How many bad songs do you have to write before you write a good one?

It's hard to define songs as good and bad as people have previously stated, but I'd say that song structure, meshing melodies with chords and musical theory in general does have a huge effect on whether you and others will like your music or not. You don't need to be classically trained but I'd say it's good to put in at least a little effort to learn chords and scales.
 
Elyrt said:
It's hard to define songs as good and bad as people have previously stated, but I'd say that song structure, meshing melodies with chords and musical theory in general does have a huge effect on whether you and others will like your music or not. You don't need to be classically trained but I'd say it's good to put in at least a little effort to learn chords and scales.
Click to expand...

very helpful. so is taking your favorite songs and breaking them into learnable parts. What is it about this song that you love, there has to be some reason, not always easy to find. Maybe it;s the lyric, why is that lyric making you like the song, why is the melody, maybe a certain melody against a chord that has an effect on you. Maybe a certain rhythm.

If you do that often enough with all of your favorite songs, or you can do it with songs you cant stand, and figure out, but if you do it alot, you can use what you learn in your own songs.

Doesnt even matter if you know three chords, there are so many great 3 chord songs. Success leaves clues.
 
Elyrt said:
It's hard to define songs as good and bad as people have previously stated, but I'd say that song structure, meshing melodies with chords and musical theory in general does have a huge effect on whether you and others will like your music or not. You don't need to be classically trained but I'd say it's good to put in at least a little effort to learn chords and scales.
Click to expand...

I think everyone agrees to this point for the most part, but me, I wouldn't want to be such a stick in the mud and say, boy (girl), this is the way you write a song (smack on the head with a ruler). Now do scales for 4 hours, then go out and play.

As soon as one says this is the only way to do it, then they are stuck in yesterday without an open mind of what could be.
 
DM60 said:
I think everyone agrees to this point for the most part, but me, I wouldn't want to be such a stick in the mud and say, boy (girl), this is the way you write a song (smack on the head with a ruler). Now do scales for 4 hours, then go out and play.

As soon as one says this is the only way to do it, then they are stuck in yesterday without an open mind of what could be.
Click to expand...

Well if somebody says there is only one way, they are wrong. There are many many ways to write a song.

There are many ways to write a letter, but one alphabet. Cant do it without letters, punctuation, grammar. Those are all things you had to learn, you dont even realize it but you did.

I just think you have a better chance of writing a great song, if you know what a great song is, at least what makes it great for you.
 
barry c said:
Well if somebody says there is only one way, they are wrong. There are many many ways to write a song.

There are many ways to write a letter, but one alphabet. Cant do it without letters, punctuation, grammar. Those are all things you had to learn, you dont even realize it but you did.

I just think you have a better chance of writing a great song, if you know what a great song is, at least what makes it great for you.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't disagree with that statement. (Don't tell the Trekkie fans that they really can't write Klingon)
 
barry c said:
Nothing wrong with that at all, but you might want to question is that is REALLY why you do it. I mean you are here, you are reaching out to fellow musicians and songwriters, you must have some need to do it outside of yourself
Click to expand...

I'm not really reaching out to anyone here to listen to my music and gain fans. I've asked for better ears than my one ear to listen and help me with regards to my mixing skills from time to time, but never with the intention of gaining respect for/fans of my music. It's mine, if people like it, cool. If they don't, cool.

The same as I'm not hear to find music. I like listening to what other people do and hearing their production, on all styles of music and believe me, I have heard some pretty damn good stuff. I've also heard some turd and some in between.

But mainly I'm here for the banter and the people. It's actually a really good laugh around here.
 
Mr Clean said:
I'm not really reaching out to anyone here to listen to my music and gain fans. I've asked for better ears than my one ear to listen and help me with regards to my mixing skills from time to time, but never with the intention of gaining respect for/fans of my music. It's mine, if people like it, cool. If they don't, cool.

The same as I'm not hear to find music. I like listening to what other people do and hearing their production, on all styles of music and believe me, I have heard some pretty damn good stuff. I've also heard some turd and some in between.

But mainly I'm here for the banter and the people. It's actually a really good laugh around here.
Click to expand...
^^^^^^ this ^^^^^^

I come here for fun and conversation.
I make my living playing music and have done so for 45 years .... the world of making money with music is totally separate from this forum ..... there's really no overlap.
If you need outside ears to judge your stuff this place is great and there are a lot of guys that know a lot so it's also really good for newbies.

But it's more of a social place for me than anything else ....... if I need outside ears I go to one of the session guys I work with and ask them.

