So I though about the differences about songwriting and compsing and I have come up with a list. Let me know what you all think about it.
Songwriting
[list] [*]Mostly uses simple chords. [*]Usually is straightforward with the message of the song. There are exceptions, like Hotlel California, I am the Walrus, Strawberry fields forever, a lot of Beatles tunes, Adele, "Set Fire to the Rain"(how do you set fire to rain? Unless your Elijah from the bible),
Composing [*]Heavy useage of chord extensions, various chord voices, arpeggios ect. [*]May sometime have variations on a theme, and wire the listener to interprate the meaning. [*]Compositions may feature lyrics such as an opera, aria , musicals chiors, pieces for mass, vocal jazz song. [*]Tend to be more complex and expressive. What I mean by this is that in a typical song, not a composition, it may just one dynamic or have one feeling, soft loud, bouncy, dance feel. I don't mean that if you are a songwriter you are not expressive, I just notice that a lot of songs tend to stick to one feeling or dynamic.
Computer: Macbook Pro, 16 inch 2021 DAWs: Pro Tools, Logic, and Maschine plays drums, percussion, bass, steel pan, keyboard, music producer/engineer
I am inclined to disagree. Isn't a songwriter a composer? Was Tom Dooly composed or written? Was Take 5 composed or written?
Definition of composer
: one that composes; especially : a person who writes music
Definition of songwriter
: a person who composes words or music or both especially for popular songs
My emphasis.
Was Dave Brubeck a songwriter on the popular Take 5 and a composer for everything else he wrote.
Were classical composers just songwriters? Classical music is based on three or four chords, I, IV, V with an occasional iim, just like modern music. See here:
These days, I don't think there's clear lines of demarcation between songwriting, composing, arranging, and producing.
Sometimes I start with the very far right end of that scale with a 'sound' and energy that I know I want; and get right at the effect chains I will use, then go looking for the right instrumentation, then think of some chords, and eventually get to lyrics if I feel a story coming in the process.
Other times, I will start at the left end and have a pile of lyrics that I sift into verses and a bridge and chorus and I'll write out all of the lyrics and then the melody comes to life.
This is not addressed to any forum respondent in particular, but is pointed at one resource mentioned in this thread that talked about "boring" classical progressions stuck in I, IV and V.
I own the Classical Fake Book and I see a lot more than 1, IV and V going on in there. I sometimes even see chords I have to look up.
Also, as I am trying to learn to Play Bach's Partita 3 for Violin in E Major I see there are many pages where a new chord appears every measure (I mean brand new unexpected chords that have not been used before in the song), using some chords I have never seen before, with my pinky bent backwards over my thumb just trying to play them, so I am going to have to disagree with Gary Ewer that Bach can be "boring" or "dull" or whatever he said in that post Mario referenced. (I still like his songwriting books though.)
Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring which is one of the easier pieces has about 6 times more chords than Blackbird, which has a lot. Blackbird borrowed liberally from this it seems, though Paul points to a Bach Bourree in E Minor. The famous Prelude I in C from Well Tempered Klavier? Simple Chords? Boring? Huh?
This from Ewer is flat out off target:
"It may surprise you (maybe even disappoint you?) to know that Classical composers were not usually very innovative with their choice of chords. In fact, if you strip Bach’s counterpoint down to its basic chord structures, you’re looking at something that might be considered downright dull: lots of I-chords and V-chords, with ii-chords and IV-chords thrown in for good measure. What complicated things harmonically was that he visited many keys within the same work."
Ummmmmmmm. No Gary. No can agree man.
None of Bach's music works without the intricate counterpoint and subtle chord changes and variations which means that the internal melodies and chord inversions are constantly changing. Even a simple tune (simple for Bach that is) like Jesu totally destroys the idea that his chords were "simple" and "dull." I am sorry but that is just crazy.
Back to the original question though:
I think ALL music is composing by definition--it's only a matter of complexity--and I find it fascinating to study the chord progressions of classical composers.
In Mozart's day they would throw rotten tomatoes at you if you tried to rip off someone else and couldn't come up with something more entertaining and original to please the King.
These days the only way to please the King and not get rotten tomatoes thrown at you IS to rip off everyone else and make your music as unoriginal as possible.
Aside from that very slight difference, music has not changed at all over the centuries.
