How do you write music in a band situation?

[jamtheguitarman]

ok, lets get the brief history outta the way.

Im in a band with three freinds. Three of us are pretty big Dream Theater (prog rock/metal) fans and have similar tastes, or at least used to, ill get to that later. The other guy (keys player) just joined. hes a brilliant player and hes ok with the music too. more of a Muse type fan though, which is ok.


everyone in the band is pretty talented.
the original three of us have been in a band for like 5 years now or something. we used to just play the old classic rock covers in school and stuff, not really a proper writing music band. the last 2 years weve taken it up a notch and have tried writing our own stuff. we have one brilliant song, not being bigheaded or anything , it just sounds awsome! we also have a couple of others songs which are good but not as polished. This has taken us countless practices and writing sessions to come up with the material weve got. it just takes AGES!!!

WE used to all be huge Dream Theater fans and have very similar tastes in music. however, the bassist, who along with me is really the driving force behind the band and the writing, is now less into our kind of music. hes a monster radiohead fan (the rest of us hate them) and seems to have a slightly different idea of the band now.
Im ok with trying to fuse lots of different genres together and creating something original, as is he, but even so we still seem to view things alot differently now than we used to. incidently, we are both pretty much perfectionists.


anyway, to cut a long story short.

HOW THE **** DO YOU WRITE MUSIC TOGETHER??

with everyone having different ideas of how songs should sound, people having different techniques of writing songs. how do we all sit down in a room and have a productive writing session?




this applys to all bands out there who write music together, how do you do it? what do you do to get past the differences in opinions? what writing techniques do you employ, i.e jamming or sitting and working things out?

does it just take years and lots of practice to start producing more material faster? do you just all have to be exactly on the same wavelength to be able to do it?



cheers for any help!

 

[MrStitch]

Very good question, Radio Head sucks by the way.

Anyways, I'm in the same boat. I'm an old school guitarist that found new life in the Clutch 'Blast Tyrant' CD (the greatest album of all time, i swear), the drummer likes Godsmack and similar, the bassist is a big Danzig fan, and the singer is more like Guns 'n Roses. How about that for a mess!

We all like each others music, but some tendancies for people come out in practice making a mess of things. Since my new band literally just started, we haven't come up with anything as we're also planning to do covers, which is where the focus is right now.

I guess the important thing to know is who the singer is, and what they plan on singing like. You can write all the music you want, but if that guy aint feelin' ya, then you'll be able to tell when they sing, making your hard work turn into a pile of crap.

So, as a rule of thumb, I fall back to the basics. "Shawn... give me a beat!". Then I come up with something that I know the singer will have at least a general interest in. Then after that we'll figure out how fill in the gaps, fine tune, blah blah blah.

I read an interview with John Meyer (spell check that), and he mentioned that 'No matter what, you finish the song you started. Even if you think the song is terrible, just finish it. Otherwise, you're nothing more than a dabbler, someone who toys around with instruments for fun. You can't be truely creative until you've completed a song, and then moved onto the next one."

I think there is a lot of truth in that. I've come up with hundreds of awsome riffs, but in the end failed because I never followed through. I think if I just kept going, then I'd be much farther ahead than where I'm at right now.

Good luck, and pass some luck to me.. .as i'm hurtin' too.

 

[Elton Bear]

I'm in a ska band with 2 guitars, drums, and trombone - we've previously had sax and trumpet as well, and we're still looking for a decent bassist - but with the 7 people we had in the band at one point it's a bitch to write!!

The way we do it now is that our singer/guitarist writes the songs, then I meet up with him to refine them (add my lead guitar bits, change a chord here or there, maybe sketch out some horns parts...) Then we play it to the rest of the band, so everybody has their input bit by bit.

That system really works for us, speeds things up, and means that 1 person can write a whole song and bring it to rehearsal without cutting everyone else out of the writing process.

