Breaking the ice on songwriting here at the U

[Frodo]

We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Go to Amazon.com's Home Page

That's okay. I've seen the Zollo book before. Very good stuff.

So, Phil-- how do YOU conceive of your original music? Certain that I've heard some of it, is a lot of your stuff consistently Beatley, or was that the result of a more or less whimsical moment of inspiration? A departure from the norm?

[philbrown]

We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Go to Amazon.com's Home Page

That's okay. I've seen the Zollo book before. Very good stuff.

So, Phil-- how do YOU conceive of your original music? Certain that I've heard some of it, is a lot of your stuff consistently Beatley, or was that the result of a more or less whimsical moment of inspiration? A departure from the norm?

Sorry about that link. Just google Paul Zollo I guess, I'm having trouble getting a good link.

Hmmm, I appreciate the question very much and has certainly provoked some thought this morning!

I'm a little self-concious to start talking about me and my songs, I'm pretty weak in the self-promotion dept (to a fault I'm told). That last song I posted *very reluctantly. On the other hand it's a bit of a private party here (with a few lurkers I presume) so what harm? And you're the moderator so I'm assuming I won't get yelled at or anything

The song I posted was definitely the most ridulously-Beatly of all but a lot of that came in the recording/arranging stage from a very strong-willed producer as much as me and the song- and there's a whole topic for another day. Where does the song end and arranging/production begin?

There was the 70's rock period (in the 70's), 80's rock period, kind of a Beatly-XTC period, a Nashville period trying to sell songs... cowriting/producing a couple of singer-songwriter folks, writing a few instrumental Irish Bazouki songs for grins, and the last few years mostly way out there experimental electronic stuff. But what about today? That's what I'm trying to figure out as we speak!

Let me think about this some more, maybe upload just a couple of things and whittle my thoughts down to a few hopefully interesting on-topic paragraphs.

[Frodo]

This might be indirectly related to songwriting, but here goes:

http://www.something-books.com/

Look inside:
http://www.something-books.com/template.html

[philbrown]

Does anyone know af a search engine where you can plug in a song title and find out who the songwriter is?

[kinnylandrum]

It's not quite the same, but almost without exception if one goes ot allmusic.com and enters the song title, all song with that title will less all recordings and the composer(s)' names are listed as well.

[philbrown]

It's not quite the same, but almost without exception if one goes ot allmusic.com and enters the song title, all song with that title will less all recordings and the composer(s)' names are listed as well.

Excellent, thanks Kinny.
I should have known either you or Frodo would answer that :D:D

[philbrown]

Song of the day

I've played a lot of gigs and played in various kinds of venues and genres but something happened with the following song that I have never seen before or since.

It's called "One of These Days" written by Monty Powell and made famous by Tim McGraw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puUArVeMMS8

Playing solo acoustic in a loud bar I've seen people multiple times brought to tears (literally) from this song and generated much enthusiasm and just generally connected with people. It wasn't me 'cause they weren't crying over any other songs I was doing, and it wasn't the arrangement or guitar solo or whatever because it was just a guy singing a song and strumming chords. This song has an emotional power I have never witnessed elsewhere. Obviously the words are the main thing, but even with great lyrics you've got to have it ALL going on to get that kind of rise out of people.
--------------
And yes I'm chickening out on posting my songs. No offense to chickens intended of course.

[kinnylandrum]

Hey Phil,
I will listen to this tomorrow when I get the chance. But I have to tell I have become a MAJOR Jellyfish fan. Best "new" band I've hard in a long time. ONLY good band to come out of the 90's, right? Well maybe that's unfair. Thanks for introducing them to me.

[philbrown]

Hey Phil,
I will listen to this tomorrow when I get the chance. But I have to tell I have become a MAJOR Jellyfish fan. Best "new" band I've hard in a long time. ONLY good band to come out of the 90's, right? Well maybe that's unfair. Thanks for introducing them to me.

