The Songwriter Forum - songwriting reviews, tips and chat
Songwriter Forum => The Bar => Topic started by: Friedemann on December 02, 2015, 11:06:00 AM
-
3 Traps Songwriters Fall Into (from fb.com/holisticsongwriting (http://fb.com/holisticsongwriting))
Let me know what your thoughts are please :)
Here’s 3 things songwriters do that keep them from rising to pro level.
1. Saying Too Much
Who hasn’t heard of K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid)?
The concept is clear and widely known. But unfortunately, knowing and understanding are two very different things. Listen to your last song for a moment and tell me: Could it be made simpler, more straight-forward?
Experience tells me that there’s always a way to simplify, or, as I like to call it, get to the core of the song. Take out a couple bass drums. Let the bass follow the kick. Experiment until you find the simplest, best solution and take out whatever you don’t need.
I do this when I get to mixing. I’ll go through each track and mute it to see what it does to the song. More often than not, I’ll wind up several regions throughout the whole song, which makes my mixing easier and thereby improves my whole sound.
So what do you listen for? You listen for the groove. If it doesn’t add to the groove (meaning the flow of your song) it’s clutter and you need to take it out.
If you start bobbing your head as soon as you take something out, that’s a clear sign that it should stay out. Your only alternative is to work on the timing and see if you can get that groove back.
2. Hooks Don‘t Hook
Many songwriters rely too much on their hooks. This is not a huge mistake in itself, hooks are very important, but they are only one of 3 important factors when it comes to songwriting.
The other two factors are Groove and Lyric-Less Storytelling. Without these, your song will never reach its potential, no matter how great your hook.
Why? Because your audience won’t even get to your hook. They will turn your track off. And that’s death.
Think about it: Why do you think A&Rs only listen to the first 15 seconds of a track? They listen to 3 things: 1) Is the production on par, 2) does it sound like this year and 3) is it interesting to listen to?
If your song isn’t captivating, you got yourself a big problem, because you will lose your audience before they’ve even heard your singer’s first line.
Your way out of this problem is Lyric-Less Storytelling, which is the process of taking your audience by the hand and leading them through the song.
Skilled Lyric-Less Storytelling relies on subtle, psychological principles that subconsciously capture your audience’s attention and keep it until the very end of the song.
3. Overwriting
We already talked about KISS, now let’s talk about it’s brother, overwriting (I don’t really have a cool abbreviation for this one. S.T.Y.F.I.? Stick To Your First Idea?).
If you’re like most songwriters, then it will sometimes take you weeks or months to finish a song. And when you write on a song for a very long time, something happens:
You get bored with it and you decide to change what was working.
This is a big problem in electronic music especially, where songwriters let their songs mutate into over-complicated constructs with way too many clever bits.
Focus on what’s important. Songwriting is an emotion game. You’re not speaking to the logical brain of your audience so don’t make it more “interesting”, make it more straight-forward.
-
Some good advice here Friedemann.
I would leave the bit about the girlfriend talking though :)
-
Haha, alright, thank you Paulski, I'll edit it out.
Was all in good fun - love my girl ;)
-
Hi Friedemann
Your idea of song writing seems different to mine, I think what you're talking about is computer based song construction using midi loop/samples etc which is not song writing to me. You seem to be talking about the "no strings or keys were harmed in the making of this song" kind of thing. To be honest I found the whole article slightly bizarre but I guess some will find it useful ???
And to keep it simple, just tell everyone to listen to Chuck Berry and if their head bobs then they know what a great simple groove is ;D
-
Hi DevyE!
Yes, true. I write most of my songs directly in my sequencer, which is standard practice today. I don't use loops much (maybe once every 50 songs) but I do use samples a lot, combined with recorded instruments.
I started out writing in Guitar Pro, which has a similar concept (even though the samples are shittier). If you haven't tried writing with a sequencer, I highly recommend it. It is enormously freeing and fun. It is when I feel my most creative.
In a way, it's all just arrangement of notes. Whether that's on my own guitar or by arranging MIDI data, I'm still writing melodies, chords and grooves. MIDI and samples don't automatically mean "loop", in fact most sound libraries can be used to play pretty much anything you could play on the instrument itself.
Hope this helps to understand my way of thinking a little better. ;) Take care & thanks for the comment!
-
For those wanting their music to be heard by a more people than a few Song writing anoraks on the internet - LOL ;). I read a quote recently by a song writing reviewer who said most of the amateur stuff he listens to seems to be written by people living in the past and he can almost tell a persons age by the style of song they have submitted. Basically he is saying that a lot of stuff sounds dated. So for those wanting to go to the next level I think its important to start listening to a bit more modern stuff and incorporating a few modern touches to their songs. Retro can be cool but it needs to be fresh.
I also saw on one of Friedmann you tube Videos him mention about songs with guitar solos and how unfashionable they were....... just a small example of the little touches that are required to fine tune a song to make it better.
-
@Morefrog Jones: You hit the nail on the head. Although I don't know about "better", certainly more fasionable though ;)
I for one miss a couple of the "oldies", like the ride cymbal, melodic melodies (sounds weird, right?) and multi-layered lyrics.
-
Sorry DevyE,
this is a good example of all 3 of Friedemann's tips plus a couple he didn't mention.
Keith
-
Guitar solo RIP?
