In light of some recent......uh, debate about it, I thought we might have a discussion about what it is that each thinks makes a good composition and completed tune.

I'll start with this thought:

So that we may not get bogged down in the mire of semantics, we perhaps should define our terms. The dictionary defines perfect as "being without fault or defect."

So, going with that definition, to my way of thinking, there isn't any "perfection" in music. If there was, I would think there would only be one genre of music composed only one way.

If one asked a classical composer of say the 18th century what their thoughts were about rap or perhaps eastern music and the stuctures and harmonies used they would most likely poo poo it.

I recall in one of my early college theory classes in college having written a somewhat Avante Gard jazz piece for a recital, the prof. said "We call that Chinese harmony." He was a traditionalist trumpet player.

So, do we have to temper what constitutes a "good composition" by:

1. The baggage we bring to the table?

2. Our understanding of the genre we are listening to?

3. Our receptiveness to other than what we like or expect to hear?

Being a fan of the fine arts (paintings) I recall the impressionists Degas, Monet, Van Gough were not allowed to show in the salons of their day, because their new style of painting was unacceptable. Purple in the shadows? Pointillism? Blasphomy! This is not painting.

Salvador Dali or Picasso....what planet are they visiting from anyway?

So the point is, are we open enough to new compositions or a different way of composing, or are they just wrong or incomplete?

OK, someone else's turn.
jam on,
Terry


------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 06-27-2003).]

I really dont think this question can be fully answered. There are so many different kinds of people, cultures, in this world that influence the music we hear. To make a statement of what is a good tune is very very difficult because everyone likes something different then the next person especially in Music. Sometimes even songs that don't sound good to "YOUR" ears will be the greatest song to another person.We all percieve a tune in a way that is personal to us as individuals. Music comes from within and thats where the hard part in answering this question lies. It's the same with all the arts, music, painting, acting, etc etc. When you can just see thru the artform and understand what the artist is saying this is the start of the process. Remember whats "GOOD" to you may not be "GOOD" to the next guy.

Donny, you express exactly my point and I agree with you 100%.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

Someone else defined this answer exactly:
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
There is no way that ANY piece or art is better or worse than another. It is a question of WHO likes it...or IF anyone likes it, for that matter. If only the artist likes it ..... that's still a viable audience, although the chances for financial renumeration will be difficult.

My money will never be spent on a Picasso, but I adore some of the finger paintings on my fridge, made by my kids. Biased? maybe, but it's MY taste, and it's "my perrogitive". (Maybe the only sensible thing that Bobby Brown ever said)

Art is trendy. It's volitile and subjective. Maybe that's why the artist's are so complex. We all share an inner passion to express mood with media, but in doing that, we open ourselves up to a barage of controversy. As comfortable as I am on stage ..... I respect the stand up comic more than any other performance artist. That, my freinds is FRIGHTNING ! Just a mic between you and the lions .... yikes !

My small suggestion to the writers is to write from the heart. Forget the hooks and the beats, unless you are trying to make money. I believ that a song needs to stang alone before it can please the masses. If it's written well, with feeling and continuity .... maybe others will like it as well.

Look at "Send in the clowns"
Not a very logical, or predictable piece, but so many people love it. It's a game of chance - played with the writer's feelings. I salute you for making the effort.

Dave a very valid point here in that in composing our music one of the great dictators of how we compose will be who it is we are composing for. If for the buying public and a record deal then we very much must listen and compose to what is hot at the moment. On the other hand, if we are composing art for arts sake, then we have much more compositional freedom.

I don't know how many recall Yoko's album sure did sell allot of copies though.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 06-27-2003).]

Here are some good starting points for writing a great song:

The song must evoke or provoke a feeling within the listener, something they feel speaks to them. Often the listeners interpretation of a song has nothing to do with what the composers original idea was but that isn't really important, the fact the song is able to mean something different to each listener is all that matters. Remember, if you aren't feeling the song the listener probably won't either.

Don't beat a dead horse! If you have to consistently work on a song over and over and over again chances are its not going to be the masterpiece you think it is. Ask any good songwriter and they'll tell you their best song practically wrote itself. If you re having trouble with a song, step away from it for while, come back to it later, and see if any new ideas come to you.

If the song has lyrics the listener should be able to be easily understand them without too much thought provoking. Simple and straightforward is often the best way to get your point across.

