Song Structuring..

I have a samba version of Rhapsody in Blue that I'm recording. Normally on a jazz tune like this you play the song through, then everybody takes turns soloing, then you return back to the head and that's it. A B A form.

But on this tune I'm doing a few minutes of solos, then the head, and then back to a few minutes of solos. You could call that B A B form.

There's been some great 1 chord tunes (Low Rider, Shotgun and Lime in the Coconut come to mind) and what makes the tune work is that the arrangement, the order of what happens isn't boring, it changes color enough without more chords. I really admire when someone can make a lot out of very little.
 
lyrics are usually the last part i write for a song.

I sit down with my guitarist and we hammer out the riffs, talk about progression from each part to the next and if we need to create drum fills or guitar licks to accommodate time changes or sharp changes in sound/dynamics.

the once the lyrics are written we really, really, really, focus on dynamics.

would coming out of the chorus straight into a breakdown be better than chorus to verse? and how we can only probably do that in one song before it becomes boring.

Verse chorus verse chorus Solo/breakdown/bridge chorus

is widely used because it works. it's simple progression that is easy to listen to.

If you can keep the structure different on every song, you've done pretty well for yourself... but it's pretty hard to do. the unique changes stand out so much that if you do it again anywhere else then people will call you formulaic.

as a band you want to be unique and avoid being shackled in, like "oh they sound like Red Hot Chili Peppers"

I like to have my guitarist write around 6-8 different riffs for a song.

from there we can still use a verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus structure but instead the verse riffs change so it keeps the sound fresh.

it becomes verse1/chorus/verse2/pre-chorus/chorus/verse3/breakdown/pre-chorus/chorus/alternate-chorus

where we would take the chorus at the end and play it slightly differently, 1/8 notes instead of 1/16's triplets instead of 1/8's or 1/4's etc. strumming instead of palm muting.

and drum changes can always make all the difference in the world as well. there's really a plethora of options available to song writers in terms of structuring their songs. Verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus is a sure bet to make a simple song sound good... it's tried and true.

but I find some of the best music ever written follows a structure dictated by what the song needs, not something forced upon for it to be "finished" or meet a certain length. 3:30 comes to mind....
 
I guess I don't really have a normal structure I go to. Except I have noticed that a lot of my songs at least start with the chorus. I actually tend to hold back on making a lot of choruses because I like them so much, so it makes me want to listen to the song again. Like a drug. When there's too much chorus it's not as special.

I've had a couple times where I've only had the chorus twice. I've been thinking lately about seeing what would happen if I got the chorus down to only being heard once, if it's even possible to do that and keep it catchy. Would that even be called a chorus then? Dunno. I do enjoy putting things in different places and messing around, however it's easier for me because I'm doing electronica and I don't have to do things like rerecord a guitar or anything... :-/
 
Multitracking in my opinion was the single most important event in songwriting, though it wasn’t apparent at the time. The likes of ordinary folk like John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Ray Davies and Pete Townshend and others writing songs certainly went a long way towards breaking the mystique that surrounded songwriting. But multitracking meant that people didn’t have to sit at a piano and come up with complete songs like they once did. And as time has passed, being able to write songs has become indivisible from recording them. Songs of many genres are written, not necessarily to be sung around the piano or campfire but to be recorded. Church is probably one of the few arenas left where the writing of songs for people to sing outweighs the need to have them recorded.

Technology has even allowed people to go one stage further and write in sections, before putting the whole lot together or even to collaborate with people in different parts of the country or even different countries. It almost goes without saying – there are many ways to write songs.

It’s difficult to say exactly how one’s songs are structured because different songs are structured in different ways. It might be useful to focus on particular songs for those that are looking at this thread and wondering......

Who would’ve thought so much mileage could be made of verses, choruses, bridges, codas, intros, outros etc ? But it can.
 
While I think it's important to find the type of structure that works for your songs and songwriting, sticking to that one type of structure is an easy road to getting stuck in a rut. You should force yourself every now and then to explore different structures, scales, time signatures, chord changes, etc that don't come naturally to you. Even if the result isn't something you'll put in your portfolio persay, you should every so often just jump out of your comfort zone and see where you land.
 
Just jam on the idea and whatever progression comes natural is probably going to be the best natural choice for the song.



9 times out of 10, if it sounds good the first time you are playing it...it will probably be best portrayed that way in its final rendition.
I've found this many a time. While I've become a little more deliberate in my songwriting as the years have gone by, most of my initial efforts came from jam sessions. I'd always tape my jams and as I'd be listening back to them, there would often emerge huge sections of a 90 minute jam that I'd think, 'this would make a great song'. and so I'd learn the section, be it 5 minutes or 20 and then that would be the song. As they were often on bass, I'd then have to think them through and figure out what else was going to be happening in there. But unless I added the odd intro or outro or extra bit, they would often remain intact literally as they had come out.
When I come to record the songs, if they're long pieces {and many, possibly most, of mine are} I'll record them in sections. I don't play in a band or anything like that so there isn't time to spend rehearsing a 15/20 minute piece {I used to try that alot}. But when taken in sections, you can actually play a piece through until it's retained and ready to be recorded.
Although many people say that you should have some idea of what it will sound like, I rarely do. The magnificence of what's in my head is rarely replicated in real life ! Besides which, other players can often bring something to one's song that the writer completely overlooked or just never conceived of.
 
