Crafting a song

[Eric VB]

Ok, I know this has been kicked around here before, but it seems like a lot of the people that took part in those discussions have long since moved on. So let's see what the current crop has to say on this topic.

 

Obviously there are many ways to approach songwriting. I'm going to try to center on successful commercial songwriting practices, but I don't want to limit anyone's comments.

 

When aiming for this kind of song, I find it's a lot easier for me to start with the lyrics. Right now I just have a lot harder time going the other way around. In popular music the lyrics are oh so important, especially in a genre like country. It really doesn't matter how hot the licks are, how good the arrangement is, how tight the band plays; if the lyrics aren't there, the song isn't going to move. So this is where I start.

 

For me, the hook in the lyrics is usually in the chorus. Like Moe said, the chorus is the high point. It's so important it's the only part of the song where the lyrics are repeated, often without change. So this is where I focus a lot of energy; often the first part I write.

 

When I write, either the chorus suggests a song idea, or the idea suggests the chorus. Either way, I need a clear road map of where I'm going and what I want to say before getting too deep in the verses. I'll often outline the song, describing what each verse is about in a few words, before roughing out the verses.

 

To make things easier I'll often use standard song structure, with three verses, a chorus and a bridge, although I admit I often leave out the bridge.

 

To help design the verses I usually look for a melody or chord progression. I've probably already come up with an arrangement for the chorus by now, so that usually suggests something for the verses. The music helps establish boundaries for timing the lyrics in a rhythmic sense.

 

Sometimes the hardest part about finishing a song is getting stuck in the idea stage. I have a catchy chorus, and maybe two good supporting verses, but it just doesn't have a big emotional pull. Sometimes what's missing is life.

 

Either I haven't experienced what I'm trying to communicate yet, or haven't witnessed it. Sometimes just living, experiencing, and observing everyone and everything around you can give you that spark to round out your song and make it have real feeling.

 

So what are your feelings on crafting a song? What parts are easy or hard? Is there a process that you've found to be particularly helpful? How important is song structure in your writing? Any other things you'd like to share?

[Moe Monsarrat]

If it's a song I'm writing for myself, I usually start with the lyrics. When writing lyrics they usually fall into a few catagories: 1.Inspired 2. Clever 3.Inspired AND clever. For example an inspired song would be something like "Oh Happy Day". A clever song would be "Thank God & Greyhound You're Gone". Inspired & clever "Let It Be". One thing about being a prolific & hopefully sucessful writer is not always waiting for inspiration. Make your contrived stuff so good folks think it's inspirational. Sometimes you find inspiration in the act of contriving. Hooks are always flying by. They're on billboards, bottles, in movies, on TV, things people say.You gotta catch them as they go by. I use the verses to tell the story. Then I use the choruses to sum up the purpose of the story. The outcome or the ongoing quest which the song talks about must be experienced & understood by your audience. Once again, simple is usually best. I want to "trigger" their minds into feeling what I felt. However, they must feel it via their own experiences. If I color it TOO much with my own experience,I take that away from them. It's not as good. Think about your favorite music. Do you think it means exactly the same thing to you as it did to the composer? Probably not, but he has caused you to construct your own meaning & that's the magic & THAT'S O.K.!

[middle z]

i find it difficult to write music for lyrics but then i'm not a commercial songwriter .

for me the music is more important and the lyrics go in afterwards !

i find it easy that way !

 

its good to read the thoughts you guys have had and in the future i'll consider what i have read when a song pops out of nowhere !!!

thanks !

[AUSSIEKEYS]

hi guys

 

my preferred way at the moment is to write lyrics and music together....it comes more naturally for me.

I am also quite happy to have no idea where its going...but let it develop its own path.Although it will have a theme to start with.

 

Lately I have writen music first but only a lines worth which may have been repeated or may even had been a full verse worth.Then I would sing what ever popped out of my head often seemingly gibeerish to anyone listening...id go back to the recording of this impromptu performance and make some sense of it musically..and hey presto a new song...admittedly I am good at adlibbing on stage while singing so there is method to my madness here as I can jump on the lyric on the fly.

[skipclone 1]

I suppose since I can`t carry a guitar everywhere I go, I end up getting more lyric ideas on the fly. But I have worked both styles and don`t have a strong preference. One of the first songs I wrote had the lyrics and words happen within a short time, but I always thought the music was better than the lyrics so I eventually left it as an instrumental.

