Is The Art of Songwriting Dead?

[Matximus]

 

". A few months ago a friend of mine told me on Twitter, "I think you should totally cover Bruno Mars' version of Amy Winehouse's "Valerie." Oh great, a cover of a cover. Now, I'm sure all of us have played covers, some more than others. And I don't have anything against playing covers per se, but it seems as though society is too dependent on them. Blame Glee or Guitar Hero, but hearing those comments from my friends kinda pissed me off...Why am I even bothering to convey my thoughts and feelings in song form, when I can just do Journey's "Don't Stop Believing" and they go nuts? Or maybe I should just dump my friends and look for new ones. Just a songwriter's rant. Hey, maybe I'll write a song about this. Nah, no one will care anyway.

 

 

People like cover songs. They like songs they recognize. There are many reasons for this. So just Be smart about this situation and exploit it .... like bands have been since the dawn of bands.

 

Beatles started as a {censored}ing cover band. It was one of the reasons they were such a really, really good band. No band will ever be better at being a band than the Beatles were at being a band. So if it was good enough for them...

 

Sides Most original songs are {censored} and the only people having a good time when they're played are the people performing them. This from a guy that's written way too many songs that people have had to suffer through. So learn a good dose of covers and be smart about mixing em in with originals depending on the situation. Music is music. All that matters is it sounds good.

 

Just play good songs. Doesn't matter who wrote em as long as they sound good. That's really all that matters.

[Monkey Uncle]

I took the time to listen to the five original studio recordings that you have posted on your music page. I think what the uneducated masses are missing in your music is a hook.

Don't get me wrong, your songs are solid and very well-performed. You are obviously an accomplished musician, way better than I'll ever be. But the style of music you are writing - smooth R&B that cruises along on an even keel all the way through - is destined to be background music. And it's damn good background music. It should get people dancing at weddings, upscale clubs, outdoor festivals, etc. But it's never going to get stuck in their heads; they're never going to say to themselves, "man, I've got the hear that song again!" Most folks aren't bowled over by subtlety; you've got to hit them in the face with something to get that kind of reaction.

The two songs that stood out the most to me were "Invisible" (nice funky groove) and "Everyone together" (that #9 guitar chord and the somewhat adventurous vocal melody on the bridge). Those two are getting closer to catchy, and might be more broadly popular with the right promotion behind them. I could tell that the lyrics of those two were hitting on socially concious subject matter, but I bet that's going to go right over the average listener's head.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I like your stuff and I'd hire you if I were throwing a big outdoor party. But if you're trying for something that the average listener is going to want to hear again, you've got to come up with a hook.

[Mark Blackburn]

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle (admirer). What a terrific reflection. The hook of course is in the melody. It's the next best thing to a strong, memorable tune -- the starting point of all great songs, from Gershwin to . . . well, Canada's most famous poet, Leonard Cohen.

 

Indulge me in my favorite anecdote on song origin: Leonard Cohen and Jennifer Warnes are life-long best friends. They were on a bus together near Lourdes (Catholicism's most famous shrine in France) when Jennifer shared with him a cherished memory from childhood: When a nun gave her a good mark for her essay on St. Bernadette.

 

"I hear a good song there," said Cohen -- provided that Jennifer could come up with a strong melody. "What sort of song would it be?" said Jennifer. And out of thin air and a great imagination, Leonard replied with what would be the opening words of my favorite of her songs (from memory)

 

There was a child named Bernadette; I heard the story long ago. She saw the Queen of Heaven once, and kept the vision in her soul. No one believed what she had seen; no one believed what she had heard: that there were sorrows to be healed, and mercy, mercy in this world.

 

It had a strong melody to tear at your heart strings. But it had a hook, both simple and insistent (consistent -- simplicity and consistency, things worth seeking in life as well as songwriting?)

 

Their most famous collaboration had a so-so melody, but very strong strong melodic hook. And a haunting lyric. Oh yes and sometimes "vocals" really are the most important part of a song -- how it is delivered "live." Case in point.

 

 

[Monkey Uncle]

 

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle (admirer). What a terrific reflection.