:D
Neil
-
Guitar solo RIP?
:D
Neil
I dont think its dead - its just resting :)
-
Dated I can be - who is the best contemporary songwriter to listen to for inspiration , remembering i'm a pale stale male that cant sing the blues or rap?
-
Dated I can be - who is the best contemporary songwriter to listen to for inspiration , remembering i'm a pale stale male that cant sing the blues or rap?
I suppose Ed Shearan is popular but quite traditional in style.
His songs get the modern full treatment but its basically him and his guitar.
-
@Mickeytwonames: Check out Max Martin or Doctor Luke, two of the biggest songwriters out there. Artists to listen to: Go on youtube and search for "Billboard Charts", they make a new playlist every week and it is VERY worth listening to to see what's going on out there.
@Everyone else: Remember that Holistic Songwriting is targeted at the modern market. There are thousands of great older songs out there that don't follow today's "rules" (whatever you wanna call it). Phil Collin's "In the Air Tonight" would never make the charts today. The times have just changed. Music, like fashion is art and like art it changes its zeitgeist.
That doesn't mean Chuck Berry isn't great anymore, just that if you wanted to make a living writing Chuck Berry-esque songs you would probably have a very hard time.
-
Just listened to a summary of the Billboard top 50 on youtube. All 50 songs in 12 minutes. Very interesting. The secret to chart success seems to be, sell songs to Justin Bieber, Fetty Wap or One Direction.
Noticed one or two country songs on the chart whose roots include Chuck Berry. Writing Chuck Berry-esque songs doesn't mean you have to sound like him.
No Lana Del Rey but a couple of imitators.
Adele number 1. I had one of my teeth filled to Hello. A surreal experience.
At number 30 a religious song. Unfortunately it wasn't a patch on the Soul Stirrers or even Jim Reeves.
All in all a dispiriting 12 minutes, most of the songs sounded the same. Nothing stood out to me as great.
Keith
-
Hi Friedemann
I think you may have misunderstood me, my feedback wasn't aimed at you personally but thanks for the insight into the way you work. You asked for our thoughts on the article and that is what I gave, I'll try and clarify my thoughts here but please remember you did ask for them.
Firstly, I do use hardware/software sequencers and do agree they are a lot of fun, I use them mainly for drums/percussion/strings etc on my humble tunes.
What I was trying to say is that in my opinion there is a difference between song writing and music creation in a sequencer or daw which is what the article appeared to be about to me. Yes wonderful results can be achieved with music creation and if you're chasing the cash then it can be caught. But
I'm old school and not chasing the cash so song writing to me is trying to capture something on my guitar and then using all of this fantastic technology to try and bring it to life. As I said just my opinion.
The advice in your article was all very sound to me although I'm sure many of us have read/heard it a multitude of times before but there's nothing wrong in reading it again. But what I was trying to say (bizarre may not have been a good word) was that I thought the tone of the article was a little patronising, so when you write your next article please talk to your audience and not down at them. Again just my opinion and others may believe differently and did learn something new too which is great.
And Chuck was only mentioned as light hearted comment :)
All the best
DevyE
-
I think you may have misunderstood me, my feedback wasn't aimed at you personally but thanks for the insight into the way you work. You asked for our thoughts on the article and that is what I gave, I'll try and clarify my thoughts here but please remember you did ask for them.
Oh boy, DevyE, I am really sorry if I made you feel like I insulted you in any way. I really didn't mean to.
In fact, you absolutely have a point and I even meant to defend you but maybe that came across wrong. What I meant with my previous post was that I completely understand that Holistic Songwriting is not for everyone. My audience is writers who are interested in making a professional career as a songwriter. And writing Pop music does have a lot of rules.
About "talking down to my audience": I'm very sorry if you feel that way. I have heard this comment before. I can assure you I don't mean to sound patronizing. From my perspective, the way I write is to-the-point, no-bullshit and clear (at least that's what I'm going for). Some people really like it, and some see it as patronizing. I personally don't like the opposite, I have had too many teachers who can't put their foot down and kick my ass if necessary. I believe it's a love-it-or-hate-it kinda thing. It is impossible to make everyone happy and I sincerely apologize if I seemed rude to you.
@diademgroove: I always listen to the full songs. There is still a lot of variety in pop music in my experience. :)
-
Friedemann, we're cool :)
-
@DevyE: I'm even wearing sunglasses at the moment. ;)
-
Interesting post. It all depends on your perspective and why you're writing/recording. I like to actually like what I write and to be able to listen to it and enjoy it. If I was writing to try and get a song on the charts, I wouldn't be able to do that. diademgrove's post about the Billboard top 50 shows that if you write to a formula, you get formula music. Bloody awful drivel that everyone's forgotten next week.
-
Hi montydog. I actually disagree with diademgrove's comment. I think the charts are still very diverse. Yes, they are formulaic, but if I have learned one thing from writing in so many styles it's that all styles are. They all have their own rules and they all sound "the same" to an outsider.
I have friends who will listen to metal and say it's all the same, whereas I am so used to the rules of the genre that I hear all the nuances. I don't have that with Salsa music for example, because my ear isn't as trained in this style and to me all Salsa sounds the same.