 

[andyhix]

As tempted as I am to scold you for your radiohead comment, I'll refrain and just answer your question. For us, anyway, one person (probably me 75% of the time and the other guitarist 25%) comes up with a basic gist for a song - chords and lyrics for a chorus and a verse or two. Then the song is presented at practice, and played over and over until the other instruments are added for those parts. THEN, once everyone is on the same page as to the general feel and idea of the song, the band as a whole can expand on those first few ideas - add a bridge, change from strumming chords to picking a melody, rearranging the etc.

But you are maybe playing more complex stuff than us, and I could see where it might be difficult to create a song as an individual that is going to translate well to the band situation. I'm sure the interplay of drums and other instruments, etc., might be difficult to anticipate or imagine sitting on the couch at home in your free time.

Final comment - Who cares what your bassist likes? Is he willing to still play in your band? Or is he trying to change the whole feel of the music by trying to get the rest of the band to change too? If he's willing to thump along with you, then it shouldn't matter. But if he is trying to change everyone to make the band sound more like radiohead, then you should can him. But it's just bass. It's not gonna change the whole feel of the music that much.

 

[jamtheguitarman]

I guess the important thing to know is who the singer is, and what they plan on singing like.

we dont currently have a singer. we were basicly waiting until we've got a decent set together and then do the search for a singer thing (which im sure will be a whole other nightmare!)

That system really works for us, speeds things up, and means that 1 person can write a whole song and bring it to rehearsal without cutting everyone else out of the writing process.

this seems to be the way alot of bands write. it certanly sounds like the most hassle free.

As tempted as I am to scold you for your radiohead comment, I'll refrain and just answer your question

hey, never said they sucked, just i really dont like them

But you are maybe playing more complex stuff than us, and I could see where it might be difficult to create a song as an individual that is going to translate well to the band situation. I'm sure the interplay of drums and other instruments, etc., might be difficult to anticipate or imagine sitting on the couch at home in your free time.

exactly, thats were the trouble for us trying to write things on our own and bringing them is. most things sound kinda crap when your just sitting at home with a guitar.
You can try and come up with all the parts in your head to get a better feel for it but then your back to that whole thing of trying to convey those parts to the other members who may hear it all differently.

Who cares what your bassist likes? Is he willing to still play in your band? Or is he trying to change the whole feel of the music by trying to get the rest of the band to change too?

well, hes like my best mate and him and myself are kinda the two people who come up with the ideas for songs and then arrange them.
he is also the guy who arranges most of the practices, he really really wants a futre for our band.
hes not really trying to get us to change forcefully, its just he hears songs and such in his head a little differently than me.
he really wants to take the band somewhere and attract mainstream audiances, which means playing stuff I generally dont want to play, along with the other band memebers.

I am all for combining genres and creating something new though, but i just dont want to write stuff just for the sake of it attracting mainsteam audiences.



also, another thing were this difference of opinions comes out is in the name deciding.
we still dont have a proper name. He wants to have a name that attracts lots of people who wouldnt normally listen to our music, but i was making the point that that is a marketing nightmare. you attract people who like the name who wont give the music a chance, you push away people who would like the music because the name doesnt appeal to them.



i think we can make it work, its just going to take a little work and a decent plan.

 

[Gidge]

Jam, if you are gonna make it as an original band, you guys are gonna have to sit down and define what YOUR sound as a band is.....you can come from different influences and tastes and meld into one band......and if you cant do that, its time to find someone else......

 

[djhead]

get this:
drummer's into hatebreed
one guitarist is into coal chamber
other is into incubus
bassist is into an plays literally everything
Im into punk rock.

I hear we end up sounding like Crossfade (who is that, anyway?)

We usually went around the leade guitars ideas for hooks, but i like the the "hey durmmer, give me a beat" and finishing it approach.