 

 

Awww, thanks, Mark.

[Lord Lav]

Art and original music is absolutely NOT dead! This is the best time in the world to be an artist ever! At least in my opinion. The difficulty is the game has changed dramatically, you are no longer there to fill a shelf like before. There is a lot more clutter to cut through but you can definitely do it.

I think one of the many big keys to getting your own music listened to and noticed is social proof. I would often play songs to friends 6 months in advance of them getting released and they'd be like, 'What's this {censored}? I hate it.' Then 6 months later after it's been played on the radio numerous times they'll be like, 'Play that song again, I love it!' The difference was it showed the music was acceptable to listen to and fashionable. Not just for 'geeks like me' who like more against the grain music.

The benefit now is we don't have to piss about with the 'masses thinking trend followers' like before. With the internet we can find those niche geeks (I don't mean the word 'geek' in a derogatory way) that will enjoy our music on first listen and tell other like minded individuals about it, thus building our music's social value in a very organic way.

Don't give up on getting your art heard. If you're good, which I'm sure you are, there are people out there that will love it, you just have to find them and get it to them. Maybe you gotta do some covers initially to build interest then hook them in with your originals.

[dreamsound2]

 

If you don't have belief in your own songs then maybe it is time for you to quit. I for one do not write and record JUST to be successful, I do it because I enjoy it. If you don't enjoy it then yeh by all means quit. There are loads of great modern songs out there and new ones being written all the time. If yours aren't as good then keep writing until they are.

 

 

Since you can't give 'likes' here on the forums, I'd like to give a big like to the response above.

 

Everyone here said everything I would've said (again, great responses) except there's nothing wrong with mixing covers along your lines of music with your originals too. It doesn't have to be one or the other. NO, it is certainly not ideal but you are not selling your soul either.

 

It took me a while to deal with that too, I hear you.

 

But the bottom line is, as you gain a fan base you can do less covers and more originals.

 

Even Metallica started playing out covers.

 

The problem now are tribute bands (?wth!?) playing covers exactly as they were played out, not even a key change to match the singers range! At least Glee plays mostly their own versions of covers.

[NeverTheMachine]

I think society is somewhat tired, impatient and over-saturated. We sometimes don't have the time or patience to get into something new, or hear someone reinventing the wheel. There's also so much music out there and a lot of crap.

 

Of course, the art of songwriting is alive in the songwriters.

 

People are depressed too, and just want to laugh. I think comedy songwriting is in. People like train wrecks. I saw this group last night. THey were horrible and it looked like they were taking themselves as serious musicians, and I was kind of like wtf? in the beginning. After a while though I "got it" and realized the joke was on me. People were enjoying them because they weren't taking themselves too seriously and were ironically bad.

 

I would actually see their "joke Act" again. It was like "No one could possibly enjoy this as real music, but whatever it is, you will pay attention" ..... Whereas on the other hand a "real" act gives their audience two options, like it or not pay attention, and it's getting tougher every day to keep people's attention.

 

Back to real music that is supposed to be good.... I'm guilty of this as much as anyone. We have our favorite artists or type of artists and now go into a corner and listen to their new releases. There's too much out there to bother with. I know what I like. For instance, I got the new Fiona Apple album. There's definitely a lot of art in her songwriting.

[RickDieffenbach]

 

Yes, I stand corrected. The point is, music is free, art is dead and people are morons.

 

 

I agree there is a lot of ground clutter out there. Life use to be much simpler when there were just 3 tv channels to watch. And without adding social commentary, it seems that society/culture, my country USA in particular, somewhere somehow decided to dumb down just about everything rather than working hard and raising educational standards and resources. Just turn on any reality show, or look at any news page headlines.

 

But Art, and music, is too ingrained and too primal to be suppressed. There is definitely, without a doubt, much more of it today. And there are also many talented writers out there, amongst many that are not so talented. People are bombarded with 500 tv channels of junk. And they are bombarded with more music than they can possibly listen to. Many people, I feel, have become music-numbed. Not that I want the old days, but one thing that was good back then was that much of the lower quality songs were filtered out by the record executive process, and only the cream floated to the top. I knew what the best songs were because that's what they told me.