I like to have the words and the music make an impact together, one thing I don`t like is prose-like lyrics that stumble all over the rhythm. I put a lot of work into making sharp, meaningful words fit the music rhymically. Some examples of what I don`t like are by artists that were rockers in their youth, and then try to get all deep and profound when they get older. Their lyrics start to sound like literature and lose their snap.

A lot of the time I don`t like to continue lyrics into a bridge section. To me this is a chance to let the music shine on its own, a lot of songs that try to keep the lyrics going sound forced and awkward to me. It doesn`t always have to contain a solo but something besides more words should be happening. Also, yes I have bits and pieces that I come back to, sometimes after quite a while. Last sunday I performed a capella at a seminar, which I mostly don`t like but I had too much gear to take a guitar. I basically had the chorus sitting around for several years, I knew there would be a talent show as part of this seminar but about a week out I couldn`t think of a frreakin thing. Then I thought about that chorus and some verses started to come to me. I threw it together, people seemed to like it and now I`m thinking about some music to go with it.

[thanksforhelpethan]

Well for me I am a firm believer to never write if I am not feeling it. Wiether I am writing lyrics or the song, I kinda just let it come to me. They both just seem to come out of nowhere and pretty much write themselfs when I work this way. Sometimes listening to a song makes me wanna write lyrics, and yes sometimes after I write a verse I get the feel of a good song to go with it. My biggest thing is to never force my stuff and I just wait till it hits me or comes to me. For starters youll always enjoy playing or writing when you do, and the stuff you make sounds very natural compared to forced music. Well atleast I think so .

 

Have fun everyone!

[thanksforhelpethan]

Oh another thing when writing lyrics I always feel I got to stay true to myself when I write. So I only write about my life, or about things I have seen personally. That way when I start remenissing about a experience or start thinking of something I plan on doing, many times a song will just naturally start writing itself in my head.

[Eric VB]

Good points, thanksforhelpethan!

[Flexby]

.

[DonaldM]

Well, call me old fashioned, but I like to actually write the music. I used Cakewalk Pro for a long time and always went to the score screen first and entered each and every note for each and every part. If I didn't like what I wrote, I went back and re-wrote it. Once I've got the music worked out, I find it much easier to then tranfer the info to the right sounds from synths and sound modules. I like to experiment with different sound combinations with music and will eventually find the combo I like a go with that.

 

Before the days of music software, I'd sit at the piano with a blank score sheet and a pencil with a big eraser (Not being Mozart, I had to erase a lot!).

 

So, I guess I'm saying, I always start with the music. Sometimes a basic melody line, sometimes an interesting rhythm that suggests a melodic direction, sometimes an argeggio pattern with suggestive melodic possibilities. But I need to write it out and see it to be sure it'll work.

 

I can't lyrics for anything, so I don't even think about lyrics.

 

[Eric VB]

Well, call me old fashioned, but I like to actually write the music.

Worked for Tin Pan Alley, didn't it? And even a few notable composers before that, too.

 

But yeah, that kind of writing has fallen out of favor to a large degree I think. It's not like you see a lot of rock guitarists carrying around staff paper.

 

Even the current fad of "fake" books are just lead sheets.

 

But if I were scoring a film for string orchestra, yeah, I'd want to get to standard notation as soon as possible. Composing on violin (if I could play one) would be nice, but without a MIDI hookup it might be a pain to transcribe later.

 

There is something aesthetically pleasing about seeing the simplicity of some chord changes with stacked triads and inversions.

 

It's definitely possible to compose entirely by ear, but as you say, it's nice to also be able to write it all out and do a bit of analysis to make sure everything works.

 

Are you still using Cakewalk? Have you tried Finale?

[jsalthoff]

A couple thoughts I've taken from different sources on writing that may be of help are 1)looking for the universal theme in your own life experiences to help you connect with those who will eventually listen to your song. I think you can start with your own life experiences, but dig deep for the universal stuff in that experience that will connect. 2) I find it helpful in the editing stage of crafting to get away from all your instruments and sing your songs especially the choruses with no accompaniment at all. Check your words to make sure they feel good when you sing them i.e. long high notes on nice easy vowels etc. If your melody can shine without any instruments you know you've got something with a great hook that other people will latch on to easily. Think of some of the great melodies like "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" or some Disney stuff. Though some may scoff and call it cheesy, almost anyone off the street can sing it back to you without an instrument and that's certainly a sign of something that has a better chance of being commercial.