I think listening to a 12-minute summary of 50 songs can give you the impression that the songs are more alike than they really are. It's like reading the blurbs of 20 thrillers and going "wait, this one is also about a killer? Man, these books all follow a formula. Get some new ideas, guys!".
I always listen to the billboard songs in full. If you listen to this weeks top 5, you'll hear Adele's Hello, Drake's Hotline Bling, The Weeknd's The Hills and Justin Bieber's Sorry & What Do you mean. Apart from the last 2, these songs could not be more different (to my ears). But judge for yourself. ;)
Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
-
I've taken your advice and listened to the Billboard top 10. I would say that all the songs are broadly ballads. I would say the production on each of them is similar which makes them sound the same even though the songs are different. So here's my thoughts on the individual songs
10. Selena Gomez Same Old Love
Her roots are Lana Del Rey without the interesting lyrics. I found the handclaps annoying. Although the breakdown was a very pleasant surprise and the best part of listening to the whole top ten.
9. Meghan Trainor Like I'm Gonna Lose You
Clever lyrics. I found some of the vocal rhythm strange. I thought the chorus was a bit flat. My first impression was nice but forgettable.
8. Alessia Cara Here
Portishead meets Barry White. A rap song about someone who doesn't like the party and why. Eventually I ended up saying who cares. Could have been an interesting song, but wasn't. Waste of a great Portishead track. Alessia can rap but really had nothing to say, at least to me.
7. Justin Bieber Love Yourself
Tried too hard to be clever. Some great lines, really well sung but without the cleverness could have been very good. Reminds me of 10cc who I thought were always too clever.
6. Shawn Mendes Stiches
Sounds far too happy to be in stitches over a lost love. The music did all the right things in highlighting the chorus but didn't fit with the words. More appropriate to finding love than losing it.
5. The Weeknd The Hills
Started with a bang, then dropped in intensity and went off in a strange direction. The different sections didn't work for me. Pity. I expected more and got less. As it went on I became less interested.
4. Justin Bieber What do You Mean?
Out of the three Bieber songs I liked this the best. The music and lyrics work. Not really my kind of music but I can appreciate the talent that went into it.
3. Drake Hotline Bling
I found this dull. You can see why she left him.
2. Justin Bieber Sorry
I thought the music did not compliment the lyrics. A song about breaking up with jaunty music, not my taste.
1. Adele Hello
Head and shoulders above the rest, which is why its number 1. Music and lyrics go together well. Do I think its great music? No, the chorus reminds me of one too many power ballads from the 80s.
In contrast to the billboard top 10 here's the UK top ten from 26 January 1967
10. Cliff Richard and the Shadows In the Country
9. Jimi Hendrix Experience Hey Joe
8. The Seekers Morningtown Ride
7. The Rolling Stones Lets Spend the Night Together
6. The Four Tops Standing in the Shadows of Love
5. The Who Happy Jack
4. Tom Jones Green Green Grass of Home
3. Cat Stevens Matthew and Son
2. The Move Night of Fear
1. The Monkess I'm a Believer
I would say the chart in 1967 had something for most people, kids, teenagers, parents and even grandparents. Most of these songs would be recognised today.
I would say the current billboard chart hasn't got something for everybody which may be why the music industry is in a mess. In 50 years time how many will be remembered?
Music is wonderful because it just comes down to opinions. These are mine.
Keith
-
3. Drake Hotline Bling
I found this dull. You can see why she left him.
This made my day ;) Thanks for the great comment. Good point on there being a lot of ballads. Maybe because of winter?
I have a couple of observations - not to argue with you, because I respect your opinion as I feel you respect mine - just because I think it's interesting:
You mention lyrics fitting the music a couple of times. I think this isn't as important anymore, because music is consumed very differently today. Today, we have music running all the time and need to hear a song 2 or 3 times before we really notice it. We hear the music first, THEN we listen to the lyrics. If the lyrics are nice, that's seen as a bonus.
I think music has never been more diverse. It's just that the diversity has moved into the niches, and it takes a little bit of work to find it. Tool, NIN, etc all have a huge following of hardcore fans, their music just sells very differently than that of more commercial artists. They typically release an album every 3-5 years (tool hasn't released one in a decade I think), whereas some big artists now release a new single every two months, completely abandoning the concept of albums. In general, pop sells quicker and dies quicker, whereas alternative music (if you wanna call it that) sells slower but longer. The billboard charts are on a week to week basis, so they are made to reflect those short-term sales, which might be an explanation for why the charts are all filled with pop music.
And another interesting fact: I am 26 now and from your 1967 list (which is now roughly 50 years old), I recognize 7 artists but only 1 song (and while I don't listen to a lot of oldies, I would consider myself a music nut). There are certainly classics which will stick around (I swear, if I hear "Last Christmas" one more time!), but unfortunately, most music dies with its generation. This is not because the songs aren't good, it's just that the sound (production AND writing) and lyrical themes have changed so much that this generation doesn't much care for them anymore.
So glad we're having this conversation! :) Looking forward to your response!!
-
I'd be interested to know which song, it'll tell me a lot and help with my reply.
-
I'd be interested to know which song, it'll tell me a lot and help with my reply.
Given that Friedemann is a southpaw I would be utterly surprised if the answer is not Hey Joe. ;D ;D ;D
-
New here, and still trying to find my feet and get used to the forum so forgive me if I'm out of order.