 

At any rate, I plan to keep writing until I can write no more, just for the pleasure of it. If someone likes a song of mine, wonderful. If they don't, maybe they will like the next one. But all that matters to me personally is that I get a little better with each song.

 

Rick

[Mark Blackburn]

Not if you remember to "Keep it simple," and, in the absence of a strong melody (who writes those anymore?) have a catchy refrain and/or melodic 'hook.' Maybe get yourself an agent in "music city" -- as they used to call Nashville back in the 60s. Remember when?

It doesn't hurt if your agent lines up a genuine star, and a skilled producer of artless videos. Then suddenly your simple little (heartfelt) song has 12.8 million "views" at YouTube. Like this one.

[Folder]

While there was a bit more radio diversity and a lot more album sales then, there were a lot fewer ways to get your music disseminated. No You Tube, no Facebook, no websites, no Pandora. Vinyl and cassette tapes were much more expensive to duplicate and distribute than CDs or MP3 files. Musicians and songwriters were much more at the mercy of the corporate tastemakers. There were far fewer tools available and it was much more difficult to do your own promotion.

 

 

There was a lot more radio diversity then. Back then it was illegal for large media corporations to monopolise the airways like they do now.

 

I think musicians are far more at the mercy of corporate taste makers today than ever before. The corporate taste makers have zero interest in originality and quality.

 

The music business is all about radio airplay. Always has been and always will be. If radio is not interested in playing good music then good music won't be popular.

[Lee Knight]

The point is, a) music is free, b) art is dead and C) people are morons.

 

 

I agree with point A, but very much disagree with points B and C. Music is free and that has hurt a lot of things we deal with. To a large degree, the dream we all grew up with, does not exist anymore. Poof! Gone.

 

B) Art is dead? No... it isn't. Have you heard a Stickboy song lately? Listened to Radiohead's latest? Looked at the adverts in a fashion mag? Have you seen the movie Drive? The pacing of it, the juxtaposition of its music to the art design to the acting. Have you seen the chalk art on the sidewalks of Encinitas? That's art, man. Have you been to a poetry slam?

 

C) People are morons? No, they're not, El. People don't react the way we want them to. That's very true. And that is a pain in the ass. Like rain on your beach day. A pain in the ass. But hey, it freaking rained and those people didn't react the way I wanted them to. So what do you do?

 

You can't change the weather but you can adjust your music to elicit the response you want. I'm not talking about being wishywashy in your art. I'm talking about taking cues from your audience and using the info. Bwahaha! Really, you want them to drop everything and shed a tear when listening to your music? It's possible. And it's {censored}ing hard as hell and you keep trying till... they shed a tear.

 

You know? They're not morons, they just don't care. Then you get so good they can't ignore you. When everybody loves your music, it won't have been the people who have changed, but your music.

[Mark Blackburn]

. . . and THAT is why I love Lee Knight. [To coin a song title (I can imagine Carly Simon singing it) Nobody Does it Better.]

 

Seriously, I'd been hoping for just such an insightful reply, ever since Mr. Knight's initial posting here, a flippant "Yes" (the art of song writing is dead and gone). Thank you, Lee.

[saturn1]

 

There was a lot more radio diversity then. Back then it was illegal for large media corporations to monopolise the airways like they do now. I think musicians are far more at the mercy of corporate taste makers today than ever before. The corporate taste makers have zero interest in originality and quality. The music business is all about radio airplay. Always has been and always will be. If radio is not interested in playing good music then good music won't be popular.

 

 

There was a relatively short period of time when there was a great deal of radio diversity. At the dawn of the FM radio era in the late 60's to the late '70's, there were a number of adventurous programmers that brought a much broader scope of music, but it didn't take long before the realities of serving a mass market narrowed the breadth of their offerings. The distinctions between one station and the next quickly grew more minute as station owners realized that owning one station was not a good way to make money. So they found formulas and bought many stations and duplicated the formula. By the mid 80's we were well on the way back to the pre-FM days of narrow formats and small playlists. Truly diverse programming has been left to the colleges and other not-for-profits where ad revenue is not the driving factor or in stations in those few markets in the country where the audience exists to support an alternative and diverse station. Commercial radio is still a business and the ability to generate revenue dictates programming.