 

-Jon

[DonaldM]

[quote=RicBassGuy

It's definitely possible to compose entirely by ear, but as you say, it's nice to also be able to write it all out and do a bit of analysis to make sure everything works.

 

Are you still using Cakewalk? Have you tried Finale?

 

I'm sort of in-between right now. I will be using Pro-Tools soon and I believe they purchased Sibelius, so I suspect that will mean a great score module for Pro-Tools will be forthcoming. But for now, I still go back to Cakewalk, but will likely upgrade those files to Pro-Tools when I'm ready to go that route.

[arneyz]

When I write songs (and I've written more than I can count) I almost always start with the instrumentals. I will be fooling around on the guitar or piaon and out of nowhere a riff or chord prog will pop into my head. I expand it from there, like a spider web, and once I get the instrumentals to fit. I'll play it through a few times to get the feeling of the song (Happy, upbeat,melancoly, slow, etc.) and then I write the lyrics. I usually just sing the first thing that comes into my head and if I like it ill expand on that. Most of my more recent songs have come to existance in this way, sheer luck and inspiration. These songs are usually finished in a day or two. I like these songs of mine best just because they are so natural and they really capture a feeling.

 

A nother way songs are born is totally opposite. I'll be out living and some great hook or phrase will pop into my head (or at least it seems great at the time). Most of the time these don't end up working out because I'll start writing the song with the tune in my head but no instrumentals to go with it and I'll later realize that i can't think of any origional music to go with the lyrics. But I keep all my little hooks even if I scrap the rest of the song.

 

The last way I come up with songs is to just sit down and try to write one. I have to say that this doesn't work. I''ve never actually completed a song that I sat down and tried to conciously write. It always ends up being a rediculous 12-chord progression (to avoid using one thats already out there) with flat, meaningless lyrics. And then I get frustrated and start fooling around and we're back to my first way of writing.

 

I have strict rules about my songs too:

 

1. Never use the basic jazz chord prog.

 

2. I will never write a love song (I broke this one but I will never publically perform or record one).

 

3. Avoid using the words "I" and "you" in the same song.

 

4. No songs about what a great/bad day it is.

 

5. No pointless filler songs.

 

6. If a song sounds too much like another song I've heard it has to change or I scrap it

 

This post is already longer than I intended so I'll stop here.

 

Zach

[Eric VB]

I have strict rules about my songs too:

 

1. Never use the basic jazz chord prog.

 

2. I will never write a love song (I broke this one but I will never publically perform or record one).

 

3. Avoid using the words "I" and "you" in the same song.

 

4. No songs about what a great/bad day it is.

 

5. No pointless filler songs.

 

6. If a song sounds too much like another song I've heard it has to change or I scrap it

 

This post is already longer than I intended so I'll stop here.

 

Zach

Great post, Zach! You could have kept going ... everyone around here already knows I would (and do).

 

Working with rules or limitations can be a good thing. They can keep us on track and focused on writing good songs, not just any old song.

 

I find your rules somewhat interesting. I don't agree with them all, but that' ok, I can still respect your slightly different approach to songwriting. I mean, if there was only one accepted way to write a song and we all had to strictly adhere to it I think songs would become boring rather quickly, don't you?

 

1. I think the "basic jazz chord prog" -- ii V7 I -- is more rampant in keyboard compositions. From the guitar point of view I think "I (vi) IV V" is much more prevalent. But the reason they're used over and over is because they function so well. I can understand, from an artistic standpoint, the desire to avoid cliches. But a pragmatic approach might use the "right tool for the job" analogy and consider a "ii V7 I" to be a hammer, the right tool for driving nails, as opposed to grabbing a saw or drill instead. But yeah, when I play bass along to someone else's keyboard-based composition I expect to have a "ii V7 I" come up at some point, and I am rarely disappointed.

 

The problem is that in Western diatonic music there are only so many different chord changes. If we stick to triads and stay in one key, we only have 7 chords to choose from, one of which (half diminished) doesn't normally see much daylight. So now we've limited ourselves to only 6 chords. The tonic (I) has a special function so we're going to use this one a lot; in fact, we're likely going to start the song on the tonic. Now, it's not a "chord change" if the chord doesn't actually change, so there are only 5 remaining chords to choose from. If we stick to these limitations for all of the songs we write, there will only be 5 distinct harmonic ways to start our songs before we start repeating ourselves. (In reality we're more likely to choose either IV, V or vi as the second chord, so there will be even more repetition.)