My pleasure. Their recordings are excellent quality so that part holds up over time, thankfully too, besides the music. I have other good music that doesn't hold up so well in that regard.

Jellyfish were so good live it was kind of mind-blowing, especially the vocals. I saw them twice, once in concert warming up Tears For Fears and once at a medium sized club in the front row. The casualness of the drummer/singer, considering the material - he makes it look too easy!

[Phil O]

I've been away on vacation and just got back, so I apologize for entering this thread so late. Great thread folks! I'm afraid I don't have much to add as I'm the world's worst historian (history was the only course I flunked in high school). My brain has a real problem with historical facts. I've had to check out most of references you guys have made on Youtube because I can't recall the structure of the songs you cite...but I digress.

Much has been said about structure, but Phil B brings up the importance of lyrics. There seems to be as many lyrical styles as there are song structures, and often the genre dictates the style. C&W tends to lean toward story telling, metal tends to be more free form lyrics with some general theme, and there's everything in between. While we're talking Beatles, one of my favorites in terms of lyrical structure is Yesterday. Yesterday is the first and last word of the song (brilliant!), and the music supports the lyrics so well. I think the lyrics should tell a story, but the music should tell the SAME story.

But which comes first? The chicken or the lyrics?

Phil

[kinnylandrum]

I think the lyrics should tell a story, but the music should tell the SAME story
Phil

Actually, in the words of John Lennon, "That is I think I disagree." In many ways I think lyrics often work best when they work AGAINST the music. It's very common in rock and roll to have dark lyrics with a happy pop tune. Steely Dan, Ray Davies, Lennon himself; many examples too numerous to mention. The other way doesn't seem to be as prevalent, but maybe someone can list some examples.

I also think one of the main differences in pre-rock and post-rock songwriting is that in the old days primarily the tune came first and the lyrics were written to it. The prime example of this was Larry Hart with Richard Rodgers, or Johnny Mercer with anyone. In fact I often think that the reason Richard Rodgers' tune went downhill so much with Hammerstein is that generally Hammerstein wrote the lyrics first. This probably had to be, since he usually wrote the books of the musicals as well. But I think Rodgers then phoned in his tunes.

In rock it's often the opposite, with the lyrics coming first, but I don't think this always leads to good songs. I think then the lyric structures tend to be too samey and sing-songy and the lyrics themselves too dense and not very singable. Maybe that's why the best rock songwriting teams write together, words and music at the same time in the same room. Of course early Elton John and Bernie Taupin were the exception, since the lyrics always came first, but I wouldn't give Bernie Taupin high marks for structure, nor for especially interesting and accurate rhymes.

I heard an interview with John Hiatt, one who you might think writes lyrics first, when asked which came first he said the music, always the music. And then there's the famous Sammy Cahn line. When asked the same question, his answer was "the phone call."

[kinnylandrum]

It's called "One of These Days" written by Monty Powell and made famous by Tim McGraw.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puUArVeMMS8

I watched this video, and while it's a nice song, two things bother me and they are both related to lyric structure, the subject of the post I made before this. One is the use of off-rhymes. I know that's in fashion these days, and of course my new friends Jellyfish are guilty of this too. But here there's just too much of it in the second verse and the last chorus. "Ring" and "rain" don't rhyme and neither do "dreams" and "whispering".

Plus the songwriter Powell sets up an expectation in the first verse with a structure of AAAB, CCCB, DD where the two Bs are the short lines "like me" and "you'll see". Clever and VERY hard to duplicate in other verses. Then he doesn't even try in verse 2.

Also, although I much admire the craft of the lyrics in the first verse, I don't agree with the sentiment. Yes this kid is being bullied. So does he REALLY expect these guys to turn around and love him. Maybe feel sorry or ashamed but will they actually LOVE him. I doubt it.

Sorry but that's just my opinion. Meanwhile I'm going back and listening to Jellyfish. One of the things I love about their lyrics is the way they sound. Sometimes people worry too much about what lyrics say and not how they sound. As Sondheim said, the difference between poetry and lyrics is that lyrics exist in time and poetry exists out of time. Very key to me.