It feels to me that production rather than song-writing is at the fore-front in what's you're saying here, Friedemann. There's nothing wrong with that - I've always thought the arranger and producer and mixer and masterer don't always get their fair dues. But they're not the song-writer. I'm sure one could take any song of the last fifty years and give it a modern treatment that wouldn't sound dated - but, again, that's not the song-writer's call (IMHO).
That said, from just listening to a few of the tunes in the Finished Song thread and reading some of the comment a lot of people are commenting on the production and arrangement as well as the song, so maybe I'm in the wrong forum. For me, the song in its purist form is of interest - ideally an acoustic guitar or piano and a vocal - all the other stuff can come later.
Like I said, I may be at the wrong place. I'm in my 50s and the pop charts have no relevance to me. I'm not looking to sell a song to Justin Beiber or One Direction - I wouldn't recognize them on the street or on the wireless. What I want to do is learn to write songs that will stand me in good stead when I sit down at an Open Mic with just my guitar. If I could write a song a tenth as good as John Prine's worst song I'll be a happy camper.
As an aside, aside from the Adele song I recognize none of the other Billboard top ten listed below - but I know all of the 50 year old songs. Heh!
Cheers
Derek
-
Really enjoying reading this thread and appreciating all the different opinions being voiced.
Going back to the hits of '67 I was absolutely gobsmacked that you said Friedmann you only knew one song, until...... I applied the same logic and looked at the best selling songs of 1938 which incidentally were......
1 Artie Shaw - Begin the Beguine
2 Bob Hope & Shirley Ross - Thanks For the Memory
3 Seven Dwarfs - Whistle While You Work
4 The Andrews Sisters - Bei Mir Bist Du Schoen
5 Fred Astaire - Nice Work If You Can Get It
I'm only familiar with two of those songs, and one as it was a cover in the 70's, the other one is obvious :)
Other members should try the same experiment - Top songs from 23 years before you were born !
I think the great thing about this forum is that there are people coming from so many angles. Of course the song is the most important but production does play a big part these days and even a simple acoustic or piano track can sound much enhanced with some considered production.
I have learned so much in the past few months it's unbelievable, mainly down to members contributions and experimentation.
Cheers
John
-
New here, and still trying to find my feet and get used to the forum so forgive me if I'm out of order.
It feels to me that production rather than song-writing is at the fore-front in what's you're saying here, Friedemann. There's nothing wrong with that - I've always thought the arranger and producer and mixer and masterer don't always get their fair dues. But they're not the song-writer. I'm sure one could take any song of the last fifty years and give it a modern treatment that wouldn't sound dated - but, again, that's not the song-writer's call (IMHO).
That said, from just listening to a few of the tunes in the Finished Song thread and reading some of the comment a lot of people are commenting on the production and arrangement as well as the song, so maybe I'm in the wrong forum. For me, the song in its purist form is of interest - ideally an acoustic guitar or piano and a vocal - all the other stuff can come later.
Like I said, I may be at the wrong place. I'm in my 50s and the pop charts have no relevance to me. I'm not looking to sell a song to Justin Beiber or One Direction - I wouldn't recognize them on the street or on the wireless. What I want to do is learn to write songs that will stand me in good stead when I sit down at an Open Mic with just my guitar. If I could write a song a tenth as good as John Prine's worst song I'll be a happy camper.
As an aside, aside from the Adele song I recognize none of the other Billboard top ten listed below - but I know all of the 50 year old songs. Heh!
Cheers
Derek
Hi Derek,
welcome to the forum. Your definitely not in the wrong place. We have a few contributors who post acoustic songs and usually get helpful feedback on song structure, lyrics, melody etc.
The bar is were we put the world to rights and discuss any and every topic under the sun. Just like a real bar.
Hope to hear one of your songs soon.
Keith
-
Hi John,
Apart from the Seven Dwarves rock and roll and the Beatles effectively killed the chart careers of all the other 4.
I can see what you mean but the chart today claims a direct link back to the Beatles, Stones, Tamla etc. I didn't hear any conscious link between today's top 10 and the 1930s.
On Youtube the top 2 videos of Andrew Sisters' song had 2.8 million listens. The top 2 videos of Lets Spend the Night Together had nearly 4 million. Doesn't prove much but indicates that the Stones song is more popular with the Youtube generation.
The main point I was making was that the chart in 1967 has a wider variety of musical styles than the billboard top 10. Hendrix is side by side with Cliff Richards and a ballad by Tom Jones. You have folk lite with Morningtown Ride, my first single and something I still play today, and I'm a Believer by the 60s version of a fabricated boy band. In the middle you have a fairly heavy Tamla song. All co-existed together and sold well, in similar amounts which explains their top 10 status.
Hey Joe, Lets Spend the Night Together and Happy Jack have been reissued on album and cd throughout the 70s, 80s and beyond. The artists may have other songs which are more famous but each of the above is in the collections of millions, including a lot of people under 30.
I agree it is definitely an interesting topic.
Keith
-
Ah Keith, brilliant. I do agree there was so much diversity in the sixties. Morningtown ride, the first song I learned the ukulele chords to. Apart (and as well as that) Some classic pop toons many of which are being derived from today. Time moves faster of course but the classics remain imho.