 

Now, it's not as bad as I've painted it above, but harmonically there is an awful lot of "reinventing the wheel" taking place every day. A lot of it is unintentional, I believe, because most beginning songwriters don't have enough knowledge of harmony to know when they've "copied" something. Certainly some of it is consciously ripped off from "influences" and usually disguised by changing the rhythm and/or the key.

 

Of course there are chord substitutions, too. If we apply a tritone substitution to change Dm7 G7 Cmaj7 -- ii V7 I -- to Dm7 Db7 Cmaj7, aren't we still effectively playing a "ii V7 I" from a functional standpoint?

 

My point is that it is difficult to be totally original in terms of chord progressions, especially when applying standard music theory. Unless you develop a totally original and different approach like Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique. Then you make artistically original music that has less general appeal.

 

When I was younger I strived to make all my compositions be as distinct as possible, going so far as to choose the key for a new one based on what I hadn't used already. (Of course, back then I wouldn't realize that songs that started C to F and Ab to Db were both I IV. ) I've come to give up and accept the fact that I will write similar chord progressions. As long as I can keep my melodies fairly unique, I'm happy.

 

Back to subject, it's possible to write songs without resorting to "ii V7 I", but I don't feel any less "original" if I end up using it. So this is a matter we disagree on, but that's fine.

 

2. No love songs, eh? To each his own, for sure, but I think that'd make it a lot harder to be commercially successful. Imagine if The Beatles had followed this rule.

 

3. What's wrong with "I" and "you" in the same song? I don't understand this one. A lot of successful songs deal with human relationships, and these often involve both "I" and "you". Unless you want to talk about yourself in the 3rd person all the time. I'd be interested to find out the motivation for this rule.

 

4. Well, after being bombarded recently with Daniel Powter -- seemingly everywhere I went he was being played -- I'll have to agree with you here. (Then again, look at what "Bad Day" did for Mr. Powter.)

 

5. "Pointless filler songs" ... well, that one is pretty self explanatory. There may be some that specialize in these, but I think we all try to avoid them for the most part.

 

Not sure if this is what you mean, but I've come to realize that on the first Led Zeppelin album, the short instrumental "Black Mountain Side" performs wonderfully as a "palette cleanser" between the bluesy/folksy "Your Time Is Gonna Come" and the harder rockin' "Communication Breakdown". Just like those little crackers you eat between wines when wine tasting. But on its own, "Black Mountain Side" is probably more popular among guitar players -- for its "wow, look at me, I can play a song all by myself!" aspect -- than it is among listeners in general.

 

With the death of albums and every song standing alone as a single now, a composition like "Black Mountain Side" would probably not be released.

 

6. Now this one I can totally agree with: not wanting my original song to sound like someone else's (or my own, for that matter) existing song. (Groups like Spin Doctors annoy me because their hit songs sound too similar.) This is where writing as a band is helpful, because there are more ears listening for that "oh it sounds just like that song ..." thing.

 

However, I did find it rather annoying when writing with one guy that was a little too good at that. Everything, and I do mean everything, that started to develop from an experimental jam session was shot down within seconds for sounding too much like something else. Very frustrating! Not so much in that it showed how unoriginal we really were, but in that the compositions weren't allowed the time to develop into something original.

 

The other discouraging part of this is when we develop a song to completion before one of our friends hears it and tells us we've just copied a song we've never heard of. (Or, at least, we don't remember ever hearing it.) I guess you have to treat it like pottery at that point. If you make 100 vases at a setting you can afford to scrap the crappy looking ones. As long as we don't get too attached to any of our songs, we can drop them and move on if necessary.

[Cozmicslop]

I've read and picked up some great ideas here, mostly from a technical or theoretical sense. I also share some of the same artistic practices some of you do. I personalize songs even as I try to distance myself to make the lyrics more universal. If I've learned anything else, that's been the most important.

 

From a musical standpoint, I also usually start with a standard song format. You can always add, but simplify at the start. I'll drop a bridge before I'll shoehorn one in.

 

Most interesting to me is the rules people enforce on themselves. Music is organic. Like eating or sex. You wouldn't eat a hot dog the same way you'd eat a steak. Your not gonna make love to your woman in the same way every time. Why force a structure on yourself before you even begin?