I do pop in here some to chat with whoever's interesting to talk to and there are sometimes some interesting discussions about stuff I like to hear all the different opinions on.

The thing about music is that everyone has an opinion and everybody's opinions are valid to them.
I don't like it when someone insists that only their opinion has merit but otherwise I embrace all points of view because they all have some validity.
 
barry c said:
The only person you have to impress is yourself, but that should include doing it correctly. Combining inspiration with at least some understanding of how you are doing, and why something works, why it doesn't. What makes a great song great, what makes it stink. Recognizing those things and then trying to do it.
Click to expand...
You've said these or implied it a lot in this thread barry c. It would be helpful if you actually laid out the ingredients of good songwriting as you see them.

A thought struck me yesterday. Prior to the multi~tracking age, what constituted "good" songwriting was easier to have a consensus on because songs were immediate and playable. People heard music live or heard someone playing it via sheet music on a piano and records played on the radio or in the home reflected this. Music listening was a communal activity not a private one and I don't think many songwriters/composers moved outside of accepted {or what would be accepted by large numbers of people} bounds.
But that really began to change as multi~tracking took hold and younger artists began writing different kinds of songs and in doing so, shifted the boundaries that had for hundreds of years been accepted. But many self appointed proponents of what art and songwriting was never made {indeed, refused to make} the shift.
Songwriting in so many instances over the last 45 years or so has been indivisible from recording. And as such,what constitutesgood songwriting necessarily changes. Multi~tracking has enabled countless imaginations to become unchained and put things into songs that actually weren't possible 75 years ago. It has also enabled songs to go in directions that wouldn't have been possible for hundreds of years. Where the song can go has changed which changes older definitions of what a good or bad song may or may not be.
Of course, many of the ingredients of yesteryear that went into the creation of songs remain. But they are not fixed forever, neither will they be in every song.
I often read people talking about analyzing why certain songs work but in truth, all songs work.........to someone.
 
IMHO I think a lot of people over analyze the structure and content of a given song and completely miss the reason it appeals to a individual or not if that is the case. Basically the song conveys an emotion similar to poetry only with sound or rhythm added. If a person connects with the song it is on one or more of those levels. When a person asks how to write a successful song or how many bad songs they have to write before a good one appears, they are in reality looking for a short cut or formula to get a "good song". If it were that simple anyone could just pour out "good songs" on a regular basis with no chance of failure. As an example, the successful country artist Don Gibson, never had any real schooling in fact he could barely read and write. And yet he was a success because he could convey his emotions in a way that others could connect with . . . at that time. If you were to step back in time and take a successful rap tune of today and go back 50 years and perform that same tune, what do you think the chances are that it would be successful? So, as stated before not only is the successful song a product of composition using what might be considered good lyrics, sounds, rhythm etc, but to a larger degree the connection on the emotional level. Not so simple and yet at the same time to simple for words . . . IMHO
 
grimtraveller said:
You've said these or implied it a lot in this thread barry c. It would be helpful if you actually laid out the ingredients of good songwriting as you see them.

A thought struck me yesterday. Prior to the multi~tracking age, what constituted "good" songwriting was easier to have a consensus on because songs were immediate and playable. People heard music live or heard someone playing it via sheet music on a piano and records played on the radio or in the home reflected this. Music listening was a communal activity not a private one and I don't think many songwriters/composers moved outside of accepted {or what would be accepted by large numbers of people} bounds.
But that really began to change as multi~tracking took hold and younger artists began writing different kinds of songs and in doing so, shifted the boundaries that had for hundreds of years been accepted. But many self appointed proponents of what art and songwriting was never made {indeed, refused to make} the shift.
Songwriting in so many instances over the last 45 years or so has been indivisible from recording. And as such,what constitutesgood songwriting necessarily changes. Multi~tracking has enabled countless imaginations to become unchained and put things into songs that actually weren't possible 75 years ago. It has also enabled songs to go in directions that wouldn't have been possible for hundreds of years. Where the song can go has changed which changes older definitions of what a good or bad song may or may not be.
Of course, many of the ingredients of yesteryear that went into the creation of songs remain. But they are not fixed forever, neither will they be in every song.
I often read people talking about analyzing why certain songs work but in truth, all songs work.........to someone.
Click to expand...

There's alot of nuts and bolts that make a great song.

A lyric: that is focused. One that doesnt veer from one point of view to another.
Lyric that gets you involved in the content right from the first word, and one way or another
relates back to the title or hook of the song. Not rationalizing how it all fits, but it actually fitting.

Very hard to do it btw.

A lyric that involves the senses, and shows how the person in the song is feeling, not says it.