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
An addendum. This is SO boring! If only Bach had had a good e-book book or a good .pdf download on how to write a chord progression he might have made something out of himself. What a LOSER!!!
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
Songwriting is a particular type of composing that emphasizes words as well as music. Sometimes I forget that the job ain't done with only words and a chord sheet.
I am inclined to disagree. Isn't a songwriter a composer? Was Tom Dooly composed or written? Was Take 5 composed or written?
Definition of composer
: one that composes; especially : a person who writes music
Definition of songwriter
: a person who composes words or music or both especially for popular songs
My emphasis.
Was Dave Brubeck a songwriter on the popular Take 5 and a composer for everything else he wrote.
Were classical composers just songwriters? Classical music is based on three or four chords, I, IV, V with an occasional iim, just like modern music. See here:
Thus to me songwriters and composers are one in the same. YMMV
OK, you make a good point Mario D, but I was talking about how in some songs, not musical compositions, they seem to lack dynamic range, and most use simplistic chords that anyone could learn on the internet. I do not count the beatles because they had a lot of help from George Martin and a lot of their song used horns, strings, and various other technics to give death, life, app and emotion to their songs.
Last edited by Islansoul; 04/17/1704:23 AM.
Computer: Macbook Pro, 16 inch 2021 DAWs: Pro Tools, Logic, and Maschine plays drums, percussion, bass, steel pan, keyboard, music producer/engineer
It may surprise you (maybe even disappoint you?) to know that Classical composers were not usually very innovative with their choice of chords
This matches my understanding as well.
With Bach, the melodic movement of voices is always more important than harmonic movement. So while something could interpreted harmonically, an explanation that's closer to how Bach thought about it might be as a passing dissonance caused by melodic movement.
As for classical music in general, it's often more effective to orchestrate using simpler harmonies and focus on creating tonal color. When it comes to writing for an orchestra, most orchestration books I've seen stick with 4-part harmonies, and additional parts beyond that are referred to as non-essential "filler", which doesn't really change the essential harmony.
Quote:
In Mozart's day they would throw rotten tomatoes at you if you tried to rip off someone else and couldn't come up with something more entertaining and original to please the King.
I've read compelling arguments against this "whole cloth" sort of understanding. Rather, classical composers would often "quote" other people's work, incorporating ideas in other popular music into their own.
So the way to please the King apparently hasn't changed that much.
I own the Classical Fake Book and I see a lot more than 1, IV and V going on in there. I sometimes even see chords I have to look up.
... I don't know the Classical Fake Book but it could be that "Classical" is being used in the specific sense and not the general sense.
What the public often refer to as "Classical" music is very diverse and very general and spans centuries of music from before Johann Bach (1685-1750) to beyond Aaron Copland (1900-1990).
The "Classic" period in music, on the other hand, is specific and covers the period from around 1750s to 1820s. One of the key features of the Classic period was that by comparison to the previous Baroque period, music was noticeably less complex. It was also written with more attention to vertical harmony. The incidental harmony of Baroque music arose from intersecting melodies (i.e. counterpoint) more so than consideration of vertical chords (although this was present, it was in the form of figured bass and not chords as we know them today).
After the Classic period came the Romantic period which was much more adventurous in the use of chordal harmony. The Romantic period then moved into Impressionistic and then Atonal music. These two latter periods were highly adventurous from both a harmonic and a non-harmonic perspective.
So back to my original thought... I wonder if the Classic Fake Book is more devoted to the music of the Classic period and maybe the transition periods that lead into and out of the Classic period.
OK... I see the point of the OP and I agree. But I also see and understand the dissenting POV that composing and writing are essentially the same.
I personally tend to divide composing and songwriting along the lines of the OP.
To me songwriting is a simpler, more basic form of composing, while composing in it's own right is a bit more detailed and intensive form of songwriting. I place compositions by writers such as Bach, Mozart, Handel, firmly into the composer class while placing writers such as Lennon/McCartney, Guthrie, McDill, into the songwriter classification.
There is a huge difference between a song and one of the compositions of the masters. Structure, use of chords and extensions, and length to mention just a few things. They are different disciplines of writing and require certain skill sets to do effectively. The common thread is that they both involve music and the thought process to create something beautiful with a limited number of notes.
