Members honeyiscool Posted October 26, 2011 Author Members Share Posted October 26, 2011 Like I said, academic rules-based approach to music may be necessary based on that individual's goals - though I totally fail to see the point for your typical verse-chorus-verse pop song.My whole point is that this stuff REALLY matters for verse-chorus pop songs. The average pop song lyrics might not be groundbreaking but they are usually extremely easy to sing and tailor made to the melody, so that anybody can start singing along quickly. Sure, lyrics like "Here's the thing, we started out friends/It was cool but it was all pretend," won't win any awards, but they fit the notes perfectly. Not observing a pretty strict meter can take away from the accessibility of the song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members oldgitplayer Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 Handling syllables - Subterranean Homesick Blues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 I'm not criticizing this approach at all. If you change the melody to fit the words, then that's exactly what you should be doing. So if you're doing iambic for the first verse but you switch to anapest for a couple of lines in the second verse, that's not lazy at all. That's actually awesome. What I don't like is you have more syllables than you normally do, so you draw out one note and spit out a bunch of syllables quickly and in an uninteresting fashion. Anything uninteresting is bad -- and it's multiplied when there's more of it, that's for sure. (Jamming more uninteresting stuff in a shorter time frame doesn't lessen the lyrical sin, I don't think, for the most part -- that's just the lyrical equivalent of too many notes and not enough melody.) It depends on the genre, though, doesn't it? You wouldn't do that in a folk song, sure, but in a hair dryer pop song? In a rap song? You know, as someone who started listening to rap at the end of the 70s and, for a decade ir so, was pretty into it, I'd have to say that people talking without saying sh-t is one of my biggest gripes with what much of rap became. That and gangsta poseurism. (Full disclosure: I was a temporary member of a rap-funk band for a number of months in the early 90s.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members playlikedanko Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 Bet you don't like this song very much [video=youtube;G0HvpwTS1xc] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cliftonb Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 My whole point is that this stuff REALLY matters for verse-chorus pop songs. The average pop song lyrics might not be groundbreaking but they are usually extremely easy to sing and tailor made to the melody, so that anybody can start singing along quickly. Sure, lyrics like "Here's the thing, we started out friends/It was cool but it was all pretend," won't win any awards, but they fit the notes perfectly. Not observing a pretty strict meter can take away from the accessibility of the song. Were on the same page, then. The above are both extremely viable ways to go about crafting pop songs - if that's what the individual is going for (aims and goals and all that). But it's only one way out of an infinite number of ways to go about writing songs (via myriad approaches). On a personal note, I never studied songwriting per se, though I listen to a ton of songwriters. I started out many years ago rapping and making hip hop beats on a cheap Radioshack keyboard. After that I spent some years developing myself as a video game music composer. Then I got really heavy into modern classical, avant-garde jazz, and non-Western folk music. Most recently I've been experimenting with electro-acoustic improv (EAI). That and the influence I get from all the crazy stuff I listen to on a given day make me who I am as a musician. In regards to the OP again, I like this song alot. [video=youtube;uq-gYOrU8bA] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members saturn1 Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 First, a brief aside. I really like this forum. I learn more from the discussions that take place here than probably anywhere. Few things bug me like a meaningless phrase used simply because the songwriter can't find something meaningful that fits. It's like reading a line that seems to serve no purpose other than to support a rhyme scheme. I'm not saying corrupt the rhythm; but I am suggesting that, for me, a phrase that is there -- especially a meaningless phrase -- simply to fit the requirements of rhythm or rhyme is a deal-breaker. I think that this is one of the primary reasons that I have notebooks of unfinished songs, although I have never put it in these terms - the phrase or line that is only there to fit the scheme. These constitute many of the parts of my efforts to which I say, 'that sucks'. So, serve the song, the story first, then the scheme. Seems pretty elementary, but it certainly moves my perspective at least a few degrees off axis. I will see what results from this altered point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted October 27, 2011 Moderators Share Posted October 27, 2011 I should have said at most one syllable per note. I am fine with one syllable stretched to many notes, but what I'm not fine with is going the other way, putting too many syllables into too few notes, which is something Elton John definitely does. I think there's an issue with the way you've stated your dictum. One syllable per note. What constitutes 'one note'? Once there are two syllables, there are two notes, even if they are the same pitch. That's two succesive note of the same pitch. There is no way to quantify this like it seems you want to. The general statement makes more sense. Your thread title for instance: Fitting too many syllables into melodies... Sure, I can go with that. It still comes down to taste and per case judgment call. Trying to slap an iron clad pronouncement, "There shalt not be more than one syllable per note" just doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members honeyiscool Posted October 27, 2011 Author Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 ^ Fair enough. It's hard to describe exactly what the problem is but say you were taking the vocal melody and transcribe it to an instrument, let's say, trumpet. I think that if you write your lyrics well, the vocal melody should easily transcribe to an instrument other than voice without sounding like you were playing too many instances of the same note. You know, as someone who started listening to rap at the end of the 70s and, for a decade ir so, was pretty into it, I'd have to say that people talking without saying sh-t is one of my biggest gripes with what much of rap became. That and gangsta poseurism. (Full disclosure: I was a temporary member of a rap-funk band for a number of months in the early 90s.)Really? I think that it's only a problem when people are supposed to be carrying a narrative but without any focus. Freestyles are kind of the rap equivalent of guitar solos and good freestylers can make them sound wonderful, even if it's only talking about how great they are at rapping. Of course, the majority of them are boring and overdone, like guitar solos. The best ones, though, can make aimless wordplay into a good song as well. I think it's all a matter of skill, delivery, and execution, not a matter of philosophy. I still think it's worth trying at, just like people shouldn't stop doing guitar solos because idiots at Guitar Center have ruined them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rhino55 Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 Most great art breaks rules, but the breaker of rules is usually also expert at using the rules. Very true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cliftonb Posted October 27, 2011 Members Share Posted October 27, 2011 This is a great community and I learn a lot even though I come from a completely different world musically that probably everyone here. I still for the life of me don't get the learn rules/break rules thing, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members freakingidol Posted October 28, 2011 Members Share Posted October 28, 2011 I do care for the number of syllables I need and how they are grouped together, this is what defines the interpretation and makes a song being fluid and very much singnable. It becomes lyrics, not just sentences that you have to somehow go though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Nijyo Posted October 31, 2011 Members Share Posted October 31, 2011 I use trick rhythms to get all the syllables I need in sometimes. I think the problem comes when such a strategy leads the singer to a corrupted rhythm, that, is, when he simply can't negotiate the required syncopations. Yeah... for you, maybe. Few things bug me like a meaningless phrase used simply because the songwriter can't find something meaningful that fits. It's like reading a line that seems to serve no purpose other than to support a rhyme scheme. I'm not saying corrupt the rhythm; but I am suggesting that, for me, a phrase that is there -- especially a meaningless phrase -- simply to fit the requirements of rhythm or rhyme is a deal-breaker. The only thing that bugs me in song construction, and I swear, it's the only thing that makes me go "oh come ON" is when the song uses a rhyming scheme, and then two lines end with the same word as a cheat to rhyming. Bugs the holy irrational hell out of me. All else is fair game, so long as you own it, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted October 31, 2011 Moderators Share Posted October 31, 2011 ^ You need to write a song called "Vaginas are Nice" ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Nijyo Posted October 31, 2011 Members Share Posted October 31, 2011 ^ You need to write a sing called "Vaginas are nice" ^ That is... a stellar idea. I wrote a song (well the lyrics for it) called "I Miss Your Boobs", which was a retro-80s hair metal sort of thing. I think Steel Panther stole it from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members eddieboston2 Posted November 3, 2011 Members Share Posted November 3, 2011 Honestly, I think songs that follow the "one syllable per note" dogma sound very old fashioned and tin-pan-alley-ish. It's like hearing poetry where every line is iambic. It starts to sound quaint and sing-songy after a while. I think modern songwriting has moved away from that, towards an emphasis on clarity of meaning and originality of thought, instead of rigid adherence to rules of meter and rhyme. If you want to sound like Dr. Seuss, go ahead, but I'd rather sound like I'm having a conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cliftonb Posted November 3, 2011 Members Share Posted November 3, 2011 Honestly, I think songs that follow the "one syllable per note" dogma sound very old fashioned and tin-pan-alley-ish. It's like hearing poetry where every line is iambic. It starts to sound quaint and sing-songy after a while. I think modern songwriting has moved away from that, towards an emphasis on clarity of meaning and originality of thought, instead of rigid adherence to rules of meter and rhyme.If you want to sound like Dr. Seuss, go ahead, but I'd rather sound like I'm having a conversation. +1,000,000,000 You're, like, my new hero and stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members oldgitplayer Posted November 3, 2011 Members Share Posted November 3, 2011 This thread has thrown up views that vary from the 'one syllable per note' dogma, to 'anything goes'. Both in old song and contemporary song, there is often an absence of rhyme and 'syllable to note' matching.What there is however is CADENCE. It can be achieved in different ways, but cadence is smooth on the ear and brain. And yes, it doesn't have klunky lines with too many syllables that trip over each other, or syllables that force the line to be rushed. It's about the singability of the line innit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.