Any other thoughts anyone? :)
Pompeyjazz
-
There weren't many outlets for music in the 60s (no radio 1 until '67) so I suppose everything and anything was mainstream and the chart reflects this.
Even 10 years after that you could hear a pretty rough and quite amateurish (but great!) Adverts song followed by a fantastic classy extravaganza by Earth Wind and Fire.
Maybe the good music goes elsewhere for its listeners.
And yes, I'm gobsmacked that Young Friedmann has only heard of one of those songs which probably reinforces the fact that I am very old and completely out of touch!
-
Great topic!
I think that top 10 list from 1967 tells us a lot (thanks for posting that Keith :))
Back then most everything was "pop" and pop meant popular music not some formula sh*t like you hear these days. I think things started to separate in the 70's when radio stations were approved to play specific genres only (at least that's what happened in Canada). So if you wanted to hear "The Green Grass of Home" you tuned to a country station. If you wanted "Let's spend the Night Together" tune to a rock one. Our "CRTC" thought they were protecting existing stations from competition - idiots :(
But I'm not bitter about it... :)
Paul
-
New here, and still trying to find my feet and get used to the forum so forgive me if I'm out of order.
It feels to me that production rather than song-writing is at the fore-front in what's you're saying here, Friedemann. There's nothing wrong with that - I've always thought the arranger and producer and mixer and masterer don't always get their fair dues. But they're not the song-writer. I'm sure one could take any song of the last fifty years and give it a modern treatment that wouldn't sound dated - but, again, that's not the song-writer's call (IMHO).
That said, from just listening to a few of the tunes in the Finished Song thread and reading some of the comment a lot of people are commenting on the production and arrangement as well as the song, so maybe I'm in the wrong forum. For me, the song in its purist form is of interest - ideally an acoustic guitar or piano and a vocal - all the other stuff can come later.
Like I said, I may be at the wrong place. I'm in my 50s and the pop charts have no relevance to me. I'm not looking to sell a song to Justin Beiber or One Direction - I wouldn't recognize them on the street or on the wireless. What I want to do is learn to write songs that will stand me in good stead when I sit down at an Open Mic with just my guitar. If I could write a song a tenth as good as John Prine's worst song I'll be a happy camper.
As an aside, aside from the Adele song I recognize none of the other Billboard top ten listed below - but I know all of the 50 year old songs. Heh!
Cheers
Derek
Totally agree with the above.
M
-
There weren't many outlets for music in the 60s (no radio 1 until '67) so I suppose everything and anything was mainstream and the chart reflects this.
Even 10 years after that you could hear a pretty rough and quite amateurish (but great!) Adverts song followed by a fantastic classy extravaganza by Earth Wind and Fire.
Maybe the good music goes elsewhere for its listeners.
And yes, I'm gobsmacked that Young Friedmann has only heard of one of those songs which probably reinforces the fact that I am very old and completely out of touch!
I think this is the case, yes. Love "Young Friedemann" btw ;) Also have to agree with what Paulski said. I do believe that availability plays a HUGE parts in what sells best. Most people just turn on the radio without thinking too much about what they want, so they just get what they're served (which most often is Pop).
You can like Pop or hate it. I personally despised it for many years but have completely changed around in the past 4 years. :)
-
You mention lyrics fitting the music a couple of times. I think this isn't as important anymore, because music is consumed very differently today. Today, we have music running all the time and need to hear a song 2 or 3 times before we really notice it. We hear the music first, THEN we listen to the lyrics. If the lyrics are nice, that's seen as a bonus.
I'm not sure this is necessarily true. I would say nearly all the top 10 have traditional pop music themes in terms of their lyrics. Your friend Drake has basically re-written Dion's Runaround Sue from 1961. It's my opinion that Adele is number 1 because the music and lyrics go together.
I think music has never been more diverse. It's just that the diversity has moved into the niches, and it takes a little bit of work to find it. Tool, NIN, etc all have a huge following of hardcore fans, their music just sells very differently than that of more commercial artists. They typically release an album every 3-5 years (tool hasn't released one in a decade I think), whereas some big artists now release a new single every two months, completely abandoning the concept of albums. In general, pop sells quicker and dies quicker, whereas alternative music (if you wanna call it that) sells slower but longer. The billboard charts are on a week to week basis, so they are made to reflect those short-term sales, which might be an explanation for why the charts are all filled with pop music.
This has always been the case. Although with Spotify and Youtube it is so much easier to find. In the 1970s, when I started paying for my own records, you had to search local record shops for singles that weren't in the top 40. Many classic records had been deleted and achieved legend status. I grew up in the 60s and 70s when, roughly, every three months artists released a single. It was not unusual for the single not to be on the album. The single market was far more important than albums for people like me well into the 1970s. Earning more money then made albums affordable.
And another interesting fact: I am 26 now and from your 1967 list (which is now roughly 50 years old), I recognize 7 artists but only 1 song (and while I don't listen to a lot of oldies, I would consider myself a music nut). There are certainly classics which will stick around (I swear, if I hear "Last Christmas" one more time!), but unfortunately, most music dies with its generation. This is not because the songs aren't good, it's just that the sound (production AND writing) and lyrical themes have changed so much that this generation doesn't much care for them anymore.
So glad we're having this conversation! :) Looking forward to your response!!