 

The song I sit down to write is almost never the one I end up finishing. I might start with a hook, but if it doesn't lead to a verse right away, I'll stream of conscious, mumble, burp, or scream my way to one letting the feeling of the music take me there. I may even drop it and pull another one out of the verse. I'll start with the last verse and work forward. I'll cannibalize and existing song or lyric or write 8 verses to get to three. Often, I'm thinking more about rhythm and cadence and subdividing beats than I am about chords or even structure most times.

 

However, I face the same artistic/commercial dilemma as anyone else. What's commercial? Then I'll step back and ask myself, to whom? Am I writing this for another artist or myself? That's often where the compromises and self doubt begin. But if I've written it for myself and the music stands up, I'm satisfied and move on to the next one. I test them on different audiences, gage what's good and bad, and make adjustments as I have to.

 

Great thread.

[arneyz]

1. I think the "basic jazz chord prog" -- ii V7 I -- is more rampant in keyboard compositions. From the guitar point of view I think "I (vi) IV V" is much more prevalent. But the reason they're used over and over is because they function so well. I can understand, from an artistic standpoint, the desire to avoid cliches. But a pragmatic approach might use the "right tool for the job" analogy and consider a "ii V7 I" to be a hammer, the right tool for driving nails, as opposed to grabbing a saw or drill instead. But yeah, when I play bass along to someone else's keyboard-based composition I expect to have a "ii V7 I" come up at some point, and I am rarely disappointed.

 

The problem is that in Western diatonic music there are only so many different chord changes. If we stick to triads and stay in one key, we only have 7 chords to choose from, one of which (half diminished) doesn't normally see much daylight. So now we've limited ourselves to only 6 chords. The tonic (I) has a special function so we're going to use this one a lot; in fact, we're likely going to start the song on the tonic. Now, it's not a "chord change" if the chord doesn't actually change, so there are only 5 remaining chords to choose from. If we stick to these limitations for all of the songs we write, there will only be 5 distinct harmonic ways to start our songs before we start repeating ourselves. (In reality we're more likely to choose either IV, V or vi as the second chord, so there will be even more repetition.)

 

Now, it's not as bad as I've painted it above, but harmonically there is an awful lot of "reinventing the wheel" taking place every day. A lot of it is unintentional, I believe, because most beginning songwriters don't have enough knowledge of harmony to know when they've "copied" something. Certainly some of it is consciously ripped off from "influences" and usually disguised by changing the rhythm and/or the key.

 

Of course there are chord substitutions, too. If we apply a tritone substitution to change Dm7 G7 Cmaj7 -- ii V7 I -- to Dm7 Db7 Cmaj7, aren't we still effectively playing a "ii V7 I" from a functional standpoint?

 

My point is that it is difficult to be totally original in terms of chord progressions, especially when applying standard music theory. Unless you develop a totally original and different approach like Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique. Then you make artistically original music that has less general appeal.

 

When I was younger I strived to make all my compositions be as distinct as possible, going so far as to choose the key for a new one based on what I hadn't used already. (Of course, back then I wouldn't realize that songs that started C to F and Ab to Db were both I IV. ) I've come to give up and accept the fact that I will write similar chord progressions. As long as I can keep my melodies fairly unique, I'm happy.

 

Back to subject, it's possible to write songs without resorting to "ii V7 I", but I don't feel any less "original" if I end up using it. So this is a matter we disagree on, but that's fine.

 

2. No love songs, eh? To each his own, for sure, but I think that'd make it a lot harder to be commercially successful. Imagine if The Beatles had followed this rule.

 

3. What's wrong with "I" and "you" in the same song? I don't understand this one. A lot of successful songs deal with human relationships, and these often involve both "I" and "you". Unless you want to talk about yourself in the 3rd person all the time. I'd be interested to find out the motivation for this rule.

 

4. Well, after being bombarded recently with Daniel Powter -- seemingly everywhere I went he was being played -- I'll have to agree with you here. (Then again, look at what "Bad Day" did for Mr. Powter.)

 

5. "Pointless filler songs" ... well, that one is pretty self explanatory. There may be some that specialize in these, but I think we all try to avoid them for the most part.

