Harmony Central Forums
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ravenhurst Road. Phase 1

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    I love v1. c1 is good but I'm not totally feeling it - it doesn't have a traditional "chorus lift" and "xxx road" is a very common lyrical construction - Steve Earle's Copperhead Road is running through my mind but there are many others.

    I'm not a big Mumfords fan, but the banjo imparts a definite flavor and it fits well into that genre (which is pretty popular these days.

    I think I like the lyric better on the page than I do in the song.
    Lyrics Songs Demos Videos Covers Dj Facebook Tumblr

    Before you leave the house, look in the mirror and take one thing off.

    -Coco Chanel

    Comment


    • #32
      Mumford are one of those bands that became so big so fast, people revolted against them. I still think they have a distinctive, cool sound...

      Comment


      • #33
        Marcus Mumford is a very talented guy who will most likely stick around long after the & Sons thing dies down. But I'm wondering what everyone hears in this that's anything like them. It's fine but I certainly don't hear it. I'm not going for that sort of neo-folk/pop thing in the least. I'm going to have to work harder to make the distinction clearer I think.

        Ram, I've got zero issue with the title and hook phrase. This is the name of a school I believe, Phil? Either way, be it a road or a whatever, I like it. Strawberry Road (Sam Phillips), Tobacco Road... there's plenty. Why should we stop? Regrading the lift for the C1. I agree. I held off on the ear candy and reserved ti for C2 but will start earlier I think. I do like that it's not my typical routine though. I need to take that further AND still get it to lift like a pop song as well. Point taken. Listen to C2 and in the left channel there's what appears to be a high string patch. That's me singing falsetto and then distorting it. I think more of that stuff will help lift the thing. Make the chorus SOAR.

        Pull out the tricks
        Last edited by Lee Knight; 07-16-2014, 11:00 AM.
        __________
        Ain't no sacrilege to call Elvis king
        Dad is great and all but he never could sing -
        Jesus

        Comment


        • #34
          Funny, I wasn't even aware of all the Mumford stuff going around with this song, I merely posted that as an illustration of the vocal vibe I was looking for. It was pure coincidence that it happened to be that band.
          Don't listen to Justin.
          LCK - 2/21/2012

          Comment


          • #35
            Ah! Got it...
            __________
            Ain't no sacrilege to call Elvis king
            Dad is great and all but he never could sing -
            Jesus

            Comment


            • #36
              I would like to hear more of the personal angle in the lyrics. I'm not getting direct insight to the anger. Lots of us went to schools, public and parochial, where we suffered swats and sermons and so on, but not everyone came out with huge anger at the end of the experience.

              Using myself and my experiences as an example....teachers and preachers quite often have a marked tendency to assume that their students/congregation are in need of a shake-up, as they are dull and unresponsive to the lesson at hand. Just like coaches who assume the mass of non-athletes are lazy and soft and need a few extra laps to show them what it means to be tough, etc. Well, a lot of kids and congregations are lazy and unresponsive to the lessons and sermons, I have to admit. BUT - in every crowd, there are some few who are very sensitive, very imaginative, very responsive, and the "shake-em-up" treatment, especially in a religious context can just decimate the sensitive few. While the average person sits through the sermon going on and on about sin and judgement, remaining pretty unruffled and thinking about lunch to come later, the sensitive type is shaken to the core. That was me.

              It's one message to say "I don't like these people" - it's another message to say "what these people did made me feel this way". The latter is, to me, far more interesting. I'm not getting that latter kind of insight so far from the tune - more of the former.

              Also, one little thing. The "Irish" reference....is that absolutely necessary? Does it possibly tap into something rather left alone?? Just think about it....

              nat whilk ii
              Last edited by nat whilk II; 07-16-2014, 12:51 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by nat whilk II View Post
                I would like to hear more of the personal angle in the lyrics. I'm not getting direct insight to the anger. Lots of us went to schools, public and parochial, where we suffered swats and sermons and so on, but not everyone came out with huge anger at the end of the experience.

                Using myself and my experiences as an example....teachers and preachers quite often have a marked tendency to assume that their students/congregation are in need of a shake-up, as they are dull and unresponsive to the lesson at hand. Just like coaches who assume the mass of non-athletes are lazy and soft and need a few extra laps to show them what it means to be tough, etc. Well, a lot of kids and congregations are lazy and unresponsive to the lessons and sermons, I have to admit. BUT - in every crowd, there are some few who are very sensitive, very imaginative, very responsive, and the "shake-em-up" treatment, especially in a religious context can just decimate the sensitive few. While the average person sits through the sermon going on and on about sin and judgement, remaining pretty unruffled and thinking about lunch to come later, the sensitive type is shaken to the core. That was me.

                It's one message to say "I don't like these people" - it's another message to say "what these people did made me feel this way". The latter is, to me, far more interesting. I'm not getting that latter kind of insight so far from the tune - more of the former.