I discovered Hendrix in the mid-70s. Hardly anybody else I knew liked him. He'd been dead 5 years, his albums didn't sell and he was basically an old hippy who had died young. The 80s weren't much better for Hendrix fans. However a new generation discovered him and he is now, almost, universally recognised as the greatest guitarist that walked the planet. However for teenagers today that will be on the basis of 3 or 4 songs. Hey Joe, Purple Haze, All Along the Watchtower and possibly Crosstown Traffic.
The same would apply to the Stones and the other people you recognise from 1967. You'll know one or maybe two songs from each of them and that will be about it. However most of the 10 mentioned built a successful career that has lasted until today. Nearly 50 years. It will be unlikely that many of the current billboard top 10 will build a career that lasts that long. The reason is the quality of the songs they wrote or sang.
Finally, I do respect your knowledge and what you offer. I just happen to think you don't recognise the full potential of what you are saying by restricting it to pop music.
I'd be interested if you could tell me how the 3 traps songwriters fall into together with lyric less story telling applies to Chuck Berry's No Particular Place to Go. Its old, the production isn't modern but your principles apply just the same.
Have fun and keep rocking
Keith
-
Hey Keith!
Interesting stuff. Never knew that artists already released singles every couple of months in the 60s.
Whether Adele's Hello is #1 because of it is hard to say, but I completely agree that the connection of lyric and music plays a part in it. But I do think (know, in fact) that there will always be commercially successful songs that don't have that whose strengths lie elsewhere.
Playing Devil's advocate here, but hasn't been Madonna been around for a while? ;) Unless you want to argue that pretty much every part of her body has been replaced over the years. And of course music is much more short-lived these days, no question about it. But I believe that is because of the sheer mass of songs rather than quality. I still hear amazing new music every day. I sometimes feel like new music only seems more fleeting because that's how we LISTEN to it. I used to buy my CDs, study the booklet, order fan shirts from catalogues and watched TV shows to see Bryan Adams sing live. Today, I find something, listen to it a couple of times in the background and that's usually it. My emotional connection is less deep, which makes the songs seem less deep.
This is of course my opinion - was it Tim Minchin who said opinions are like assholes, but unlike assholes, you should examine your opinions on a regular basis?
Finally, I do respect your knowledge and what you offer. I just happen to think you don't recognise the full potential of what you are saying by restricting it to pop music.
Thanks for the kind words. Restricting myself to pop was a VERY conscious choice that took me many months to make (I started working on Holistic Songwriting in January this year). Here's my thinking behind it. I think it may also clear up a couple of other things.
1) All styles gravitate towards Pop. Look at Metal, which started out as this extreme thing. Now it's widely accepted in the shape of Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park, etc. It's still Pop, but they definitely took a bite out of the "Pop music rule book". So I think all songwriters can learn something from Pop.
2) Most of my "fans" don't write Pop, which is exactly what I had hoped for, but I want them to understand that I'm coming from a certain angle (commercial music) and that all my ideas and techniques spring from that. People (like yourself) get that my stuff doesn't just apply to Pop music . When you watch a stand-up perform, you don't necessarily agree with him but he's entertaining because you get where he's coming from. If I said (like so many other songwriting coaches) "I teach EVERY style", it becomes much harder to place me.
Take a look at Lady Gaga. She's a pop queen to the outside world, but only few people know that she has a background in jazz. It's her image. I'm also not just "Pop", I have written for (and conducted) orchestras, Big Bands, Drum bands and choirs, but if I told you that the first time we met, you'd probably think a) he probably does a lot but nothing's any good and b) I can't relate.
3) I don't want to have to start using sentences like "do this. Unless you're writing Rock, in which case do this. Unless you're in 6/8, in which case..." etc. By restricting myself to Pop, my message is clear and simple.
4) Pop is easy to access. You don't need to know much about music theory or orchestration (I've written for a couple of Big Bands, and it's quite a challenge to understand all the different instruments).
There are countless more reasons, but you get the idea.
-
Madonna is much more musically significant than the post-Brian Jones Rolling Stones. At least in my opinion. I'll think about the rest of your post tomorrow.
I'm just going to relax after our 2-1 victory against Reading.
-
This is by far the most entertaining post of the week. Come on you tigers !!
-
I have to say that the title of the post sets us all up to fail. Who decides what is a trap and what is a brilliant piece of creativity? Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen couldn't get airplay because the fore runners of people who have your attitude said it was too long. If the crazy DJ Kenny Everett hadn't championed it and lied about how long it was, it would probably have never been a hit.
The phrase "traps that songwriters fall into" suggests that there is a right and wrong way to write songs which is complete bollocks.
Many truly successful artists/songs have broken all the rules set by the people who have your mindset and completely changed the musical landscape.
Discuss.
M
-
Interesting. In this context traps seem to imply things that restrict getting to your full potential or the best commercial pop...
:)
Neil
-
I have been following this discussion with interest but haven't yet contributed as I do understand where FRIEDEMANN is coming from (as many know I champion "commercial pop") but I just can't quite "buy in" to what is being promoted and this approach to the "rules"
I couldn't quite put my finger on how to phrase it until MONTY's last post:
The phrase "traps that songwriters fall into" suggests that there is a right and wrong way to write songs which is complete bollocks.
Many truly successful artists/songs have broken all the rules set by the people who have your mindset and completely changed the musical landscape.
