How important is subject matter in songs ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter grimtraveller
  • Start date Start date
Xdrummer said:
1 beer + 1 beer = 2 beers?????

Perhaps my thought process is not deep enough to comprehend the esoteric nature of this argument - but arguing that one plus one does not equal two seems to be such a waste of time and effort. Certainly you folks can hi-jack this or any other thread for your personal spats - but why turn what in theory could be a positive, cooperative, informative web site into an endless bitch fight.

I try very hard to make all my posts positive and hopefully helpful - and I know I will regret I even bothered to compromise my personal intergity to post this reply - but My God you people need to take a break and count to 10 (in the abstract that would be 5+5)
Click to expand...

This thread's hosed, man. Trying to save it will just get you caught in the crossfire. *ducks out of the way*
 
Xdrummer said:
1 beer + 1 beer = 2 beers?????

Perhaps my thought process is not deep enough to comprehend the esoteric nature of this argument - but arguing that one plus one does not equal two seems to be such a waste of time and effort. Certainly you folks can hi-jack this or any other thread for your personal spats - but why turn what in theory could be a positive, cooperative, informative web site into an endless bitch fight.

I try very hard to make all my posts positive and hopefully helpful - and I know I will regret I even bothered to compromise my personal intergity to post this reply - but My God you people need to take a break and count to 10 (in the abstract that would be 5+5)
Click to expand...


you never took enough math for me to explain it to you.
 
For me, subject matter is everything, but then, I am not trying to write "pop" songs. I write what I feel, and that is very rarely mainstream material. To me, music is about passion, and I cannot pretend, like so many pop artists do.
 
why would you even waste the man's time with this drivel? xdrummer, I'm talking to you.
 
Berkley's songwriting course is full of songwriting rules. Don't follow them - marks deducted.
Emphasis word not on the beat -1, not the correct family of rhyme -1 etc.
It may be about trying things and discipline but it certainly isn't about creativity but craft.
There are lots of good things about it as well.
 
If I were taking a songwriting class at Berkley, I'd expect it to be all about teaching you what the "rules" are. There are a lot of patterns to songwriting that are good to know. But a big point in learning those rules and patterns is so that you know how and when to break them to best effect.
 
I do a delivery to the watch people, Audemars Piguet, and they have this poster on one of their walls that says "In order to break the rules, you first must master them."
I spent a long time thinking about this and I said to one of their guys that it was a great slogan because it really got one thinking.
And having thought about it, I don't agree with it, especially when you put it in the context of songwriting.
For starters, many songwriters adopt elements considered by some as 'rules' without even being aware of it.
 
VomitHatSteve said:
There are a lot of patterns to songwriting that are good to know.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I met Chuck Cannon at a songwriters convention and he said the same thing. He went through all the songs that ever made the top ten list for sales, or billboard pop charts or something, and compared them; looking for commonalities. They were many. I forget most, but hard rhymes was one. Very little near rhymes were used. Switching rhyming schemes between verse and chorus was another... ie Verse = AABB, Chorus = ABAB.... Always switch 'em up.

Another one was time. Always between 3 1/2 minutes and 4 minutes. But we've heard that pattern/rule so many times already.
 
Chili said:
Agreed. I met Chuck Cannon at a songwriters convention and he said the same thing. He went through all the songs that ever made the top ten list for sales, or billboard pop charts or something, and compared them; looking for commonalities. They were many. I forget most, but hard rhymes was one. Very little near rhymes were used. Switching rhyming schemes between verse and chorus was another... ie Verse = AABB, Chorus = ABAB.... Always switch 'em up.

Another one was time. Always between 3 1/2 minutes and 4 minutes. But we've heard that pattern/rule so many times already.
Click to expand...

I think when people describe a song as sounding "formulaic", they're thinking of formulas like those.
 
I'd expect to learn conventions and formal forms but, serioulsy, it was as I described. It was a freebie course as a precursor to a real enlrolment (the suck in). The lecturer was good, experienced at writing and reasonably clear in his explanations but the assignments were a) strict on rules & b) ambiguous in terms of interpreting the rules for marking.
 
fat_fleet said:
I think when people describe a song as sounding "formulaic", they're thinking of formulas like those.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Formulas, guidelines, patterns. I think the general listening populace has an expectation of how songs should go. Songwriters who drive in those ruts would probably get more listens.

That expectation to follow a formula is probably what makes a hit song a hit song.
 
As far as the topic, does subject matter? Yes and no. Some people like to listen and contemplate on the lyrics. Others couldn't care less. I try to write songs so those who like to pull meaning from the lyrics, or hear a story, have something substantial to listen to. Yet, for myself, I couldn't care less what the lyrics say and don't pay much attention to the words in other peoples' songs. But I like how the words add to the performance. Sometimes the right word with the right melody can really make a song work.
 
Chili said:
As far as the topic, does subject matter? Yes and no. Some people like to listen and contemplate on the lyrics. Others couldn't care less. I try to write songs so those who like to pull meaning from the lyrics, or hear a story, have something substantial to listen to. Yet, for myself, I couldn't care less what the lyrics say and don't pay much attention to the words in other peoples' songs. But I like how the words add to the performance. Sometimes the right word with the right melody can really make a song work.
Click to expand...

Then there is the triple crown, words that add to performance, right word with the right melody and the third where it takes you somewhere. Like wow, that song was good musically, lyrically and made me rethink the world. Those are the songs I really like.
 
Good call, Chili. That's right on the money. The band Illuminati that I was in in Denver in the 80s wrote great lyrics, put them in the right places and wrote on topics that people of Ill's genre could relate to (Iron Maiden-ish). But the people who were interested in signing a contract with us wanted control over the song writing: "Slow this down", "This needs to be quieter" and the guys in the band weren't interested on the "artistic freedom" argument and passed on the contract. I wanted to go along with the contract on the "it's only three albums in three years and then we can do whatever we want" argument, but I lost. So now I work for the world's largest retailer.
 
BroKen_H said:
I wanted to go along with the contract on the "it's only three albums in three years and then we can do whatever we want" argument, but I lost.
Click to expand...
I agree with your former bandmates.........to an extent. Many bands never get beyond that third album where they can do whatever they want thereafter. Three years is a long time to have to compromise what may be an integral part of oneself and keep knocking out stuff one may not fully believe in.
On the other hand, and this is why I say "to an extent", record companies were not always Satan. By sometimes pushing bands towards a more commercial product, they actually helped writers to become better writers, becoming short, swift and concise in their songwriting and in the process, loads of songs that in my opinion are fantastic songs, came about. Many of these artists learned to combine and balance these, um, more
commercial offerings with their edgier, more esoteric leanings. There are zillions of examples, but MC5's "Back in the USA", The Wailers' "Catch a fire" and the Sex Pistols' "Never mind the bollocks" albums spring to mind as do songs like Kansas' "It takes a woman's love", Chuck Berry's "Maybelline" and Pink Floyd's "San Tropez", all of which exist in the forms they do because of record company/producer influence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top