                Also, one little thing. The "Irish" reference....is that absolutely necessary? Does it possibly tap into something rather left alone?? Just think about it....

                nat whilk ii
                Well... there are two things going on here. What I spoke about, and what Phil wrote about. When I read Phil's lyric, it makes total and clear sense to me. It never mentions anger. I mentioned anger. I believe the lyric works very well as is. I'd love perhaps some of the prosody issues to be cleared up (or not cause I'm not sure what others are hearing), and hell, if it ended up better, re-written. Sure, why not. But I don't see it as lacking or needing a personal angle. The lyric says what it needs to say.

                For me at least. Phil may feel very different.

                I'm not suggesting it can't improve. I just don't see that sweeping need for the types of explanations you mention above. Sorry. How do others feel about that?
                __________
                Ain't no sacrilege to call Elvis king
                Dad is great and all but he never could sing -
                Jesus

                Comment


                • #38
                  nat, i think your looking way to deep into the lyric. I think it's great and expains it all as is.

                  Also you wrote,
                  Also, one little thing. The "Irish" reference....is that absolutely necessary? Does it possibly tap into something rather left alone??
                  what does that mean?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Foose31 View Post
                    nat, i think your looking way to deep into the lyric. I think it's great and expains it all as is.

                    Also you wrote, what does that mean?
                    Simple - does the lyric communicate dislike for the entire Irish people group or not? I'm not pronouncing that there was any intention along those lines, but I'm suggesting that it could be interpreted that way, so it's something to think about.

                    nat whilk ii



                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Lee Knight View Post

                      Well... there are two things going on here. What I spoke about, and what Phil wrote about. When I read Phil's lyric, it makes total and clear sense to me. It never mentions anger. I mentioned anger. I believe the lyric works very well as is. I'd love perhaps some of the prosody issues to be cleared up (or not cause I'm not sure what others are hearing), and hell, if it ended up better, re-written. Sure, why not. But I don't see it as lacking or needing a personal angle. The lyric says what it needs to say.

                      For me at least. Phil may feel very different.

                      I'm not suggesting it can't improve. I just don't see that sweeping need for the types of explanations you mention above. Sorry. How do others feel about that?
                      Ok, I've made an error here - I read Phil's first post of the lyrics, not his updated posts - and I thought the C2 section was your addition. Since you mentioned anger, and I mistakenly thought the C2 section was your own addition, I was looking for some insight into your own anger.

                      But I said basically the same thing way back in my responses to Phil's original thread on this - that I would like to see a more personal angle. Since I thought (wrongly) that you were doing some re-writing, I pushed the same angle your way.

                      nat whilk ii



                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by nat whilk II View Post

                        Ok, I've made an error here - I read Phil's first post of the lyrics, not his updated posts - and I thought the C2 section was your addition. Since you mentioned anger, and I mistakenly thought the C2 section was your own addition, I was looking for some insight into your own anger.

                        But I said basically the same thing way back in my responses to Phil's original thread on this - that I would like to see a more personal angle. Since I thought (wrongly) that you were doing some re-writing, I pushed the same angle your way.

                        nat whilk ii


                        I see. I realize it may have been a mistake to speak too much on my feelings for the topic. I do want to be sure to have a certain taste of anger or resentment in the music and performance. Just sort of bubbling under the surface...
                        __________
                        Ain't no sacrilege to call Elvis king
                        Dad is great and all but he never could sing -
                        Jesus

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          It wasn't a mistake for me. I wouldn't have decided that the vocal needs more oomph if I hadn't known what you were going for. That's the point, isn't it?
                          Don't listen to Justin.
                          LCK - 2/21/2012

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Lee Knight View Post

                            I see. I realize it may have been a mistake to speak too much on my feelings for the topic. I do want to be sure to have a certain taste of anger or resentment in the music and performance. Just sort of bubbling under the surface...
                            Nah, I am very interested in what motivates people, so I appreciate the personal talk. Well, some people can get too personal for the BBS format, but a dribble here and there keeps things interesting, makes me feel like I have some facsimile of virtual/real community here, rather than just jousting avatars.

                            Especially since this is songwriting which entails a lot of self-revelation intentional and otherwise.

                            nat whilk ii

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Lee Knight View Post
                              So, should I get rid of the voiceover lady at the top?
                              At first I was like, whaaat? But it sort of grew on me. I'd keep it.
                              “Good Vibrations” was probably a good record but who's to know? You had to play it about 90 bloody times to even hear what they were singing about. What’s next? Rock opera? —Pete Townshend, Melody Maker Interview, 1966.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I haven't followed the whole thread, but I agree with Nat about the personal impact/resonance and I think that would lift the chorus as well.
                                Lyrics Songs Demos Videos Covers Dj Facebook Tumblr

                                Before you leave the house, look in the mirror and take one thing off.

                                -Coco Chanel

                                Comment









                                Working...
                                X