"I love you" means absoultely nothing.
"I cant sleep, I cant eat, now doubt, Im in need" much more descriptive, albeit by now too cliche.

A lyric that pays off. They call it a payoff because the person listening needs to get something out of
listening. It's the sum of the song, a point in the song where the person says "ahh, thats it"

A lyric which uses literary devices just enough to make things interesting, where they add to the point trying to be made
Metaphor, Analogy, Hyperbole, Euphemism, Irony, etc, but not making the whole song a device.


A song that has a discernable structure. Knowing all the possible structures, and deviating from them if you feel like,
but structure that borders on the familiar so the listener knows whats going on, while still being surprised a bit.

A melody that breathes life into the lyric, Where it actually sounds like the person is saying what he is saying.

Punk Rock was all attitude, those guys werent great writers, but alot of it worked because they knew how to get their point across
as raw as it was. The way a melody comes out can make the lyric true or false. if a punk rock singer says
"pardon me me, do you have any grey poupon" like in waynes world, it's actually funny, because hes not supposed to say those words

a melody that flows well, has pauses, and has deviation while at the same time, all sounding like it fits in the same song.

So many things.

The best book on lyric writing is "THE CRAFT OF LYRIC WRITING" still the best book ever written...on writing.

In short, for me a great song is one where the character in the song is really there. He is living, hes not just being
Said. Hes breathing. This is done by using lyrics well, and music that sounds like he is really saying what hes saying.

Songs that dont reinvent the wheel, but are a new road for the wheel to spin on. Its that balancing of familiar
with a fresh angle, is what makes it yours.

Songs made for money have vague uses of these things, but for the most part it's watered down.

People may like it, doesnt mean it's a great song.

I like all kinds of songs, I love stupid songs like Louie Louie, I Like The Ramones and alot of their raw pop songs.

I like blues songs that sometimes dont tell me anything, it's all stomp.

I like Led Zepplin and thos jams, Van Halen.

Some musicians speak with their music.

I just dont call alot of that stuff great songwriting, but they are great tracks, great entertainment, great musicianship sometimes.

Worth the price of admission just for that. But the topc was How many Songs,,, etc, not how many jams or productions.
 
RogerL. said:
IMHO I think a lot of people over analyze the structure and content of a given song and completely miss the reason it appeals to a individual or not if that is the case. Basically the song conveys an emotion similar to poetry only with sound or rhythm added. If a person connects with the song it is on one or more of those levels. When a person asks how to write a successful song or how many bad songs they have to write before a good one appears, they are in reality looking for a short cut or formula to get a "good song". If it were that simple anyone could just pour out "good songs" on a regular basis with no chance of failure. As an example, the successful country artist Don Gibson, never had any real schooling in fact he could barely read and write. And yet he was a success because he could convey his emotions in a way that others could connect with . . . at that time. If you were to step back in time and take a successful rap tune of today and go back 50 years and perform that same tune, what do you think the chances are that it would be successful? So, as stated before not only is the successful song a product of composition using what might be considered good lyrics, sounds, rhythm etc, but to a larger degree the connection on the emotional level. Not so simple and yet at the same time to simple for words . . . IMHO
Click to expand...

I agree but appealing to people is different than being well crafted. The craft is a skill. Appealing on an emotional level is probably why people like a song, and nobody really knows how to do that, but if you think that the best songwriters of all time, didnt understand the nuts and bolts of what they were doing, you are missing it. If you are a hit songwriter who doesnt perform his own songs, that is when you REALLY know your craft.
 
LeonGuitar said:
Usually i start writing when i feel the time is right, i consider it to be a calling...
Click to expand...

Sure seems that way, sometimes something just pops in your head, and you dont even know where it came from.

The skill then is to complete the initial burst from beginning to end
 
The short answer? You always find your car keys in the last place you looked. I read an interview with Paul McCartney, where he said he writes 10 to 20 songs a day. I have a hard-drive full of songs that may never see the light of day. Some times I pluck one out and polish it, but mostly I just keep pushing new concepts until lightning strikes. You find both good & bad songs all along the technical ability spectrum, so you can rule that out as an impediment. "Is the topic relevant?" I hear that bandied about as a marker, but try to apply that to "Wooly Bully"....falls apart fast. "Does it achieve the desired emotional response?" ..."Every Breath You Take" is one of the top wedding songs......it's sung from the perspective of a stalker peeping on someone....concept fail, song great. So I suppose my answer is, you have to write all the bad ones before you get to a good one. There are no short cuts, just hard work and shit luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top