particularly on-topic; it was purely an act of venting. In a fit of wikiness I was up WAY past my appropriate bedtime, which probably had a lot to do with its length! And yes, while I enjoy the grad-school-thesis schtick sometimes, I do also know it can get old. Sometimes the appropriate response is simply "Ha ha! He kicked the Cheat! Ha ha!"
     And please don't misunderstand; I'm not arguing that we shouldn't undertake a systematic, realistic discussion of an unsystematic, non-real world, by any means. The important thing is just to remember, in the back of our minds, that we are.
     (And evidently I'm going to be creating a user page, but it probably won't be any time in the next few days!) notstrongorbad 23:59, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I think you're whole agurment is a bit hypocritical when you told us in the "Boo" agurment to, "Note that his immobile mustache doesn't necessarily mean he's not making it; when someone's mouth is hidden by a mustache, they can make small mouth movements without it moving visibly."

     Yeah, I can see what you mean. But actually the two have something in common. I tend to prefer a kind of "agnostic" philosophy about what the things in the 'toons mean. Some things are obvious, and never engender debate. Others are "mostly obvious," i.e. maybe one or two people interpret them differently, but everyone else is in agreement. And then other things provoke great diversity both in how viewers percieve them (see the gr----est debate above) and in how they create meaning out of those perceptions. The rant immediately above was precipitated because attempts to construe meaning out of the relative chronologies of Chairscoot, Geddy, and or other noises had reached an absurdist moment; I was advocating for sticking more to the obvious and undebated.
     My comment in the "Boo"/"Doo" argument that you quoted is similarly motivated--there are certain things that are uncontested (although I was wrong to assume that one of those is the identity of the voice). We all agree that a sound occurred, and we agree roughly as to what it sounds like. The debate arises when we try to derive a meaning from the sound. In this case, given that it's not the most important moment in a shot that is relatively minor within the 'toon, I'd argue for not assigning a meaning at all.
     The bit about mustaches moving—which, you're right, is a real-world/'toon comparison that my rant above would seem to contradict—was another of my agnostic attempts to hedge my bet, to argue both sides. I emphasize "doesn't necessarily mean"; I certainly wasn't saying either that he is or is not creating the sound. And at least in this case, I'm disinclined to say either for sure; it's non-integral enough that I'm comfortable leaving it ambiguous. — notstrongorbad 23:31, 6 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Sounds and Indietronica

Yesterday, somebody tried to make an Inside Reference saying that the sound that accompanied the "Get Outcha Seat Sound" logo was from Lil' Brudder, and was of course deleted with the explanation that "it's been noted that TBC reuse sounds." Now it's been added to the transcript, first as the "Fluffy Puff Nibblins" sound, and then as the "Homsar walking sound." Mightn't a good approach be to either ignore SFX entirely, except where they pertain to the action of the email (e.g. the Standing Up Noise), or else to give SFX that are repeated often enough their own pages, to systemize what they're called?

Unrelatedly: someone deleted the Real-World Reference to Indietronica entirely. While I don't want it to turn into a long list of bands that fit (?) that category, I think it's a significant enough phenomenon and far enough from assumed mainstream knowledge to be needed. Maybe the best way is simply to link to, even though it's a somewhat sloppy stub. I'm not sure about protocol, though; would linking within the transcript or Easter Eggs section be appropriate, or should it be put back into a Fun Fact? notstrongorbad 04:40, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Might I direct your attention to my pride and joy? --DorianGray
And I would say put the indietronic link back as a fun fact, unless anyone has objections? small_logo.pngUsername-talk 04:45, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Holy cow, Dorian; you were WAY ahead of me. Very shipshape. And consider the Fun Fact reinstated.
Thanks! ^-^ I love the praise. I can't take all the credit--It's dot com came up with the initial idea, and other people helped with some minor formatting and additions--but if you look at the history, the brunt of the work was done by me. And I constantly keep watch for more additions. Nice to know my hard work is appreciated. --DorianGray

Questionable Fun Fact

"The sign on Bubs' Concession Stand reads 'Bubso's Concession Stand', which may be why Coach Z calls him Bubso."

The sign being called "Bubso's" is already noted in the transcript, and it's obvious that Coach Z calling him Bubso is due to the sign, or that the sign and calling him Bubso are both due to a related reason. Either way, this doesn't have to be pointed out. --Der Pepper

I wouldn't have noticed it if it wasn't for this Fun Fact, but then maybe that's just me... -- 21:03, 29 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I didn't notice it until I read the fact... - Joshua


Is the singer really Matt using his high voice? When you download the file, it says Mike Chapman.--Martin925 01:55, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I dunno, but personally, the voice sounds very female. I'd be very surprised if it wasn't.--Stux 03:14, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
It does sound female, but I don't know who it can be. It doesn't sound like Missy, and I have no idea or any backup if it is Jackie C. Matt is a very talented voice actor though. I guess no one knows for sure!--Martin925 04:27, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I dunno Missy has quite a talented voice too! But yeah, it's somewhat different. I don't know who Jackie C. is unfortunately. And yeah no one knows for sure... for now! I'm sure it'll come out on some DVD or get leaked somehow ;) --Stux 07:11, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I personally thought it was pretty clear they were thinking of The Postal Service, which would make the voice a (rather good) take on Benjamin Gibbards lofty vocals. --notstrongorbad 07:23, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Ok now I have to listen to The Postal Service cuz I don't think I've heard them before! Thanks for the info. I still beleive there's a hint of femininity in the voice. Typically you can tell the difference between a girl singing Alto in her normal voice, and a guy singing in his falsetto voice. (Though there was this one contratenor who was part of this choir performing in Notre Dame Cathedral that was simply amazing...) ! --Stux 15:37, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I find it amusing that the boys in the middle school choir I observe are reluctant to hit the high notes, thinking that it's unmanly to use your falsetto. I feel like, "Ever heard of Postal Service, Death Cab for Cutie, Sufjan Stevens, Coldplay, The Shins, Mick Jagger..."--Hey, talk about countertenors, check out Yes's Jon Anderson! When I was 15 my parents, in a mild midlife crisis, brought home Fragile on CD, and I assumed until told otherwise it was a woman singing. --notstrongorbad 19:26, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Um, I sing-a the rock and roll music, and sometimes bust out the falsetto - usually for back-up vocals. And the singing here is without doubt one Chapman or the other (my guess is Matt - anyone else hear the faint resemblance to Strong Sad?) doing falsetto. Oh, and no offense if anyone here is a countertenor (or a castrati, for that matter) but those fellas creep me out. — THE SMOKING MONKEY 12:25, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
Personal tools