Solo studio artists: Write all the songs first or produce as you go?

[-]

This question is directed towards anyone who is writing and recording by themselves...

 

Let's say you're putting together a 12-song album for possible CD or MP3 release. You're writing, playing, and recording everything by yourself. What is your method regarding writing and tracking? Do you...

 

* Write all/most of the songs first, practice all of the songs without recording them to see what's working and what's not, and then do all of the arranging/producing/mixing?

 

Or...

 

* Write one song, practice it for a while to see if it's going to have lasting value to you, record and mix it, then move on to writing the next song?

 

I'm currently using the second method, but I'm wondering if it isn't slowing me down in some way. For me, writing a song takes *far* less time than producing/mixing it. I find myself *not* wanting to write a new song -- even if I'm feeling inspired to write one -- because I don't feel like I got far enough along producing the previous song I did.

 

What's your method of working, and what are the advantages/disadvantages you've found with it?

 

 

This message has been edited by popmusic on 05-12-2001 at 03:39 PM

[Steve LeBlanc]

I've found my best tunes are written with a single instrument (ie. Acoustic Guitar, Piano) and arranged later...I think I get good results this way:

 

http://www.besonic.com/stephenleblanc

 

but I don't really do solo stuff anymore...I have a lot more fun with a band.

[spookmuzik]

It is kind of cool to have all the songs written first. That way you can have a sense of how the whole record goes together. Also you find one song doesn't go with the others, you just put it aside for the next project. Play the songs live if you can, get feedback from others. A good setlist which keeps 'em interested might determine the song order on the record. For me, I find writing and recording to be different beasts mentally, and its just easier for me to do one then the other. Of course when you are tracking stuff you might change things again, and experiment with arrangements, but your starting point is there. YMMV

 

Julian M

[WFTurner]

I write mainly with a guitar.

 

I hold to the old philosphy that a well crafted song should

be able to convey itself just as strong with one voice and

an instrument, such as guitar or piano, as it would to a whole

arrangement and production. Once I have the lyrics set so I

can keep the flow of the story and start having fun with it

on the guitar then I start thinking of the arrangement.

 

As far as the writing/producing conflict you bring up, the

writing part of it all, the muse, is flighty and often times

unpredictable and when it shows up it gains the focus.

 

The arranging and producing, once the skills have been learned,

for me seems easier to turn on and off.It's easier to pick up

where you might have turned it off.

 

That's me.

 

 

 

 

------------------

William F. Turner

Guitarist, Composer, Songwriter

[ricknbokker]

Right on Mr. T.!!!!

 

To bad everyone doesn't use that very same philosophy.

 

I'm not claiming to be some kind of genius or something, but I know exactly what I want from the song before I ever start with the red light.

 

I know every guitar part, keys, drums, vocal arrangement, fills, etc, etc, before I ever record any of it. It is rare for me to catch anything 'in the moment' while recording. I mean, it happens all the time, but it usually ends up being an idea for a future project rather than the one I'm working on.

 

Sorry I can't be more help to you. Best to have your *hit together right from the get-go, I always say.

 

Steve

[fantasticsound]

As far as the writing/producing conflict you bring up, the

writing part of it all, the muse, is flighty and often times

unpredictable and when it shows up it gains the focus.

 

This is the crux of the matter. When an idea springs up, are you going to ignore it, or flesh it out? When the muse hits you, it doesn't always focus on the song you are consciously working on.

 

Read the liner notes from Kenny Loggins, Leap of Faith CD. He talks, in depth, about the writing process on various songs. The most interesting anecdote, to me, is when he explains that on a deadline, namely the following day for his latest child's christening, ANOTHER idea forced it's way out. He sat there in the middle of the night insisting he couldn't concentrate on another concept, as he had only a few hours to finish the christening song. To paraphrase his words: Like babies (being born), they both came out together.

 

If production is a difficult process for you, it's going to take some time. I'm not a good songwriter. If an idea avails itself to me in the middle of another song, as a solo artist, I HAVE to get it down in it's entirety while the mood hits me. Otherwise it's lost forever.

 

I understand there is a point at which you'll need to finish production to complete a project. Don't miss a great song opportunity, though. Like you said, it's all you. That leaves it to your descretion whether to digress, or ignore your inspiration.

 

Neil

[Anderton]

It's more like I "harvest" a CD -- I'm always working on something musical, and sometimes it all fits togtether. However, I also work from a more coherent base sometimes. For example, one CD was entirely based on my live performance act circa 1998-9. I just took the tunes that people liked best, and remixed them into something presentable.

 

The CDs based on movie soundtracks are the same way. I put together the sound track, then take the best stuff and remix.

 

I don't think there's any one method. How you create changes with your experience, how the rest of your life is going, who you work with, the weather, etc.

[the stranger]

Mostly #2.

 

This seems to best way for me. Plus, I usually going in a whole lot of different directions at once.

I just go with the flow and record everything. I do write songs and go from there, but the path from what was written to what is recorded is littered with improvisation. And I usually do write songs from a composing standpoint (as in I can hear all the parts), but cool ideas tend to spring up during the recording process, so I go with the flow.

 

Of course, I'm real compulsive, so I can't exactly say what I may be doing musically from day to day. Too many ideas, too many possibilities. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif (I'm thankful for this everyday)

 

I was in the middle of putting the final touches on my recent project. I got totally sidetracked on an Acid (the software) thing. I have almost a whole project worth of killer beds to lay some guitar ideas on. Three days of no sleep, but I was inspired. I have to go with where the muse is.

The week before I was on a drum kick. I waas really clicking on the drums, so I was going with that. All these little side roads and detours tend to make certain projects wait, but in the big picture I get more accomplished and I end up more fulfilled.

I just go with the flow. If I'm not inspired doing one thing, I do another. I don't force anything. If the vibe isn't there, it isn't worth recording.

(Unless of course you're just recording ideas....mandatory!)

 

So yeah, number 2. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Thank God I'm not paying for studio time. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

[Chip McDonald]

Depends.

 

Does it matter if it has a consistent production style?

 

One of the coolest CD's put out I think was the Smashing Pumpking's _Pisces Iscariot_ release of Corgan's demos from different times in his career. It's interesting to hear how his gear changed and his methods. Some people don't want that, however...

 

The last CD I did started out as a lark, and because of that it screwed up the sound of the whole because I couldn't get too far away from the first couple of recordings - which were done haphazardly and fast. So I ended up with an ugly compromise in the end because of it.

 

I think it's probably always a good thing to wait an mix later. The perspective that time gives is invaluable, and the consistency of the sound will be better. You less likely to get locked into a sound.

[GZsound]

I write like a crazy person. I do all my songs from a keyboard into my computer using MIDI. I never think about what the song will end up sounding like as I'm writing. I have songs I wrote in the early 80's that have held up well and I eventually decide to make them "radio ready" by writing words or laying down lead tracks. Other songs just come out in complete form. I write for my own CD's and also for my rock and roll band so I write anything from the blues to jazz to new age.

 

I always try to get it stored in the computer so I have a good basic idea of how the song goes. If we jam a song in rehearsal, I'll write it into the computer using midi and get the help of my drummer and bass player to create what they are doing. That way we have a good quality practice song that we will remember the next time we rehearse. It's also easy to loop a section to practice lead work or harmony.

 

Since I never know if a song is going to have words, have the melody be played completely on my sax, or be a multi instrumental tune, I always write the song first and decide later what to add.

 

I think everybody writes differently since it depends on which part of your soul has the inspiration.

 

------------------

Mark G.

[WFTurner]

>>>I think it's probably always a good thing to wait an mix later. The perspective that time gives is invaluable<<<

 

Jeez ain't the truth. I was laying on the couch yesterday morning

listen to mixes when a tune I had about 4 long long days in and

shouldn't have even tried a rough mix on and did the night before came up and I thought I was gonna go into cardiac arrest. It's scary how something

can consume you for days on end and you lose total focus.

 

It is true songs are like your children.... and when you're in those final

stages of a project, they're like children in their late teens, you kinda wish they'd just go away till they finish growing up http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif

 

 

 

------------------

William F. Turner

Guitarist, Composer, Songwriter

[Hippie]

I write on an acoustic guit. mainly, sometimes piano for a different perspective, (piano is my 2nd instrument). I try to get something groovin, just by myself, then, if worthy, introduce my band to it, and see if that helps the song "do more" of what I'm trying to get at. I normally get the basic tracks down with bass, drums, and rythm guitar, and then build upon the basic take(s), that has the best feel, by doubling parts, re-doing vocals, adding solos, etc. So, I guess I do a combination of both, live tracking and over-dubbing. This seems to work out best for me.

 

Live long and prosper V,

-Hippie

[Bubbajazz]

I'm kind of back and forth. All my stuff is instrumental, and my background is as a solo and ensemble piano/keyboard player. I've gotten in the habit of writing with the tape/sequencer on, mostly to be sure and capture any fleeting magic (and boy, does it fleet.) Kind of a digital scratch pad.

 

If I decide on second/third listening that an idea is worth developing, then I start, mostly again on sequencer, then to tape.

 

It's funny, though. This thread has me thinking I really should go back to the acoustic piano/pen and paper for a while, and see where it leads me. I've found the sequencer to be invaluable for helping develop an idea quickly, but I have had some great stuff happen with just me and my 88 friends. Hmmm...