When I used to write alot, I found myself getting stuck in a rut with V C V C solo C...with that formula, I could put out a large number of merely mediocre songs. I now find myself writing significantly less, but more inclined to experimenting with song structure-moving solos and bridges around changing around, pushing back the chorus, writing another verse/different chorus as an outro, etc...the result being, in my opinion, much stronger songs.
 
Very first post

My writing is very subconscious, as in I'll hear something
I like when playing my guitar then words just flow, it kind of
Writes itself, it always seems to make sense to me in the end.
I joined this site by the way as I'm about to start up my own
Recording, I love the advice and tips you people give, I'll
Definitely be back asking and annoying ha ha , great site,
Love being among musicians. Rock n roll
 
I have to say I don't follow any pattern either when it comes to songwriting.
I tend to get a melody, an idea and then I just follow where it seems to take me.
I have to say I go with the 'feel'.
I know this isn't a very scientific way of explaining it but Songwriting means so many different things to so many different people.

http://www.somojo.net/Steven_Jackson/
 
Free style

The way I write my songs is I usually freestyle with the beat of my choice and that is how I come up with the words to a song. The only promble I have is I sometimes repeat myself in the second verse. So it take it takes me from an hour to a day to get the second verse to sound not so repetitive. If any1 have a better way then this let me know.

Thanks the 1 and only RE.
 
Interesting about Get Behind the Mule. It is monotonous - yet, it would carry the party.

My biggest problem I face is, getting a rhythm structure which makes good verse but finding how to structure a chorus, as a chorus is similar in pattern but yet is so different from the verses?
It comes naturally when playing only sometimes and not at all everytime.
It's also hard when practising to go from a neat new chorus you just invented back again to where the verse was.
It's easy to get one good riff but hard to fit all the pieces together.
 
I write to the exact same structure of queens bohemian rhapsody - to the bar. Every single song has the exact bohemian rhapsody structure...

Or do I? XD

Who cares I suppose :)
 
Human beings have been exposed to two part song form(AABA) since the inception of performed music(church etc.). Being a trained musician, I have no problem with freestyle but most human beings feel comfortable with basic two part song form. The freedom within this form is almost endless with the choice of chord progression, meter, and rhythm patterns.
 
the unstructure

I prefer the "no structure" structure all in progression. That, alone with my singing has been my most criticized aspect of my recordings. I like to make it unpredictable and have each listen offer more of what was missed. Maybe why I'm the only one who listens to it but i still get thrown off by my songs.
All Human Beings want to listen is "Fun and Recognizable" ... Love it right away, and don't really have to listen or pay attention.

Structure is most definitely the back bone but should also be flexible and not only stimulate the hear but the mind as well.

Notes and chords are easy to come by, I always get strung out over the structure. Structure makes or breaks a song.
 
i follow the prototypical verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus type structure

however, for some reason on some songs, i like to put a big finish that's a refrain that revolves around the chorus chords but incorporates a different melody and lyrics than the chorus.
 
I think overall, structure is really all about progression. The typical intro/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus/chorus/(outro) structure does this perfectly, while adding the element of repetition (and thus familiarity) perfectly.

1 - The intro, which potentially introduces the theme of the chorus sans-vocals right from the start
2 - Verse 1 takes the energy down and sets the stage for the chorus
3 - First chorus sets up the eventual payoff at the end
4 - 2nd verse drives the lyrical story and gets you excited to hear the chorus again
5 - 2nd chorus reaffirms your understanding of the song and builds comforting familiarity, yet also just borders on a little too much of the same, which perfectly sets the stage for...
6 - The bridge, which gives melodic variation to the whole song, and builds the final energy towards the...
7 - Final double-chorus, which you should know by now and should be singing (or at least humming) along to (optionally, if the bridge didn't vary the melody enough, this would be a good time for a full-step-up key change, although this was overdone in the 90's
8 - (optional) Outro, possibly to tie in with the intro and give the song a bookend feel.


That said, "the pop formula" isn't the only way to write songs that progress and repeat, it's simply the most obvious. Subtlety in structure is a huge part of what separates different genres/subgenres, and can even define the overall character of a band. For my music, I've always been a fan of repeating melodic or rhythmic themes that are often noticed only subconsciously during the first few listens, due to slight (or not-so-slight) variation in tempo, mode, or arrangement. When done properly, this tends to give each song its own character, which can be somewhat difficult in the context of a 40-60 minute metal album (which very often has little-to-no variation in the instrumentation). One of my favorites is introducing a minor-mode melody line, and repeating it later in the song in a major mode, often with a half-time rhythmic variation in the drums and an additional major-mode melody line.