The song must have something truly memorable about it. Often this is the melody line although it could end up being a solo, certain sound, or even a rhythm. A catchy melody or riff that the listener can walk away humming will almost certainly make them remember your music for quite some time. Most "hits" have a memorable melody line.

The production of the song must be done well enough to hold the listeners interest for the entire song. Too little production means the listener will get bored too quickly, over production can cause the listener to tune out even faster. Knowing that fine line between the right production and over produced is a difficult one to learn and a common mistake amongst most songwriters who try to produce their own music.

Keep the song short and sweet. While 15 minute tunes from the likes of Yes, ELP, and Genesis may have done OK in the 60's and 70's that doesn't fly today. Its pretty difficult to get your point across if nobody is able to hear your music. No radio station today will play a song that exceeds 5+ minutes so take that into consideration of you want the masses to hear your music.

Make sure your arrangement is interesting. Like it or not there is a classic formula for making a song and the intro-verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-verse-chorus-chorus-out formula still holds true. Sticking to this formula isn't a must but it can help in making a better song.

If your song has vocals the delivery of those vocals is extremely important. Singing with heart felt emotion is a must and if you intend to sing your own song be certain you have the vocal ability to get your idea across. If you don't have great pipes, consider hiring a vocalist who can do your song justice. Nobody likes to hear seriously out of tune vocals no matter how great the song may be.

If you can write a good song but lack the musical ability to play and record it well, hire someone who can do that for you. Knowing how to put the song down in a manner which is appealing is important. If that means hiring musicians, a producer, or an engineer by all means do it. If you believe in your music strongly enough then spending a few dollars so that you can have a well done project that you can show others is quite beneficial.

Be your own worst critic. Remember, if your song isn't of the same caliber as what you hear available commercially chances are you need to keep working on it to make it better. Being able to be honest with yourself as to whether or not your song has what it takes to make it in the real world is a difficult thing to do. Not every song you write will be good, many will be stinkers, and if you are lucky enough some may become the standards of tomorrow.

Writing the song is one thing but bringing all the elements together to make the song a finished product is another. Once the song has been written and recorded now comes the hard part, marketing it so that you can allow others to hear your works. Radio airplay is hard to get and even harder to keep. If your song is catchy, has something unique about it, and can hold the listeners ear, chances are you'll have a hit on your hands and a song that may be around for may years to come.

After looking at the profile for Ensnareyou, I find out that he is a record producer. This will account for some of his beliefs in terms of "saleability". I accept the fact that most "sales" companies, whether related to the arts or not, are in business to make money. Not a bad thing, but not an artistic viewpoint either.

Many composers and artists create for the creation, itself. The rewards are glorified with financial support, but the product is made with artistic content as the driving force.

I urge all who write to do so with the emotion of a hermit. Look within your soul, and deliver a product that reflects what you want to say. Forget the pop trends, the hip lingo, the slang, the satire ... forget it all, and write the feelings that you wish to express.

If you want to sell these products, then you need to apeal to the masses, but don't follow anyones "rules" for writing a hit. Chances are - they have no more hits than you do.

Real emotion is hard to come by, and almost impossible to hear in todays hit music. Tell your story in a way that people can relate to it, and people will listen. Audiences LOVE story tellers.

Good luck, writers. Keep them words flowin' !

The music itself, instrumentation, melody, arrangement, etc. is what grabs my attention and interest. I pay less attention to the lyrics. Guess that's why my CD collection is largely instrumental music.

Uncle Dave Wrote:

<<<<
After looking at the profile for Ensnareyou, I find out that he is a record producer. This will account for some of his beliefs in terms of "saleability". I accept the fact that most "sales" companies, whether related to the arts or not, are in business to make money. Not a bad thing, but not an artistic viewpoint either.
>>>>

Dave,

I am a record producer and engineer but I am a composer first and foremost. I write songs because that is my life. I don't do it because I make money with it I do it just because its something I have to do, sort of like breathing. Yes, I am successful at what I do but that doesn't mean my beliefs will be different because of it. First and foremost is to write a song that is heart felt. After that producing and engineering it to the best it can be will only help to get your point across better. If it happens to be well received, great. If not, my feelings certainly aren't going to be hurt. I wrote the music just because, not because I thought it was going to be a hit.