I couldn't agree with this statement more - and couldn't have put it better myself
Whilst I completely accept that there are "rules" to songwriting and genres (which I always put in " ") I prefer to see them as "common themes" that are clear to see and can be consciously learnt (by reading songwriting books, studying songs etc.) or are just absorbed by "osmosis" from what you listen to (often from what you listened to during your younger formative years)
Eg - if I want to write a metal or a heavy rock track I might want to consider using electric guitars, if I want to write folk I would probably pick up my acoustic, if I am writing pop I will dig out my sample cd of swooshy sound fx etc. etc. - the same common themes can apply to structure, lyric content, themes, melodies, mixing etc. etc.
However, I find the language of "absolutes" that is being used a bit of a turn off
Someone else mentioned the tone of the article being a bit patronising etc. and I can see why some people thought this - although I completely understand that this is not FRIEDEMANN's intention
I find it a very fine line between giving "observations and advice" and "preaching" (which ironically is something to bear in mind when writing lyrics for songs!)
The views have obviously provoked discussion, which is a great thing
On this single point instead of "3 traps songwriters fall in to" I would have much preferred to have seen something like:
3 things to bear in mind when writing commercial pop
3 common mistakes made when writing commercially
3 potential traps to avoid when songwriting
I find this way of presenting the same thing MUCH more engaging as it doesn't deal in "absolutes", which is difficult to do in an area such a songwriting, which is sooooooo subjective
In the "pitching world" I completely accept that there are some very specific "dos and don'ts" but even these are determined by the particular brief (is label, tv, film, library etc.) but it is dangerous to extrapolate these things to songwriting in general (IMHO)
-
Friedemann...Perhaps English isn't his first language?
Which might explain some of the clunky wording.
He seems like a really nice fella who is just trying to help with some advice that we are all free to consider/ignore...I know he's got a book out but hasn't made much of that. It's served as an interesting discussion - though I must say I feel a little for him now.
Personally, I wish he'd been around with feedback Friday to persuade Queen to cut out that barmy Scaramouche Bismillah Fandango bit in the middle of an otherwise canny song :)
My first song submission here didn't follow the "rules" of songwriting...and that was pleasantly, helpfully and correctly pointed out to me :)
-
Personally, I wish he'd been around with feedback Friday to persuade Queen to cut out that barmy Scaramouche Bismillah Fandango bit in the middle of an otherwise canny song :)
That's the best bit, 17, drunk, walking from pub to pub in the middle of winter singing at the top of our voices, Scaramouche, scaramouche can you do the fandango? What's not to like?
-
Friedmann is a very enthusiastic young fellow and seems like a nice guy who has given a lot of time to giving his views about some of the forum members' songs for absolutely nothing. Yes, he is promoting his book, but as Paul says he isn't being heavy about it and his Friday broadcasts are engaging and I've enjoyed watching them.
He hasn't made any false promises and has made it clear that he is talking from today's commercial point of view. We can take it or leave it, can't we?
While I agree with Monty that the creative boundaries ought not to be too limiting, there have long been 'song factories' and writers who studied the formulating of a hit song for the current market and i'll bet that most of us love some of these 'manufactured' songs. I know I do. So isn't Friedmann just continuing that method. It might be that some of us old curmudgeons think that most modern music is not as good as it used to be but plenty of young folk clearly think otherwise.
And Friedmann I am still intrigued to know which was the only song that you knew from that 1967 chart. I'm amazed that either Hey Joe or I'm A Believer is unknown to you! Us old farts, eh?
-
I agree with the Viscount. I think Friedemann's advice is valuable and has contributed enormously to the forum. I enjoy listening to his Feedback Friday's and seeing if I agree with his comments. Usually I do, but not always.
Keith
ps I'd love to know which song he knows as well.
-
Hey Keith, totally agree. I love the feedback Friday stuff. It's my top watch at the weekend. Come on Freidemann what was that song ??? It has to be Hey Joe ?
Cheers
John
-
Haha ok ok ok! I'll tell you. Yes, Jambrains was right it's Hey Joe. But listening to the first second of I'm a Believer I know it of course, I just didn't know the title. Which may corrupt my entire case ;) But it was meant as more of a joke anyways.
I completely agree that there are "classics" that have gone down in history that'll stick around. And I also agree that there won't be many classics from this generation, although that might be for different reasons.
As for the blog title: It is meant to grab people. I see it as an ad for the text and usually refrain from using similarly strong language during the actual text. Hey, it made all of you click, didn't it? And if I piss some people off, I'm ok with that - as long as some people learn something and do like it.
About "rules": I agree with all of you that the rules can be broken. Often it's what makes songs stand out. My favorite artists (James Blake, Deftones, Avishai Cohen, Stravinsky etc) are all famous for doing something unusual and I love it. THING IS: This "genius" is often something very personal and has a lot to do with the artists identity, and that is something that is near impossible to teach (although I am playing with the idea of a workshop on finding your unique voice).
What boydie said:
Eg - if I want to write a metal or a heavy rock track I might want to consider using electric guitars, if I want to write folk I would probably pick up my acoustic, if I am writing pop I will dig out my sample cd of swooshy sound fx etc. etc. - the same common themes can apply to structure, lyric content, themes, melodies, mixing etc. etc.