It's interesting; a lot of my views on songwriting stem from a fictional quote by Robert McKee in the movie "Adaptation" on script/story-writing:

"I'll tell you a secret. The last act makes a film. Wow them in the end, and you got a hit. You can have flaws, problems, but wow them in the end, and you've got a hit. Find an ending, but don't cheat, and don't you dare bring in a deus ex machina. Your characters must change, and the change must come from them. Do that, and you'll be fine."

...which you can easily adapt to songwriting, if you're a little creative:

"I'll tell you a secret. It's the ending that makes a song. Wow them in the end, and you got a hit. You can have flaws, problems, but wow them in the end, and you've got a hit. Find an ending, but don't cheat, and don't you dare slap on a haphazard, out-of-nowhere "epic" ending, with the expectation that it'll make up for the lack of structure preceding it. The character of the song must change, whether in a lyrical sense, or a musical sense (or both), and the change must feel like a logical progression. Do that, and you'll be fine."

Not a perfect translation/adaptation, but I've found it has helped me write songs that I like.
 
I use Midi Drum loops to inspire creativity. I find a beat I like, then noodle around on the guitar until I get a tone and riff/lick I like. Then it seems like everything else falls in place around it. I sometimes find myself going back and restructuring some things, but that's alright. I don't usually stick to a format, but I usually incorporate:

intro (sometimes)
verse
chorus
verse
bridge (sometimes)
chorus
outro/post chorus (sometimes)

I tend to feel things out to reach my end product. I don't like to let structure always dictate what I do. Music is soul and the soul must be felt (if you achieve that) then structure doesn't really matter!
 
First, Let me say I am one of the slowest songwriters on the planet. I am my own worst critic and therefore the rewriting process can go on for years, no kidding. That being said, I have finally crawled out from the rock I was under and gone digital. This has reignited my creativity just because it's cool to have new toys to play with. I may seem to be getting off subject, but stick with me.
First, I get some song or part of a song recorded then I usually forget about it within a month or so. Then I go about my normal life until one day I write something else that somehow reminds me of that old melody. After search my cluttered mind and apartment, I may, or may not find what it was I recalled and then realize it may or may not fit with what I just wrote. Sometimes I rewite the old to fit the new, or visaversa. But I find having two or more parts that "struck" me at different times, in different ways, makes the "whole" sound more interesting. The structure seems to make itself as the parts coelesce around each other and my constant self criticism makes me switch stuff around.
Getting back to my earlier point, having new VST instruments is a great way to take old stuff, write it to midi and mess around with what it sounds like on other instruments, which could end up making a whole new part, bridge or whatever. Oh well, I guess I've rambled on enough, Good Luck!
 
Yes there are some artists who use the same structure over and over and over again. Their milking it. Either because of their producer or they just milk what got them there. A few bands come to my mind also and I myself hate it. Every song sounds the same to me. The teeny boppers probably love it and they do spend money on it. That's another reason I guess.
Let the song take you to where it's going!!! I start out musically with a concept that I like. Maybe 1,2, or 3 chords I like together. This might be a verse or a chorus. Then I go to the drum machine and find a rhythm that complements what I want for the sound. I then look for chord progressions that will go with the verse or chorus I already have. Then search for bridge chords if you want a bridge. During all of this I constantly ask myself, what does this feel like, in relation to lyrics. I rarely write them at this time but sometimes I may have a line or two for it or even a chorus but not to often. But I think that having that feel for it lyrically always helps. I pretty much use this process all the time and it usually works for me. I said usually. I don't think there is a perfect way. It's what works for you. You need to have a feel for it and let it take you.
 
The song goes where the song wants to go.

Usually I start with my chords, what ever chords Im feeling at that time. then I play around with them for a while, singing whatever words come into my head and structure just takes shape. I have noticed I 'produce' songs a little more now. for example: I've started a project writing/producing a "summery" ep. I want to do the typical singer songwriter thing with it, just my voice and guitar with a little sparkle here and there. simple as cheese and crackers. So i try to keep the songs short and sweet, and the structure to match that. Im also working on releasing an album, which is a little more 'comercial' so when Im tracking, structure is a concious thourght. asking myself "is this boring?", "does this work?", "is that verse too long?", "does that extra chorus bring the final song length too long?".

basicly speaking, I write a song structuring it how the song wants to be structured to work well, after the actuall songwriting stage, usualy after guide tracks are layed down but before anything solid is tracked. I put my producer hat on, and work with how the end product will be recived and how I can best implicate that.
 
Back
Top