I think perhaps there are a few writers who can successfully cross that line. Jeff Lynn (ELO: Out Of The Blue) and Ian Anderson (JT: Thick as a Brick) are two I can think of that can get close.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
I am not going to argue this point too much 'cause that would be silly and I have songs to write, BUT...
I have actually studied under two Segovia students and as part of that training, we mapped out the chord progressions measure for measure (and sometimes beat by beat) on a lot of Bach. Categorically, without a doubt, or any questions whatsoever he was a master of and pioneer of both harmonic movement and melodic movement. There may have been accidentals but no accidents--every harmonic choice and chord inversion was purposeful in its marriage to the melody.
Even the Renaissance masters were often noted for harmonic genius, not just melody, so I was questioning an oversimplification in a column I was referred to here that is simply not accurate from a musicology standpoint.
As for the "in Mozart's day observation," he never wrote any two pieces of music that sounded the same. That is why he is still around. Sure, there may have been rip off artists back in the day, but the masters of classical (and those who tried to compete with the masters) have always been known for constantly upping the game, always raising the bar.
Last edited by David Snyder; 04/18/1712:18 PM.
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
What do you call it when studio technician tweak the process and come up with a sound that could be said to carry the day? I think Les Paul and Mary Ford's sound was the same audio track offset a microsecond -- presto, echo. Bob Marley and Peter Tosh on the wah pedal. The Beatles tech sretting up this long hallway in the building and getting it just right. Or even just a way of playing, no effects, like Louis Armstrong or Eric Clpton. All this stuff going on. We mortals find out about it when we open our first Garage Band.
What do you call it when studio technician tweak the process and come up with a sound that could be said to carry the day? I think Les Paul and Mary Ford's sound was the same audio track offset a microsecond -- presto, echo. Bob Marley and Peter Tosh on the wah pedal. The Beatles tech sretting up this long hallway in the building and getting it just right. Or even just a way of playing, no effects, like Louis Armstrong or Eric Clpton. All this stuff going on. We mortals find out about it when we open our first Garage Band.
Production/engineering. It can certainly be creative but it's not composing or writing. The producer or engineer is getting paid for his/her work under a producer's contract and nothing they do or create is copyright-able by them, as a result.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 04/28/1701:30 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
What do you call it when studio technician tweak the process and come up with a sound that could be said to carry the day? I think Les Paul and Mary Ford's sound was the same audio track offset a microsecond -- presto, echo. Bob Marley and Peter Tosh on the wah pedal. The Beatles tech sretting up this long hallway in the building and getting it just right. Or even just a way of playing, no effects, like Louis Armstrong or Eric Clpton. All this stuff going on. We mortals find out about it when we open our first Garage Band.
Production/engineering. It can certainly be creative but it's not composing or writing. The producer or engineer is getting paid for his/her work under a producer's contract and nothing they do or create is copyright-able by them, as a result.
That also goes for arranging unless express written permission is granted by the publisher in advance.
The exception is for works in the Public Domain.
BIAB 2025 Audiophile Mac 24Core/60CoreGPU M2 MacStudioUltra/8TB/192GB Sequoia, M1 MBAir, 2012 MBP Digital Performer11, LogicPro, Finale27/Dorico/Encore/SmartScorePro64/Notion6 /Overture5
What do you call it when studio technician tweak the process and come up with a sound that could be said to carry the day? I think Les Paul and Mary Ford's sound was the same audio track offset a microsecond -- presto, echo. Bob Marley and Peter Tosh on the wah pedal. The Beatles tech sretting up this long hallway in the building and getting it just right. Or even just a way of playing, no effects, like Louis Armstrong or Eric Clpton. All this stuff going on. We mortals find out about it when we open our first Garage Band.
Production/engineering. It can certainly be creative but it's not composing or writing. The producer or engineer is getting paid for his/her work under a producer's contract and nothing they do or create is copyright-able by them, as a result.
I disagree that it is not composing or writing. If an engineer or producer comes up with the signature riff or signature sound or some other significant creative contribution they have most certainly contributed to the writing of the song!
