PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production What to leave in, what to leave out

Couldn't remember the univ or the name of the study I wanted to cite when typing the above post.

Found it, though.



For those interesed, the full .pdf is below:

http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/faculty/goodman/same%20old%20song.pdf


Food for thought that might sway some opinions on the subject but even if not, might cause some thinking about same.


--Mac

This has evolved into an arrangement discussion, but in reading the OP's orignal post, it started as a discussion of song length.

I highly recommend Pat Pattison's free Berklee songwriting course offered through Coursera.org.

It's mostly a lyric writing class, with Pat expounding on various topics, some of which are very pertinent to Guitarhacker's questions.

Pat has this one idea he calls 'the boxes', wherein he describes songs with lyrics should have about 3 boxes, or elements of a story.

As you progress from the first verse through the last, each of the story elements should fit into the next one presented - that is the succeeding story element should use the previous element, with a new detail or twist added so that what is presented as an idea can 'contain' the previous idea. The final box should be a big enough idea to 'contain' the previous two boxes.

Anyways, you might still be able to sign up for the course - it begins October 14th. I am taking it again just to absorb more of the content.

-Scott

I should hope that the length consideration should be part of the arranging...

Well, I guess it depends on the order of songwriting operations for the particular writer. I tend to write and edit lyrics first. Then the # of verses, # of chorus sections, pre-chorus length, intro length etc. becomes much more elementary. At least, this is what works for me - I realize that there are writers who write the music first, and then add words after the fact. However, in an incredibly informal and unscientific manner, I would say that most of the folks that I have talked to in the past that are prolific (intentional) songwriters that involve lyrics tend to have lyrics ideas and their story to tell, ahead of melody or chord patterns, etc. This discussion comes up always in the February Album Writing Month discussion boards every year. Here's the one that riffed on this theme this past year.

http://fawm.org/forums/topic/550/

For this part of songwriting, the Pat Pattison class which I mentioned above and a few others on this forum highly endorse, is a nicely compact and helpful course and it's the best price - Free. The first post of this thread doesn't mention how many instrument parts in any fashion. It's about verses, choruses, etc.

In my brain, arrangement decisions are more of a task in 'the vertical', not so much the time axis of the song. What are the dynamics like, how do I build them, does the song beg for brass parts, does a walking bass-line seem appropriate for the end of the chorus, should the piano part run only in the first 2 verses and then after the chorus disappear until the outro, does a train-beat drum pattern fit the feel, etc. This has been what I've understood arrangement to be but I'm not saying that it's 100% correct or that there's a correct definition of arranging.

Then there are production decisions - what and how much reverb belongs, if any, on the vocals, the various parts, etc. Would there be a useful effect to take a part from mono in the verses and expand it to stereo in the chorus sections, etc. Sometimes, when I get to this, I'll hear a verse that's really not adding to the meaning of the song - it sits outside 'the boxes' and can be trimmed, or maybe there's some lyrics I already edited which just seem like they make more sense than some that I've got in there already.

So, again, I would highly recommend taking the Freebie Berklee College of Music / Pat Pattison course to answer the kinds of questions asked in the original post of this thread. For easy one-click access: https://www.coursera.org/course/songwriting

Since it starts in less than a week, it might not allow new attendees, but you can add yourself to be watchlisted for the course.

When composing, I tend to work from the standpoint of development.

So length is dictated by the type and amount of development spent on the thing.

There are other factors, of course.

For example, sometimes I find I've developed in a wrong direction, or developed too quickly, or developed not enough, etc.

I think that there are many different ways that one can think about it, work it, different approaches that can still lead towards the same goal in the end.

I know a lady who just simply seems to pop up with it all at once, and a lot of her stuff leaves me in awe.


--Mac

Back in the 60's and probably even earlier, the rules were the song could not exceed 2:30 in length or it risked not being played on radio.

Some of the bands made 2 versions...album cuts and radio cuts to get around the rules. The 45 was the radio cut.

Now, the rules are a bit different. Songs can be longer but the SHALL NOT EXCEED length has moved out to 4 minutes. Most still fall in the 2:30 to 3:00 length.

The new rules include: (or so "they" say)
Intro not longer than 13 seconds. Shorter is better.
Be into the chorus before 60 seconds
Keep it under 4 minutes max...less is better.
Keep it uptempo, (despite the fact that the majority of hits are ballads)
It must sound "radio ready" which means professionally done. (this one is true) The people listening and making the decisions have no imagination and no idea of what a song could be,,,,so the song should have the parts in it...intro, guitar, piano breaks worked out and polished, singers that sound like the stars, and the entire song should sound like it is ready to go on the radio "as is".

I don't know how many times I have heard these things repeated ad-nausium at songwriter workshops and seminars. Some are true, some are good advice and some not.

Of course, the rules are there but established artists can set or break the rules as they see fit depending on their clout.

"It is essential to know the rules and practice following them before the ability to break a rule with impunity can be obtained."

And I'd add to that, "If you break a rule, make good and sure that you break that rule for a darn good reason!"

Those who perceive that rules like these are made top-down and for arbitrary reasons fail to grasp that these things actually evolved over time as the industry found out what people listened to and what they didn't. It is indeed market-driven.

Your audience dictates what they want to hear and how they want to hear it.

If you've gotta tie 'em to the barstools or lock the doors in order to keep 'em in there listening to you, rethink.


--Mac

excellent post Mac.

the rules are the rules for a reason.