[philbrown]

I'm busy with work but enjoying this thread still.
Welcome Phil O! Thanks for joining the conversation.

I brought up "One of These Days" mainly for the emotional side of things, but very glad lyrics have come up as a subtopic.

Kinny your lyrical criticisms of 'One of These Days' are by the book correct. I admit "rain and ring" is pretty bad rhyming by even loose songwriting standards. Sammy Cahn in his Rhyming dictionary is very strongly opinionated about such things, a "Redneck of Rhyme" if you will. [I'm having a bit of fun and this is with all due respect] In a perfect world "One of These Days" would have both perfect rhymes AND the emotional response. But given my experience related in my post above in regards to the emotional response of listeners to the song... I guess my question would be- would you sacrifice the emotional connection the song has with the listener in order to acheive perfect rhymes, if given that choice? Hypothetical I realize. Also, other than songwriters, poets and English teachers, how many in the audience are even aware of rhyming rules and to how many does it matter, even if they were aware? Zooming out a bit, at what point do rules and dogma stand in the way rather than enhancing? I'm not arguing for bad rhyme but more "where does one draw the line?"

My personal pet peeve more than imperfect rhyme is the forced rhyme. If I think a writer has used a word only to rhyme and no other reason then I'm immediately thinking "AMATEUR!" I'm going blank on an example just now...

I have another area of lyrics I'm wanting to discuss but would rather stay in this area for now and hear what you guys have to say. This is great fun and very stimulating in the best way for me.

[kinnylandrum]

Hi Phil,
I more or less believe in going by the book. My operating principle is that a prefect rhyme is always preferable to an off rhyme. I also believe that, when going for a choice between what a lyric says and how it sounds, I'll generally go for how it sounds. And I don't believe I'm alone here.

However I'm not inflexible about this. I understand once Randy Newman and Sondheim were on a panel about songwriting together. Evidently Sondheim turned to Randy and said "I'd never rhyme girl and world, would you." And Randy, typical of him said, "sure why not?" I've now somewhat modified my operating principle and have a new rule, such as it is. If the first consonant following the vowel of the last syllable is the same, it doesn't matter about any following consonants. Or another way of saying it is, if it's alright with a bluesman, it's alright with me (to quote another world class rhymer).

A forced rhyme I guess is bad, and Ira Gershwin in particular was often guilty of that. But I would never lower my standards because the public will buy it. You can always aspire to rhyme like Sondheim or Larry Hart or Cole Porter or Jimmy Webb without lowering your standards to just say, well as long as it sounds OK, it's fine.

Just my two cents, and I'm afraid that I'm increasingly tilting at windmills (what does THAT rhyme with?).

[Frodo]

... I guess my question would be- would you sacrifice the emotional connection the song has with the listener in order to acheive perfect rhymes, if given that choice?

I agree with the assertions that a perfect rhyme is more preferable to an off rhyme...

..but to contribute to the answer at issue: no, sacrificing emotional content is wholly unacceptable. That's the whole point of a good lyric, imho. But this can also serve as strong motivation to re-examine other options of finding other ways to word out weaker lyrics with stronger ones that might have an emotional impact equal to or exceeding what was originally conceived.

One technique I enjoy from time to time is an elided rhyme. Take the end of a verse and the beginning of a chorus-- as an example:

... with the setting sun
... I'm betting

That one of these days...

(please forgive the re-application of the McGraw hook-- this is just an off-the-cuff example for the sake of discussion...)

With all due respect to context, the elision sort of breaks of the predictability of the original:

... as he walked way
... I heard him say

One of these days...

An elision displaces the rhyming problem of ending the verse in perfect rhyme where the pay off can be slightly delayed until the chorus begins. Sometimes it can create a stronger link between verse and chorus-- or one verse to another-- or a chorus and bridge-- or whatever two sections may be at issue. It could also be used internally within a verse or chorus or bridge.

Hope I'm making sense.