Of course, I understand that the music business world decided long ago that that contribution does not count as a writing credit. But that is just arbitrary. I have always felt songwriting credits should be more fairly defined and shared among the participants. If The Beatles had not spent so much time together perfecting their craft as a group I would venture to guess they might not have achieved what they did. Likewise had they not had major influence from people like Epstein and Martin they almost certainly would have accomplished much less.
When I am king everyone who contributes gets partial credit!
Of course, I understand that the music business world decided long ago that that contribution does not count as a writing credit. But that is just arbitrary. I have always felt songwriting credits should be more fairly defined and shared among the participants. If The Beatles had not spent so much time together perfecting their craft as a group I would venture to guess they might not have achieved what they did. Likewise had they not had major influence from people like Epstein and Martin they almost certainly would have accomplished much less. When I am king everyone who contributes gets partial credit!
Maybe the producers felt if they just took all the money, it was a fair exchange. Seriously, it would really open up the Pandora's box if people started claiming effects settings as proprietary I had an Ibanez tremolo pedal that was out of this world. I bought it. Anyway, thanks for the interesting and enlightening responses to my question.
PowerTracks 2026 is here—bringing powerful new enhancements designed to make your production workflow faster, smoother, and more intuitive than ever.
The enhanced Mixer now shows Track Type and Instrument icons for instant track recognition, while a new grid option simplifies editing views. Non-floating windows adopt a modern title bar style, replacing the legacy blue bar.
The Master Volume is now applied at the end of the audio chain for consistent levels and full-signal master effects.
Tablature now includes a “Save bends when saving XML” option for improved compatibility with PG Music tools. Plus, you can instantly match all track heights with a simple Ctrl-release after resizing, and Add2 chords from MGU/SGU files are now fully supported... and more!
Get started today—first-time packages start at just $49.
Already using PowerTracks Pro Audio? Upgrade for as little as $29 and enjoy the latest improvements!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Windows Special Offers End Tomorrow (January 15th, 2026) at 11:59 PM PST!
Time really is running out! Save up to 50% on Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® upgrades and receive a FREE Bonus PAK—only when you order by 11:59 PM PST on Thursday, January 15, 2026!
We've added many major new features and new content in a redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®!
Version 2026 introduces a modernized GUI redesign across the program, with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, and a new Dark Mode option. There’s also a new side toolbar for quicker access to commonly used windows, and the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, making it easier to customize your workspace.
Another exciting new addition is the new AI-Notes feature, which can transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI. You can view the results in notation or play them back as MIDI, and choose whether to process an entire track or focus on specific parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®.
There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
Upgrade your Band-in-a-Box for Windows to save up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade packages!
Plus, when you order your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade during our special, you'll receive a Free Bonus PAK of exciting new add-ons.
If you need any help deciding which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We are here to help!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® Special Offers Extended Until January 15, 2026!
Good news! You still have time to upgrade to the latest version of Band-in-a-Box® for Windows® and save. Our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® special now runs through January 15, 2025!
We've packed Band-in-a-Box® 2026 with major new features, enhancements, and an incredible lineup of new content! The program now sports a sleek, modern GUI redesign across the entire interface, including updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, a new dark mode option, and more. The brand-new side toolbar provides quicker access to key windows, while the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, creating a flexible, clutter-free workspace. We have an amazing new “AI-Notes” feature. This transcribes polyphonic audio into MIDI so you can view it in notation or play it back as MIDI. You can process an entire track (all pitched instruments and drums) or focus on individual parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
There are over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®.
When you order purchase Band-in-a-Box® 2026 before 11:59 PM PST on January 15th, you'll also receive a Free Bonus PAK packed with exciting new add-ons.
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® today! Check out the Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
Band-in-a-Box 2026 Video: The Newly Designed Piano Roll Window
In this video, we explore the updated Piano Roll, complete with a modernized look and exciting new features. You’ll see new filtering options that make it easy to focus on specific note groups, smoother and more intuitive note entry and editing, and enhanced options for zooming, looping, and more.
Band-in-a-Box 2026 Video: AI Stems & Notes - split polyphonic audio into instruments and transcribe
This video demonstrates how to use the new AI-Notes feature together with the AI-Stems splitter, allowing you to select an audio file and have it separated into individual stems while transcribing each one to its own MIDI track. AI-Notes converts polyphonic audio—either full mixes or individual instruments—into MIDI that you can view in notation or play back instantly.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean