Tweet
I was writing about the difference in song writing, not gigging. Writing a song now is typically done by deciding and starting a basic rhythm sequence and adding in additional percussion elements. The song becomes a song at a later time as it starts to flesh out with additional layers on layers. It is a rather mechanical process that lends itself to routine steps.
The lyrics are the very last thing created. This is the reason sometimes this process takes more time than traditional writing, despite all the automated functions; because the song is not really a song or has a meaning until the very end. It is sort of like the difference between building a house layering one board at a time versus designing a home one board at a time, the concept, meaning and aesthetics are unknown until it is finished.
Before, the common way to write a song is to have s vision or story, lyrics or music as a framework and meaning before a single sound is recorded. It is a song before getting near a recording device or computer. Maybe not a fleshed out song but the concept is known and that allows seeing how some musical idea either helps move the concept along or hinders at every step. The architect designs a home with the overall concept, and aesthetic in mind before thinking about individual boards and their exact placement. Architects and song writers had a lot in common in that way of working before the shift to rhythm based song writing. If the architect designed like songs are written now, he would start with some door knobs, or windows and place them, or cut and place 346 2x4s to various lengths or cut the carpet and lay it before possibly a floor existed or the size of the room was known and would not know when it was a house until it was finished
Sometimes writing occurs in the studio(in the old day, now it is usually one person with a computer to creating the song as the result of laying down the components as the first and only step until he can't think of any more to add, then it is finished as a completed entity without arrangement, production or mixing steps as before) but what is meant is that the song was fleshed out or alternative arrangements were tried but the song actually was a song before anyone opening the sound proof door into the studio. If the production team are all aware of and understand the song intent and meaning, polishing the arrangements and lyrics is a natural process and when it works everyone knows it because it makes the intent of the song more clear.
Use of recording too early in the process has hurt lyrics the most, it often sounds like how they really were written, as tacked on layer at the end.
Song writers who are doing it only for their own fun or expression do not have to worry about intended audience but those who want to make it a career do have to be concerned with how the message is perceived and communicates to others. Tacked on, almost an afterthought lyrics are less likely to communicate.
One of the biggest problems with the writing technique used by most now is that the song is "produced" from the start. Its meaning is entirely the finished product of the writing process. An example would be using some sound effect or theme as a base element of the song. The song is not that song without it so it is important in its appeal. The concept or meaning of the song goes away if done a different way. For a song writer, that means no one else can do that song and if by chance it was popular, it can't be covered. For a song writer, it is a dead end if others can't do it by adding their own stamp on it so it seems like the song was the actual expression of the artist. The potential audience is limited also since it can't be covered or reinterpreted by others because the song has no core independent of the sonic elements that the writer built upon.
So aspiring song writers take note. If you want a career and to place songs, do not produce them. A producer/artist is looking for songs that can be interpreted by the artist so it sounds like he believes it. It is the rare producer who can "unhear" sonic elements that are built into the song. What they want is a song that has a melody and meaning without specialty production elements, where the meaning is in the core of the song regardless of the details of instrumentation, effects and temp. They will add those as appropriate for the artist.If you want producers to hear it or to remember to call you to see if you have a song for a project they are working on, supply a very basic vocal and melody, maybe only piano or acoustic guitar accompaniment. It will have a much better chance of making it into the artists project.
Don't add percussion parts that are not playable because you might like them but it will sound awkward to an audience. If you are not a horn player, resist the notion to program in horn parts in your project because it is almost always awkward sounding to others. Get a horn player to program the sequence, just as getting a drummer to program the beatbox. It makes a difference in how the part is perceived. Resist the overly common practice of layering mania. If the concept is not clear to the listener with a modest layering, it is not going to be more clear when buried under 200 tracks of percussion. Don't laugh, that is not an unusual number. A friend was producing a reggae/punk band for Sony and I dropped by his home studio to see how it was going because it was several weeks late in delivery to the label. He was obsessing over a sound that when soloed was a little strange but nothing to worry about in its isolated playback He built up a few dozen slight variations on it, soloing each in sequence. I did not care at all since I did not listen to music with one track soloed to tell how it worked in the song. But apparently this percussion section had delayed him for almost a week. I asked him to just play the whole mix, he did, but only the percussion group and it was so complex and layered that no one would have been able to detect the part with a microscope. Just this percussion part was 197 layered tracks....for a punk band! In the old days he would have been able to tell instantly how any element fit or contributed to the overall song but now with such detail to focus on, he was obsessed with some of those details that would only be heard in his imagination and have less than zero impact on the communicative ability of the song. I have seem many home projects by amateurs with 500 tracks. If there was a meaning on concept somewhere in that pile of tracks, only the writer will ever know it while an audience will not.
Slow record sales have many contributing causes but the root is poor song writing. It has also killed the follow-on market of covers.
