Acoustic only -- Would you do it??

  • Thread starter Thread starter mjr
  • Start date Start date
mjr

mjr

ADD -- blessing and curse
Probably a dumb question.

I'm thinking about "retooling" my CD, and making it all acoustic (just me and my guitar). If I intend to sell this CD, should I even do this?

Also, I've got a question about song lengths.

I was working on a song over the weekend, and I left off a verse and the song was over 5 minutes long. I figure if I actually add in the verse, and change the structure a bit, the song will be 6-7 minutes long (or longer). It's a slow country ballad (refer to this thread for the song). I'm not really expecting any radio play, but I was just wondering if I should limit the length of my songs.

I'd like thoughts on this...
 
I guess it depends on what your priorities and aspiratrions are.

I do whatever sounds good with all aspects of the song (length, composition, instrumentation etc). Some songs sound 'right' at 6-7 minutes, or even longer. Conversely if I feel a song's repetitve or going on a bit I chop bits out.

Some songs sound at their best with one vocal and a guitar, some sound better with all the bells and whistles.

To me the number one priority is doing what's good for the song. I have to say I like a stripped back sound but that's just my personal taste.

As far as track length goes you could always do 3 and a half (ish) minute edited versions of your more radio friendly tunes in case radio play ever becomes an issue?

Otherwise just do what's best for the song.
 
I agree with Kevin. If you're shooting for radio play, there are some "rules," but whatever works is fine for everything else. It may help to think about things from the listener's perspective. A 2 minute instrumental intro may really help build the song, and is possibly appropriate for prog-rock, but it also may be boring to the listener and would definitely not fly on contemporary pop/country radio. This is one area where I've found myself editing a lot of my songs. Can I do a 4 bar intro instead of 8? Do I really need that instrumental break after each verse/chorus? etc.
 
scrubs said:
I agree with Kevin. If you're shooting for radio play, there are some "rules," but whatever works is fine for everything else. It may help to think about things from the listener's perspective. A 2 minute instrumental intro may really help build the song, and is possibly appropriate for prog-rock, but it also may be boring to the listener and would definitely not fly on contemporary pop/country radio. This is one area where I've found myself editing a lot of my songs. Can I do a 4 bar intro instead of 8? Do I really need that instrumental break after each verse/chorus? etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not really shooting for radio play with my CD. I just want people to listen to it, and if they buy it, great.

Anyway, the song is three verses. The intro is a G, Em, Am progression, once through, I'm not sure of the tempo, I didn't calculate it. I did verse, chorus, verse, chorus, chorus, and the song was over 5 mins long. If I restructure it and go verse1, chorus, verse2, chorus, verse3, chorus, you're talking something like 6-7 minutes. The instrumentals are short, basically the G, Em, Am progression once through, just like the intro.
 
There is a nitch audience for Acoustic/Vocal only CD's.
I think it has the potential to do well.

-Luke.
 
demensia said:
There is a nitch audience for Acoustic/Vocal only CD's.
I think it has the potential to do well.

-Luke.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping so. My guitar playing isn't stellar, so I'm hoping the singing and the lyric content can overshadow it a bit.

The way I figure it, I've got 75 minutes to work with.

I don't want to mislead people, because my CD will be primarily country, but if it's all acoustic, I don't want people thinking it's something it isn't, so I've got to brand it appropriately.

Any other thoughts?
 
I think I'd get bored listening to a CD that was just a vocalist and a guitar, even if it was really good stuff.
 
Have to agree with apl. Although I'm a solo acoustic guitarist that does'nt even sing. If you have to 'hide' your guitar playing behind your vocal and good lyric, I'd suggest using at least a few other instruments in most of the songs where you're not that proficient on the guitar. But nothing eloborate. Just bass and maybe some drums. Maybe even try a cello in the bass line.

Then on the pieces where the guitar playing is not that important, then just slap on your vocal to the piece.

Can't help you on whether it will sell or not. I've never even tried to sell my stuff yet. And to radio play... ha. I'd have no way to answer that one. Although I am being played on a station on the internet where I have no music. Still don't understand that one. :confused:
 
There's definitely a market for it, if it's good enough, though. I mean, Dashboard Confessional (yes, I know, emo, eww, just hear me out), 'The Swiss Army Romance' album was huge, and that was just guitar and vocals. Depends on what you want to do with it.
 