 

[chazba]

Trying to write as a "commitee" can be disastrous. There has to be one guy whose creativity and musical vision place him (her) in an undisputed place as leader. Anything else is gonna result in the sound and feel being very diluted
and diffused (de-fused) There are some notable exceptions and I'm sure that you can come up with lots of bands who prove me wrong on this point.
But if you think about it, the most remarkable music has been the product of the spark and creativity of ONE GUY backed up by talented and loyal players who dig his music. IMHO
I hope this will stimulate some discussion, so FLAME ON....


chazba

 

[jamtheguitarman]

But if you think about it, the most remarkable music has been the product of the spark and creativity of ONE GUY backed up by talented and loyal players who dig his music. IMHO
I hope this will stimulate some discussion, so FLAME ON.

i think thats true with alot of mainstream music, but quite a few bands who i listen to (prog/jazz genres) seem to write alot together.

i guess there is no one formula for a succesfull band.

 

[Gidge]

Trying to write as a "commitee" can be disastrous. There has to be one guy whose creativity and musical vision place him (her) in an undisputed place as leader. Anything else is gonna result in the sound and feel being very diluted
and diffused (de-fused) There are some notable exceptions and I'm sure that you can come up with lots of bands who prove me wrong on this point.
But if you think about it, the most remarkable music has been the product of the spark and creativity of ONE GUY backed up by talented and loyal players who dig his music. IMHO
I hope this will stimulate some discussion, so FLAME ON....


chazba

no flame but i think it probably happens like that less than you think.....even if one guy in the band thats the "creative" guy and does most of the writing, most notable music has a big name producer stepping in and really doing the magic to the songs.....which is why he makes more than the band.....

 

[Gidge]

and look at all the music that is the result of partnerships.....Elton John/Bernie Taupin (sp?), Lennon/ McCartney, Bon Jovi/ Richie Sambora..........

 

[MrStitch]

My two cents... again.

The above is right. There has to be some sort of head area, which is where I reside I guess. As long as I have the backbone, then I'll dream the music. Then we force the singer and bass player to fill in. Repeat as needed for fine tuning.

However, one thing that hasn't been mentioned is consistancy, in relation to multiple albums.

A perfect example is Metallica. James and Lars did most of the music back in the day, where James was the final word. They kept that formula for several years until Bob Rock came along (damn bastard), and James started getting older. The result was that the master at the helm changed and more writing power handed over to Kirk, Newsted, etc. Granted, some songs were good, but because of change in formula, we all got practically a whole new band.

Then Saint Anger came out and no one knows what the fuck happened. At that point I think James lost all interest in running things and was just fucking around while people followed. Never mind the fact that Bob was still there screwing shit up. Isn't he fired now?

/rant
/two cents

 

[Layla Nahar]

I read an interview with John Meyer (spell check that), and he mentioned that 'No matter what, you finish the song you started. Even if you think the song is terrible, just finish it. Otherwise, you're nothing more than a dabbler, someone who toys around with instruments for fun. You can't be truely creative until you've completed a song, and then moved onto the next one."

John Meyer is John Meyer and you are you. It may be that you need to write 50 sketches in order to get to one song. Don't worry about it. The worrying about if you are doing it right will get in the way. #2 - Don't worry about writing songs with your friends. You can't make magic happen. Find people you like to play with, & something will come of it. Good luck

 

[blueroommusic]

Trying to write as a "commitee" can be disastrous. There has to be one guy whose creativity and musical vision place him (her) in an undisputed place as leader. Anything else is gonna result in the sound and feel being very diluted

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement....I've been in many many original bands since I can remember, and have always more or less, except for a few instances written all the tunes...IMO you have to have a leader that essentially creates, because like you said it sounds diluted if you don't. That being said, I've had a hard time really "backing" someone....the last band I tried to play with had a fit, because I came in immediately offering suggestions on the musical arrangements....they were like "who the fuck is this guy"...although my suggestions would have done the band some good; eventually I decided it wasn't for me....So I've been working on my album for the last 2 months....call me selfish, self-centered, egotistical, whatever....