 

I think that the record business has changed from being taste makers to being taste followers. Labels take little risk and spend little time, money or effort developing new talent. "That job is left to the talent themselves. Hone your craft, develop a following, demonstrate that you can gain a following, then come and see me," is the attitude. Even better if you've already recorded an album that we can slap our label on and release.

 

I disagree that the music business is all about radio airplay. Certainly there is a segment of the music business that is all about that, but it is the segment that is concerned with the mass audience. The music that moves a mass audience may not appeal to you, but if a million people will buy an album from artist 'A' and only 50,000 will buy one from artist 'B', don't blame the record company for choosing 'A'. Luckily for artist 'B', he doesn't need a record label to reach those 50,000 people nowadays. The artist can print that CD in batches as small as 100 and sell them at gigs, or on a web site or sell downloads on itunes or other services. That artist can use YouTube to find new listeners. I'd venture that there are more artists now that are known and sell music on a national and international scale than ever before. I'd say that there are more artists who are making a living writing, recording and performing music now than ever before. For every Adele that sells millions of cd's and downloads and is heard constantly on the radio, there are at least 2 or 3 Wilco's or Cross Canadian Ragweeds that sell 10's of thousands of recordings, perform to sold out audiences and rarely if ever get radio airplay. These guys know that the are unlikely to reach that mass audience, but they also know that there are a lot of people who are moved by what they do.

 

Virtually everybody in this forum can provide a link to an artist that you have never heard on the radio that is writing and recording music that is good and is getting recognition and attention from their intended audience. If you (the royal 'you', not you individually, necessarily) want to reach the mass audience that commercial radio reaches, then write music that is likely to appeal to that audience. If that's not the kind of music you want to make, then work the other routes that are available. But whatever kind of music that is, it needs to be good first and foremost.

[Mark Blackburn]

Thanks Ron "saturn1" for that terrific reflection. This has turned into a really good thread which, to coin a phrase, may not die any time soon!

 

Thanks again, Ron for this one: Your observations about what happened to FM radio after that brief but wonderful period of diversity in the late 60s, early 70s -- your writing here (as at your blog) is musical reflection at its best!

 

postscript: Regarding your astute observation that,

 

Virtually everybody in this forum can provide a link to an artist that you have never heard on the radio that is writing and recording music that is good and is getting recognition and attention from their intended audience . . .

 

You reminded me of the corollory: another story we all know -- the local band whose best song

[Marshal]

 

. . . , You can't change the weather but you can adjust your music to elicit the response you want. I'm not talking about being wishywashy in your art. I'm talking about taking cues from your audience and using the info. Bwahaha! Really, you want them to drop everything and shed a tear when listening to your music? It's possible. And it's {censored}ing hard as hell and you keep trying till... they shed a tear. You know? They're not morons, they just don't care. Then you get so good they can't ignore you. When everybody loves your music, it won't have been the people who have changed, but your music.

 

 

Nice.

[blue2blue]

Yeah... so good they can't ignore you -- if they even knew who you were. Which they don't. Because all the music 'journos' are busy looking at Rebecca Black's paid-click video and thinking, Wow, she must really be great if all these people like her. Naive morons who don't even bother to investigate the metrics they seem to rely on. Gaming the social media system is HUGE with Big Media, they create 'buzz' by paying shady, often offshore "IT firms" to initiate spam and fake-LIKE and fake view campaigns. (Youtube and parent company Google reportedly are constantly working against such organized gaming but, particularly with YouTube, it's apparently the way things are done. A penny a click/'view,' etc, is, I'm told the going price for such services.

 

No, the same people who corrupted the old marketplace are still working overtime trying to corrupt the new one.

 

People will always be people and there will always be people who thinking cheating is OK -- as long as it's they who are doing it.

[blue2blue]

Yeah... so good they can't ignore you -- if they even knew who you were.

 

Which they don't.