Personally, I could listen to an entire CD with just acoustic guitar/vocals, as long as the songs were (really) good and they didn't all sound the same.

I think adding some piano to an acoustic song can really add a lot. Harmonica also, but that may not be in your genre, I haven't heard your songs.
 
Not Rocket Science

I do all-acoustic for folks all the time. There's a lot better chance of a solo artist selling CDs at a coffee house gig than there is a rock band trying to get the drunks to decide between their bar tab and the music they've barely listened to all night. But, I do those too, so...

http://www.myspace.com/electrohickproductions

The Kim Starlin tune is on a six song EP that's coming out as soon as we get the art right.
 
I think everyone is looking at this in the same way.

Can a CD be intereting and enjoyable to listen to with just a voice and an accoustic guitar? If the songs are great, the voice is interesting and/or has quality tone and the guitar playing is stong enough to support the song - then maybe. If any of those three things (songs/voice/guitar) are weak, then most people other than loved ones and close friends would not enjoy listening to 30-60 minutes.

There are few performers that could carry an entire CD in that format - a song here and there, maybe - but 12 - 14 songs, highly doubtful.

Song length - certainly the "commerical rule of thumb" is no song should exceed 3 or 3 1/2 minutes - however, there are several great songs that are much longer than that. Again it depends on the quality of the song, the voice and the instrumental performance.

Only you can determine (if you can really assess your work professionally and with a reasonably critical, inpartial view) how good your CD can or can't be. If you feel you can be pround of the final result - then perhaps that is the most reasonable standard to strive for.

Anytime I record (other then intitial demos) I try to create something that I believe could qualify for air play and something that I could have even the most talented and critical of my musical associates listen to - and if it is not good enough to pass that criteria, I go back to the drawing board.

Hey, I just realized, maybe that's why I never manage to get anything out on CD :eek:
 
mikeh said:
I think everyone is looking at this in the same way.

Can a CD be intereting and enjoyable to listen to with just a voice and an accoustic guitar? If the songs are great, the voice is interesting and/or has quality tone and the guitar playing is stong enough to support the song - then maybe. If any of those three things (songs/voice/guitar) are weak, then most people other than loved ones and close friends would not enjoy listening to 30-60 minutes.

There are few performers that could carry an entire CD in that format - a song here and there, maybe - but 12 - 14 songs, highly doubtful.

Song length - certainly the "commerical rule of thumb" is no song should exceed 3 or 3 1/2 minutes - however, there are several great songs that are much longer than that. Again it depends on the quality of the song, the voice and the instrumental performance.

Only you can determine (if you can really assess your work professionally and with a reasonably critical, inpartial view) how good your CD can or can't be. If you feel you can be pround of the final result - then perhaps that is the most reasonable standard to strive for.

Anytime I record (other then intitial demos) I try to create something that I believe could qualify for air play and something that I could have even the most talented and critical of my musical associates listen to - and if it is not good enough to pass that criteria, I go back to the drawing board.

Hey, I just realized, maybe that's why I never manage to get anything out on CD :eek:
Click to expand...

Ok, good points!
There's actually a link to one of my songs in my signature. Not the one I'm inquiring about here, but one of the other ones I've recorded with guitar, electric, bass, and drums.

I've been thinking of doing as you suggested, I have three or four (of 10) songs I could potentially do with just guitar.

I'd like to think the lyrics I write are at least decent if not good.

The other inquiries I've made into this song have varied, and have been pretty much split down the middle. Some say "yes, it's too long, cut it down", and others say either "It's fine that way" or "it's your song, it's your art, you do what you want with it".
 
Im about to release a Acoustic album. Just me and my guitar, two mics and one take. Works for me. I wouldnt buy it, but then i dont have to! :)
 
gummblefish said:
Im about to release a Acoustic album. Just me and my guitar, two mics and one take. Works for me. I wouldnt buy it, but then i dont have to! :)
Click to expand...

Ah! I know what to do...I'll just add the word "Unplugged"...

Instead of acoustic...it's unplugged!

It's a marketing difference! I'll sell more that way!

:) :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top