 

[chazba]

You're right, you can't just make the magic happen. Also, you can't force-feed your stuff to an unwilling player. That's one good reason to quit a band...the best reason I know of. It basically means that there's no magic.Another caveat...don't hook up with guy's who don't pick up on your ideas IMMEDIATELY. Not that they will modify your concept, but that they just don't have the chops or "concept" to execute your ideas. If I wanted to put together a PUNK band, I wouldn't be calling up my Country-Western buddies and verse-vicea. The best thing that can happen is that you figure out early on who you are musically, and where you want to be at in-say 2 years or so. If it's doing the bar gigs, then so be it. If it's Nashville or Hollywood, then that will require a lot more drive and ambition but at least you know that out front, and hopefully you will hook up w/ players who want the same thing. And whose girlfriends/wives wants it too.

 

[Todzilla]

Trying to write as a "commitee" can be disastrous. There has to be one guy whose creativity and musical vision place him (her) in an undisputed place as leader. Anything else is gonna result in the sound and feel being very diluted
and diffused (de-fused) There are some notable exceptions and I'm sure that you can come up with lots of bands who prove me wrong on this point.
But if you think about it, the most remarkable music has been the product of the spark and creativity of ONE GUY backed up by talented and loyal players who dig his music. IMHO
I hope this will stimulate some discussion, so FLAME ON....
chazba

I agree Chaz, but then, I'm that one guy.

 

[Todzilla]

and look at all the music that is the result of partnerships.....Elton John/Bernie Taupin (sp?), Lennon/ McCartney, Bon Jovi/ Richie Sambora..........

Poor examples.

1 EJ/BT - one wrote music, one lyrics
2 JL/PM - increasingly wrote in isolation from one another
3 BJ/RS - well, that's kiddie music

I'm aware there are some songwriting teams that put together great collaborations, but I think you'll find it is very difficult to find songwriters with compatible styles.

The "let's jam together an interesting song" has always led to mediocre crap in my experiences.

 

[Jack Russell]

This a good thread topic, really.

The band I'm in at the moment is a little out of the ordinary, because we have played in many bands, and each of the three of us write very well. (That's my opinion, of course). In fact, I think the other guys write as well as I do. So, there is no talented leader among us.

When we play each other's songs, therefore, we tend to show more respect to the original demo than normal, because we've known each other for awhile. (Each of us can play guitar and bass well, so there isn't anything done poorly on the demos.) We will suggest something we hear, when we work things up, but the rule is that the main writer always has the final say. During rehearsal however, we will re-interpret the instrumental parts more.

Having said that, on ocassion we've recorded a solo half done demo and left it for the others to write the lead vocal and words for. This can be fun.

It seems to me that there are two categories of songwriting:

1) Writing: where you write the bulk of it yourself--if you have a specific idea or sound in mind, then don't give up on it or get distracted.

2) Co-writing: where you work it up with others--let the combination of ideas lead to its own sound.

Both are fine ways to write, but the key is not to confuse the two. Have the sense to judge when something is done and doesn't need to be done over.

 

[Jack Russell]

Poor examples.

1 EJ/BT - one wrote music, one lyrics
2 JL/PM - increasingly wrote in isolation from one another
3 BJ/RS - well, that's kiddie music

I'm aware there are some songwriting teams that put together great collaborations, but I think you'll find it is very difficult to find songwriters with compatible styles.

The "let's jam together an interesting song" has always led to mediocre crap in my experiences.

Also:
4. RD/PT (Daltry/Townshend).

This is a case where the singer Daltry really stays true to the original melody and demo, but he adds some vocal flair to fill out the songs. But make no mistake about it, these are 100% tunes writer by one writer: Townshend.

 

[Jack Russell]

Trying to write as a "commitee" can be disastrous. There has to be one guy whose creativity and musical vision place him (her) in an undisputed place as leader. Anything else is gonna result in the sound and feel being very diluted
and diffused (de-fused)

I agree with this also. There was a band in Baltimore a few years ago, which shall remaing un-named ( ) which wrote all their music as a group. They practiced many nights together for hours until something came together, and the singer put the words to it and started singing.

This is very time-consuming!!!

The results, sadly, were the same essential sound and song many times over. After 5 tunes, it got very boring.