The lyrics are the very last thing created. This is the reason sometimes this process takes more time than traditional writing, despite all the automated functions; because the song is not really a song or has a meaning until the very end. It is sort of like the difference between building a house layering one board at a time versus designing a home one board at a time, the concept, meaning and aesthetics are unknown until it is finished.
Before, the common way to write a song is to have s vision or story, lyrics or music as a framework and meaning before a single sound is recorded. It is a song before getting near a recording device or computer. Maybe not a fleshed out song but the concept is known and that allows seeing how some musical idea either helps move the concept along or hinders at every step. The architect designs a home with the overall concept, and aesthetic in mind before thinking about individual boards and their exact placement. Architects and song writers had a lot in common in that way of working before the shift to rhythm based song writing. If the architect designed like songs are written now, he would start with some door knobs, or windows and place them, or cut and place 346 2x4s to various lengths or cut the carpet and lay it before possibly a floor existed or the size of the room was known and would not know when it was a house until it was finished
Sometimes writing occurs in the studio(in the old day, now it is usually one person with a computer to creating the song as the result of laying down the components as the first and only step until he can't think of any more to add, then it is finished as a completed entity without arrangement, production or mixing steps as before) but what is meant is that the song was fleshed out or alternative arrangements were tried but the song actually was a song before anyone opening the sound proof door into the studio. If the production team are all aware of and understand the song intent and meaning, polishing the arrangements and lyrics is a natural process and when it works everyone knows it because it makes the intent of the song more clear.
Use of recording too early in the process has hurt lyrics the most, it often sounds like how they really were written, as tacked on layer at the end.
Song writers who are doing it only for their own fun or expression do not have to worry about intended audience but those who want to make it a career do have to be concerned with how the message is perceived and communicates to others. Tacked on, almost an afterthought lyrics are less likely to communicate.
One of the biggest problems with the writing technique used by most now is that the song is "produced" from the start. Its meaning is entirely the finished product of the writing process. An example would be using some sound effect or theme as a base element of the song. The song is not that song without it so it is important in its appeal. The concept or meaning of the song goes away if done a different way. For a song writer, that means no one else can do that song and if by chance it was popular, it can't be covered. For a song writer, it is a dead end if others can't do it by adding their own stamp on it so it seems like the song was the actual expression of the artist. The potential audience is limited also since it can't be covered or reinterpreted by others because the song has no core independent of the sonic elements that the writer built upon.
So aspiring song writers take note. If you want a career and to place songs, do not produce them. A producer/artist is looking for songs that can be interpreted by the artist so it sounds like he believes it. It is the rare producer who can "unhear" sonic elements that are built into the song. What they want is a song that has a melody and meaning without specialty production elements, where the meaning is in the core of the song regardless of the details of instrumentation, effects and temp. They will add those as appropriate for the artist.If you want producers to hear it or to remember to call you to see if you have a song for a project they are working on, supply a very basic vocal and melody, maybe only piano or acoustic guitar accompaniment. It will have a much better chance of making it into the artists project.
Don't add percussion parts that are not playable because you might like them but it will sound awkward to an audience. If you are not a horn player, resist the notion to program in horn parts in your project because it is almost always awkward sounding to others. Get a horn player to program the sequence, just as getting a drummer to program the beatbox. It makes a difference in how the part is perceived. Resist the overly common practice of layering mania. If the concept is not clear to the listener with a modest layering, it is not going to be more clear when buried under 200 tracks of percussion. Don't laugh, that is not an unusual number. A friend was producing a reggae/punk band for Sony and I dropped by his home studio to see how it was going because it was several weeks late in delivery to the label. He was obsessing over a sound that when soloed was a little strange but nothing to worry about in its isolated playback He built up a few dozen slight variations on it, soloing each in sequence. I did not care at all since I did not listen to music with one track soloed to tell how it worked in the song. But apparently this percussion section had delayed him for almost a week. I asked him to just play the whole mix, he did, but only the percussion group and it was so complex and layered that no one would have been able to detect the part with a microscope. Just this percussion part was 197 layered tracks....for a punk band! In the old days he would have been able to tell instantly how any element fit or contributed to the overall song but now with such detail to focus on, he was obsessed with some of those details that would only be heard in his imagination and have less than zero impact on the communicative ability of the song. I have seem many home projects by amateurs with 500 tracks. If there was a meaning on concept somewhere in that pile of tracks, only the writer will ever know it while an audience will not.
Slow record sales have many contributing causes but the root is poor song writing. It has also killed the follow-on market of covers.
As I do consider someone who uses "tools" (as opposed to instruments) as musicians as you definitely create music! So apologies to those who read this in the future. But again, no slight was intended. Poor choice of terminology on my part, and my communication issues rearing their ugly head again.
Start simple...then go deep!
Comment