 

Because all the music 'journos' are busy looking at Rebecca Black's paid-click video and thinking, Wow, she must really be great if all these people like her. Naive morons who don't even bother to investigate the metrics they seem to rely on. Gaming the social media system is HUGE with Big Media, they create 'buzz' by paying shady, often offshore "IT firms" to initiate spam and fake-LIKE and fake view campaigns. (Youtube and parent company Google reportedly are constantly working against such organized gaming but, particularly with YouTube, it's apparently the way things are done. Around a penny a click/'view,' etc, is, I'm told, the going price for such services. Facebook, OTOH, seems to encourage corporate gaming of their LIKE system. Think of all the free offers we increasingly see. Just click 'Like' to get a free 32 oz whatsit.)

 

No, the same people who corrupted the old marketplace are still working overtime trying to corrupt the new one.

 

People will always be people and there will always be people who think cheating is OK -- as long as it's they who are doing it.

[Lee Knight]

Yeah... so good they can't ignore you -- if they even knew who you were.

Who's "they"?

I'm not naive. "They", those guys in quotation marks, don't know me and it is very unlikely they will. But El was talking about a specific they. As a songwriter, as a glass pipe sculptor, as a graffiti artist, "they" might never know you, but you can still work at your art and present to an audience. And all the truths of creating for both you and your audience still hold. That "audience" might take a different form today than it did in earlier times.

So art is dead and we're talking about Rebbecca Black? People are morons and misreading the metrics. And BIG MEDIA sucks too! Alright then. So I'm confused here. What are you reacting to? You're mad at the morons of BIG MEDIA? The entertainment business community? What?

Or maybe I'm reading your point wrong? You and El are both angry at what?

[rsadasiv]

So art is dead and we're talking about Rebbecca Black? People are morons and misreading the metrics. And BIG MEDIA sucks too! Alright then. So I'm confused here. What are you reacting to? You're mad at the morons of BIG MEDIA? The entertainment business community? What? Or maybe I'm reading your point wrong? You and El are both angry at what?

 

Between this thread and the "I Get It Now" BSWTB thread .....

 

 

I'm backing away ... slowly ... hands in plain sight ... nothing to worry about ... nothing to see here

[Lee Knight]

[EightString]

Maybe I'm naive, but I write and perform for my own pleasure, otherwise I wouldn't do it.

 

The fact that a reasonable number of people are enthusiastic and enjoy what I do musically is a pleasant icing on the cake.

 

Sure, I find it sad that turds seem to float to the top of the musical punchbowl these days, but I just continue do what I do anyway, for its own sake, while consciously making an effort to purge the sense of entitlement that might come with my personal and admittedly biased opinion of my own talent.

 

Unless progressive metal suddenly goes viral with teenage girls, or "Tin Pan Alley" jazz is suddenly all the rage in Iowa and surrounding states, then I am contentedly resigned to the idea that the material I'm passionate about writing and performing is never going to be "huge". But I like it, and that has to be good enough.

[rsadasiv]

 

 

 

Interesting site about the provenance of your sig quote:

 

http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/11/08/writing-about-music/

[Oswlek]

 

Maybe I'm naive, but I write and perform for my own pleasure, otherwise I wouldn't do it. The fact that a reasonable number of people are enthusiastic and enjoy what I do musically is a pleasant icing on the cake. Sure, I find it sad that turds seem to float to the top of the musical punchbowl these days, but I just continue do what I do anyway, for its own sake, while consciously making an effort to purge the sense of entitlement that might come with my personal and admittedly biased opinion of my own talent. Unless progressive metal suddenly goes viral with teenage girls, or "Tin Pan Alley" jazz is suddenly all the rage in Iowa and surrounding states, then I am contentedly resigned to the idea that the material I'm passionate about writing and performing is never going to be "huge". But I like it, and that has to be good enough.

 

 

+1, especially for the bold.

[EightString]

Wait, maybe progressive metal WILL go viral with teenage girls!

 

[video=youtube;vil-s82_LM0]

 

[EightString]

Interesting site about the provenance of your sig quote: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/11/08/writing-about-music/

 

I might have to update my siggy.