...is exactly how I see it.
@all the self-proclaimed "old farts": I actually completely agree with all of you, very much so. It's just that for Holistic Songwriting, I'm approaching songwriting from a very specific (and often unforgiving) angle: the market. But I am loving this discussion :)
-
I completely agree, and appreciate that the "absolute" language helps provoke discussion
To break the rules you got a learn them first!
-
I suppose we all have learned at least some of the rules and apply them without being too aware that we are doing so. As a songwriter without a commercial goal, I mainly jump in and follow my nose. I'm never really dissapointed with the end result and so I can say that I love to write, embracing twists and turns wherever they may occur. So much fun to be had from this approach though I can when I choose to be, very disciplined. my main goal is to please myself. :)
By the way, I love well written lyrics, the simple stuff bores me. My favourite writers have enjoyed a degree of success without being too simple in their approach to lyric writing in fact they are often deliberately smart in their approach: Lloyd Cole, Roddy Frame, James Grant, Paddy McAloon, Gary Clark, Billy Joel.
Paul Simon - the list goes on and on.
Paul
-
47 responses and counting, great discussion guys. I know that we don't like to be lectured (and some may baulk if they infer a commercial motive behind the original post) but actually I think the three main takeaways from it make total sense: (i) don't overcomplicate; (ii) use variation to get and keep attention; and (iii) know when to stop tinkering.
I don't think that these are particularly genre specific. In a 3 - 4 minute artform anything we add (melody, lyric, instrumentation, space) should be there for a reason, and a sanity check is always good. That doesn't always mean dumbing down. If we are writing for a specific genre then that will always have its own challenges and, probably yes, rules. If we just want to write the best songs that we can write and effectively transmit what we want to say, then I'd say these thought processes still apply (even if we reject them, considering them will generally be a "Good Thing").
I think that those of us who grew up before the millennium are certainly lucky - looking at the top 40s from those days we were served a radio diet of everything from Queen to Bowie to Joy Division to Nirvana, Punk, Ska, Disco, funk, rap, electro, rock, comedy, wierdness, kitch, ballads, soul, folk, pretty much anything, which consciously or unconsciously we can use to our advantage and flavours what we produce. Today, even though everything is just a mouseclick away, you have to somehow find out that it exists and go and find it, as it's not in the charts.
-
Today, even though everything is just a mouseclick away, you have to somehow find out that it exists and go and find it, as it's not in the charts.
This is exactly why "marketing" is as key to the music business as the music itself - and why labels are still very important despite the decline in sales
-
I personally think music's never seen better days. Yes, you have to look to find new and original music, but it's out there! It's easier than ever to make music and start a band - and people do!
No, they don't make it into the charts, most won't be able to make a living off of just songwriting (let's be honest, who can?). BUT is that not the greatest thing that could happen to music? Music becoming a medium of passion, not money?
When I became a full-time musician I heard from many people that I wouldn't make any money with it. But I didn't care. It was never about the money.
I believe there are many others like me who now, in this generation, make music because they can, not because they must. If you look in the charts you won't find these people, because as I said it's a different game.
But the new generation still has a lot to offer and if you're smart you can use the internet to your advantage. Think OK Go, Amanda F-in Palmer. Not a lot of fans, but DEDICATED, true fans (does the 1,000 true fan theory ring a bell for anyone here?).
If I was born in 67 I wouldn't be able to do what I can do today. I would've needed a TON of money before I ever would be able to put out music. Now, I can just do it myself, with a program that comes with my Macbook.
I for one love being part of this generation and am VERY excited about what will happen next!
-
If I was born in 67
I was born in -67 and have to agree with a lot off stuff here. I can do stuff today that I could not do with my Tascam 244 in the eighties. I can also afford equipment today that was out of reach earlier. Just think of all the cheapie microphones that is more than up to the game. And the price for good software "outboards". I still got a problem with todays "popular" music. I feel like it´s a part of the "dumbing down" of society as of today. Music has no "value" to a big part of the population, and the easier it is to "swallow" the better. And me personally can't stand it. It´s like muzak but more ear-wormy and intrusive. Or "commercial" perhaps. I feel force-fed if I have to listen to commercial radio.But I have found a lot of music well up to par with the best music from yesteryears and beyond. But I have to look for it in the realm of "alternative" music… :D
-
I feel force-fed if I have to listen to commercial radio.
I feel you, have felt like this for a really long time, too. Happy New Year btw :)
-
K.I.S.S. One Note Song ;D
-
Is it strange that I finish a song in 1 or 2 days instead of a month? Or do you mean "finish a song" also record all of the voices?
-
Hey JOdejo!
That completely depends on what style you write in and what you mean with "finish". For me, a song is "finished" when I can hear it fully recorded and produced in Itunes ;) It takes me about 5 days to do that well, but I've also done it in 2 days and still get an end product that I'm proud of (but then I need a break of a couple of days ;) ).
-
I'm really sorry I missed this little gem of a discussion :)
You guys are all so awesome, and I agree with what everyone said, to some degree, and that's all
I'm going to say about that ;D ;D
-
I'm really sorry I missed this little gem of a discussion :)
You guys are all so awesome, and I agree with what everyone said, to some degree, and that's all
I'm going to say about that ;D ;D
Haha ^^ So agreeable today!