 

Not sure if this is what you mean, but I've come to realize that on the first Led Zeppelin album, the short instrumental "Black Mountain Side" performs wonderfully as a "palette cleanser" between the bluesy/folksy "Your Time Is Gonna Come" and the harder rockin' "Communication Breakdown". Just like those little crackers you eat between wines when wine tasting. But on its own, "Black Mountain Side" is probably more popular among guitar players -- for its "wow, look at me, I can play a song all by myself!" aspect -- than it is among listeners in general.

 

With the death of albums and every song standing alone as a single now, a composition like "Black Mountain Side" would probably not be released.

 

6. Now this one I can totally agree with: not wanting my original song to sound like someone else's (or my own, for that matter) existing song. (Groups like Spin Doctors annoy me because their hit songs sound too similar.) This is where writing as a band is helpful, because there are more ears listening for that "oh it sounds just like that song ..." thing.

 

However, I did find it rather annoying when writing with one guy that was a little too good at that. Everything, and I do mean everything, that started to develop from an experimental jam session was shot down within seconds for sounding too much like something else. Very frustrating! Not so much in that it showed how unoriginal we really were, but in that the compositions weren't allowed the time to develop into something original.

 

The other discouraging part of this is when we develop a song to completion before one of our friends hears it and tells us we've just copied a song we've never heard of. (Or, at least, we don't remember ever hearing it.) I guess you have to treat it like pottery at that point. If you make 100 vases at a setting you can afford to scrap the crappy looking ones. As long as we don't get too attached to any of our songs, we can drop them and move on if necessary.

 

Alright this is good stuff. I love talking about this topic. Here is my reply, and I will elborate a little more.

 

1. I suppose I don't avoid those basic Chord progressions completely but I don't structure an entire song around it. One way I avoid this basic structure is by spliting a song up into sections. Each section can be completely different from the rest of the song. I will change the beat mid song as well as the key and chord progression. I find this does a good job at opening up more variations so I'm not limited to those seven chord changes you mentioned. And even though they are still used, it doesn't sound like they're being used.

 

Since I am younger I guess I still have that drive to be as individual as possible but I am beginning to realize how little it takes to satisfy most people. Unfortunately what satisfies most people is often frowned upon by many musicians and it doesn't satisfy me. I try now to write catchy songs that are still good showcasees of artistic talent.

 

2. I realize how popular love songs are. But they are so cliche. I just can't bring myself to write one until it becomes necesary to sell my music.

 

3. I like to write songs about other people or substitute "I" for "we". Or write songs without a human subject. I think that is one of the things that sets my music apart from other music. Or at least music I've heard.

 

4. I actually hadn't made this an official "rule" untile Daniel Powter . He kind of made me hate those kinds of songs. (though I guess it wasn't his fault that it was so overplayed)

 

5. I wouldn't consider "Black Mountain Slide" a filler song. It's one of my favorite Led Zeppelin songs. I never realized that transition it makes untile you mentioned it. Great observation!

 

I never buy singls because I feel that an album is the complete work and the songs, while they can do just find standing alone and should be able to, are just part of the real work.

 

6. We agree. I don't really have anything to add. But i do have to say that I am a great example of someone ho drops songs regularly. I've written countless songs over the last few years and I have only FOUR completed songs that I have kept but I am writing am album to live off of so I'm being extra selective.

 

 

[rush666]

Lately and it has been a very negative experince for me, but I will just pick up my guitar and jam, just play anything, for an hour or so. Then i'll sit down and try to write something, but my lyrics have a very hard time flowing with any of my riff's.

[Griffinator]

Sounds to me like you're trying to force pre-existing lyric to fit with pre-existing riffing.

 

Songwriting, no matter what experience level you've attained, is an organic process. Mashing things together and hoping they work is an exercise in futility. Either you have to hear a melody and background music from a lyric, and then find it, or you have to hear words from a riff or progression, and then write them. The most difficult route to a complete song is the one you're describing, where riff and words already exist, independent of one another, and you're trying to force them together.

[mcstrum]

For me its music then lyrics but that is mainly because I am not a lyricist, I am a musician. So that being said, I have always found it easier to write out the music that captures the feel of the type of song I am going for. Then I can go back with some rough backing tracks laid down and drop in some ideas for the chorus and maybe some individual lines or get an actual lyricist to input their ideas and then make changes to the main tracks if needed.

 

McStrum

http://www.dejunair.com

[miroslav]

With most of my songs...I get lyrics and music happening at the same time. Not necessarily the whole song at once, but I will hear a melody, and almost immediately it becomes associated with a line or two of lyrics floating in my head...