This is more to my point of view for songwriting and is how I go about creating my work as opposed to the more commercial view given by ensnareyou.
Terry


------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

Great ... we have some common ground here, and lots of positive comments on "why to write". Keep it coming folks.

Well, let me disagree a little (by the way, I do think that Ensareyou made some good suggestions here) --------Anyway, I do think that one can evaluate a song, or a performance, with more than just whether or not you happen to like it. One of the songs on the Akai collection is a deeply sentimental song, performed in a very emotional style. This is waaaay too sweet for my taste, and makes me uncomfortable hearing it. However, I have to concede that it is well written, well produced, and for the style, well sung. My mother would love it, and no doubt many others will too. I can judge this a "good song" even though I don't like it. On the other hand, I really like blues music in all of its' forms. But I heard a new blues recording that was a "bad song", because it did not convince me. The lyrics, the vocal performance, the guitar licks----all just going through the motions. I did not feel for one moment that these performers were loving what they were doing. Instead, they were loving the IDEA of what they were doing, they wanted to be a blues band, wanted to be "stars" at whatever level. This is the acid test of your own music----would you love it if it was not your own? Do you love it for itself, or do you love it because you did it? Uncle Dave loves his kids' artwork, but would he love this same art if it was NOT by his kids? When I first started writing, I actually got mad if anyone did not like my songs. The thrill of creating something new was so intoxicating that I was sure that if I did it, it must be great! I was sure that my critics were wrong. But with time I came to see that these early songs were pure crap! I was fooling myself because I wanted to be a writer. When I could finally hear them like they were someone elses' work----I hated them! That's OK, we have to start somewhere, but the point of this rant is that "good " and "bad" have some objective validity beyond our own preferences. People can sling paint on canvas and say that it is art and you can't prove otherwise, but that don't make it a Michaelangelo! Art is about connection----with each other, with what is eternal, with what is universal to the human condition. People, at their core, have not changed from the days of Shakespeare, which is why those works are timeless. If you do some music that really moves YOU, then the chances are excellent that it will move others too. And THAT is a "good tune" -----Rant over!
Bill

Bill,
how beautifully phrased! I think that you have summarized my point of view as well.
Andrea

After reading the flames and missiles from some of those previous posts regarding TrT Jazz and the ensusing flames and missles in the counterattacks I have to say and conclude for the most part that I appreciate Ensnareyou's comments and the "reality check" he provided not only to TrT Jazz but to all of those on this Forum. His reasoning and explanations although somewhat rough around the edges by his sounding a little caustic at times in his replies during his dissertation, yet I don't think he was trying to be that way.

Reading your comments was really eye opening and I don't believe you were trying to belittle anybody but just pointing out some hard facts. And a good book I know says that "Open rebuke is better than secret love." In other words instead of kowtowing to something that may or may not be all its cracked up to be, instead you let it be known that something is possibly amiss and you want to correct that error and notion by pointing it out. I think you were right on in saying that a person might need to step back and re-evaluate the situation and to try and "listen" to what is being said. That goes for me too.

You know, they say that only a true friend has the audacity to speak his or her mind and tell you what they think regardless of the consequences. To do less, would, I think, make that person not really a true friend. As long as what is being said is constructive with the intention of helping although at first it may not sound or seem that way to the hearer. We can all learn from others not only on this Forum, but in everyday living. What we have to do is "glean" the good from it, use it for our betterment if possible, and enrich the lives of others because of it. Again, I want to say thank you for providing that "reality check" to me too. I am no record producer, just your average Joe who has some Musical experience and ability and who wants to grow in that ability and hopefully touch others in the process. Every insight I can get to achieve that goal should be welcomed. I count it a true privilege to have a record producer as one of our Forum members and for you keeping us wannabe's on the up and up.

Best regards,
Mike

Bill & Mike,

Interesting thoughts both, though I tend to both agree and disagree.

I think Dave and I are coming from an artistic point of view while others may come from a more commercially viable point of view. Those are two vastly different approaches. It does not mean they cannot be mixed and are mutually exclusive, however as it applies here they are exclusive.

IMO a true artist creates art fot art's sake and the financial rewards that may or may not come from it does not enter into the equation. VanGough is the perfect example of this (however out there in left field he may have been). The general public's or anyone else's acceptance of the work has ZERO to do with either the quality or validity of that artistic work. Again Van Gough...

The next thing is we as musicians are coming from a totally different place than the general listening audience is coming from. Once someone becomes involved in something and becomes technically proficient at something they loose the ability to JUST enjoy something on a totally emotional level. We are watching and listening for what riffs, progressions, mixes etc the artist is doing rather than a neophite who just watches, hears and says "cool tune." We have a more advanced way of listening to the work and try as we might we cannot get away from that, because it now is part of what we know and who we are.

I think an artist must first and foremost connect with themselves and what they wanted to say, if the general public and peers then like it and connect to it, then that's the icing on the cake. If it is commercially viable beyond that, that's the cherry and whipped cream on top of it.

In short, I do not believe art is definable, however commercial art is.
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html

[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 06-28-2003).]

Hmm...
as I said before, I tend to agree with what Bill wrote; I think that every form of art, at its deepest level, is an universal language and, thus, must be able to speak to everybody, more or less, depending on the degree of perception the listener has developed.
Frankly, I don't believe into the stereotype of the artist who lives on the top of a mountain, looking down onto the outside world which is unable to understand what he is trying to say.
At a compositional level, to me the real "art" is not a rational process, but has more to do with the left side of the brain, i.e. the so called unconscious, the intuition or whatever you call it.
You may or not like them as human beings, but I consider Paul McCartney, Elton John, Phil Collins, Billy Joel great songwriters, whose songs reach deeply into the listeners.
Elton John once was asked, during an interview, to explain his composing process; his reply was, more or less: "I usually sit down at the piano and start to play; if nothing good comes during the next 20 minutes I quit, because I know that it's not going to be a good day".
This, more or less, is on the same level as Paul McCartney saying that he woke up one morning with "Yesterday" already written in his mind.
(...frankly I believe that he put some work also in the post-dreaming phase...)

Two final remarks for my friend Terry: if someone asks for an opinion about his songs and someone else (like Scott) takes the time and the pain to reply in a constructive way, you cannot simply say "That's the way I compose", because then Scott (or anyone else) could reply "Fine, then why did you ask for an opinion?"
I know that Terry has a desire to leave a musical legacy behind, but I have a feeling that sometimes he is priviledging quantity over quality. Some of his songs are remarkable, but he simply leaves them there, kind of rough and unfinished (to my ears); like Scott once wrote, they are more sketches of musical ideas, but Terry unfortunately does not take the time and the pain to perfect them. He is entitled to do so, but then maybe Ensnareyou gave him a good advice, writing "hire someone who can do that job for you"; Terry then replied that he is not interested into the commercial aspects of the music business.
I have a feeling that something is missing here; two weeks ago, Terry posted on the SVPWorld Forum announcing his new CD (Jungle Jazz); after a while, since nobody replied, he wrote:

"Not even one comment after 5 days?
OK for you guys/gals I guess I won't listen and comment when you post new tunes either then.
Terry"

So, dear Terry, it seems to me that if you choose to play the role of the artist who does not care about the world and its rules, you should be coherent and not ask for other people's opinion; on the other hand, if you do that, this means that you DO care for what others may think of your music and then you should also accept their opinions and their constructive criticism.
Personally, I owe a lot to all the critics I have received on this Forum, and I owe a lot especially to Scott, whose candid remarks -albeit a bit irritating at first because did not flatter my ego- really helped me to correct a lot of mistakes.
Andrea

Andrea,
While I could post rebuttals to most all of what you have said here, I'll just leave it alone, and take the target off my back.

This is the only thing I will comment on as long as you have chosen to throw it in my face:
Not even one comment after 5 days?
OK for you guys/gals I guess I won't listen and comment when you post new tunes either then.
Terry"

This comment I made is all about the mutual support of one member to another not about accepting my work. If we post and expect answers to those posts then I feel when others post we are obliged to acknowledge those posts as well. It's all about courtesy more than about acceptance. Apparently the bit of sarcasm got lost in the translation to you. Look at the comment again, does it say ok, if you're not going to listen and ACCEPT my work then to heck with you? No it doesn't it just says, hey when you post you expect some sort of response, is it then so unreasonable that I should expect the same? You know, "do unto to others as you would have them do unto you."
Terry

------------------
jam on,
Terry http://imjazzed.homestead.com/Index.html



[This message has been edited by trtjazz (edited 06-28-2003).]