...and that is usually what gets the ball rolling on most of my compositions.

 

From there, I just work both lyrics and music together, as much as I can, until I have a very defined direction for the song.

Once I get the chord progression all worked out...and the structure of the song worked out...then I can sit down and worry about adding more verses/choruses and other details.

 

A lot of my songs ARE written in first-personand I do not think that is really bad, as all people listen in first-person, and therefore can identify with the song much easier...as opposed to listening to a song about "someone else".

But anything works...if it's a good song.

Also...a lot of my songs ARE "relationship songs"...and while some may call those types of songs..."silly love songs"... ...love songs generally DO get the most "air time" if you are concerned about commercial success.

Though there ARE many types of other songs that also succeed commercially.

 

I do have other, non-love songs...but right now I'm more focused on pushing out stuff that I feel has a better shot at commercial successthen I can turn my attention to other things once I get my foot in the door.

I also like writing head-music"...Floyd style, and also doing some basic "roots" Rock/Blues...

...but I actually find basic "love songs" are much harder to craft so they do not sound cliché'....

[nursers]

Of course, it's hard not to compare yourself with what's already out there. For example, if I was trying to write a love song I'd use the benchmark as Neil Finn. Hence I don't write love songs

[Griffinator]

...but I actually find basic "love songs" are much harder to craft so they do not sound cliché'....

 

That's because, although "love is a many splendored thing", every possible angle on every one of those splendors has been covered a million times over again.

 

I'm quite convinced that every possible way to say "I love you" in a song (ACK! ANOTHER CLICHE!) has been covered, and most of them so much it's painful to listen to someone repeating them.

[miroslav]

The hard part of "love song" composition...is only the lyric.

 

While most every angle of love-gained/love-lost has been covered...I find that the English language is rich enough to provide new/different ways of talking/singing about the love-gained/love-lost.

 

Also...seeing how much the general population is very focused/interested in relationship stories (just check prime-time TV, movies and the magazine racks at the supermarket)...

IMO, there will never come a time when a well-crafted "love song" has no audience/fans.

[Griffinator]

By all means, Miro, the sheer number of songs that still include the most hideous and egregious cliches ("My tears fall like rain", "I'll be there for you", etc) that still crash the pop charts are a sure indication that the general populace really doesn't give a shit if your love song is creative, original, or interesting. They'll buy it if it's got a singable hook and plenty of syrup.

 

I, personally, refuse to lower myself to regurgitating other peoples' lyrics in order to sell a piece of music.

[caro feat charli]

I'm jumping in here as a new member and new to this thread but for me it has to start with a great lyric, then some great chords and melody. I've posted a song up on icomposition.com 'Goodbye Pain' as artist philharding for an example.

 

xPhil

=======

[miroslav]

But you know Grif....sometimes tears DO fall like rain...

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with saying something that's been said before, if you can personalize it for YOUR song.

 

I too try to avoid the more predictable rhymes and phrases when I am writing lyrics...and I will sometimes spend hours with a Thesaurus and rhyming dictionary looking for ways to say things differently.

But...if "My tears fell like rain" is truly *THE* line that works for that song, I'm not going to avoid itJUST to avoid it.

 

Plus, I think if you are writing "popular" music (your MOR Rock/Pop/Country...etc)...IMO, it's about trying to make YOUR song easily accessible to the general population, and if you make things too cryptic...they just WON'T get it.

Oh sure, if they sit down and analyze/examine the song, most people will figure out what you are saying even if it is rather cryptic...but, (IMO)...a really good song has to just "wash over" you without too much effort required to "get it" or to find some personal connection to it.

 

And again, thats why its hard to write easily accessible music that a lot of people are guaranteed to likewhile at the same time avoiding the clichés.

Writing off the wall stuff is actually quite easy, IMO. Letting your imagination run free and doing what I like to refer to as head music.

I enjoy that toobut I find that type of music is often narrow focused and maybe interesting only to a niche groupthough every once in awhile even the weirdest stuff will break out and go general public.

 

While I can write in a variety of stylesmy current goal is to focus on some general population musicstuff that is very accessible and easily identifiable for many people, and music that has a lot of cross-over potential rather than just some chiseled-in-stone style.

I am looking for one or two (hopefully more) of my current project songs to break through and end up in a very commercially viable situation.

Then I will worry about pushing some of my more esoteric stuffwhich I also happen to like doing quite a lot.