Jump to content

Rob Ash

Active Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Rob Ash last won the day on April 19

Rob Ash had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

481 Legendary

About Rob Ash

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • Yahoo

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United States of America


  • Songwriting Collaboration

Critique Preferences

  • Getting Critique
    Give It To Me Both Barrels

Recent Profile Visitors

5,846 profile views
  1. Critique my song please

    Just curious..... What is a "sticky member"...?
  2. I drum with my teeth!

    Rudi, do you ever sigh in mild exasperation when nobody gets your jokes? "Impression"... indeed.
  3. Do i have potential to be better?

    Okay.... whew! Sinpan, what I find most telling about your singing abilities is the material you chose you showcase what you can presently do. I was unable to hear the classical performance, and what I heard I admit I did not recognize. I shall, therefor, limit my remarks to your performance of "Aces High"... I have been the lead vocalist in at least a dozen pretty good amateur bands over the years, all of which included Iron Maiden tunes in their repertoire. "Aces High" is one of the many amazing performances by Brice Dickinson (the lead singer of Iron Maiden) I was NEVER able to cover. At least, never well enough to perform on stage. Your performance is NOT perfect. It has MANY flaws. But it SOUNDS like Brice Dickinson. In fact, it sounds A LOT like Bruce Dickinson. Are you aware that Bruce Dickinson, like a lot of classic rock, hard rock and metal performers, was a classically trained musician? By the time he was picked as the new lead singer for Maiden, he had obtained as much experience as a classical singer as he had singing rock or metal. It is in large part owing to his training in classical forms and disciplines that he sang as well as he did, as HIGH as he did, and in the manner that he did. Iron Maiden has often been described as a bombastic, classically inspired metal band. Steve Harris, who writes most of the music the band performs, and produces ALL of, has indicated in numerous interviews that he borrows heavily from classical music for the style and substance of Maiden's music. Whatever the case... NOT an easy band, singer, or SONG... to cover. You struggle with your breathing. Breathing is, arguably, the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT of what makes a serious, or professional singer able to do what they do. Until you learn to breath like a singer, you will never have the durability, the range, or the raw ability that a trained singer has. So Google "Breathing for singers", read up, and practice. You can find a lot of very helpful resource material on THIS SITE to help you get started with this. Second of all, you struggle with PITCH... or singing on key. In my opinion, this has as much to do with the song you chose as it does with your present level of ability. However, you are unlikely to enjoy much success if you can't sing on key. Assuming you are able to determine that you can HEAR in key, you should have no problem learning how to always sing in key at the same time you are learning all else that you need to learn to sing more professionally. Again, Google "Lessons for learning how to control pitch"... and you will find many results. Incidentally; learning to control your breathing will go a long way to helping with pitch control. It is hard to do one properly without learning to do the other just as proficiently. All that said, I doubt there are more than perhaps a very small handful... maybe less than four or five all together, singers on this site who could perform the song you chose, and sound more like Bruce Dickinson. So, the answer to your question is, in my opinion, YES, you can sing. YES, you can get better. The Dutch rub part of this, however, is that now, the really, really hard part begins for you. Because now you face the task of taking what raw talent you may have and forging it, through much dedicated practice, into a real skill and ability you can use to produce a really substantial and entertaining singing performance. I am not lying or exaggerating. If you really want to control that instrument you have in your throat, you have a lot of hard work ahead of you. Such is inescapable, Sinpan... and is true for anything i\n life worth having or being able to do. In that, I wish you all of the dedication and "stick-to-it-iveness" you will need. If you want it badly enough, I believe you have the raw ability to become a fine singer.
  4. Do i have potential to be better?

    To everyone who's post falls above MIke's in this thread, I pose the following question: are you actually inclined to limit the membership here to seasoned amateur and professional musicians? The generally callous nature of the responses in this thread amazes me. I chose the above, quoted text only as a place marker to indicate my remarks here are aimed at Mike's post. What follows are my comments, aimed at his post IN IT'S ENTIRETY. What a magnificent load of horse crap! All I can safely say here is that it is a damn good thing this site doesn't have a larger contingent of metal/hard rock devotees as members. If there were, Mike might actually be affected by the responses to his post above. I can think of no better way to illustrate what is, in my opinion, a post that serves to define the very essence of pseudo-intellectual musical snobbery. And what makes Mike's comments as thoroughly repugnant to me as they are (and as they should be to ALL musicians, regardless of their musical preferences) is that he, in much the same way anyone who is socially and intellectually isolated by virtue of their own self-imposed ignorance and poorly defined standards, HAS NO CLUE WHY HIS REMARKS ARE SO MESSED UP. This (the performance of "Aces High") is not an original song, Mike. If you had any level of even marginally respectful respectful knowledge of metal music, especially classic metal like this song is, you'd know that. It's actually a karaoke, vocal performance rendered to a "canned" piece of cover music. When compared to the original song (something I can do without having to pull up the original on youtube), it also happens to be a pretty good rendition by the way. Which brings me to my next point of contention with Mike's ill considered remarks. Although Mike is, of course, perfectly free to offer up any comment he wishes, it is, perhaps, better for him at least, that he does not realize how uninformed his remarks demonstrate him to be. Iron Maiden, the authors of the original version of the song in discussion here, is widely considered to be the most successful metal act of all time. More hits, more album sales, more money earned. More fans. More loyal fans over the decades. The only band who can even come close to claiming the title would be Metallica. Another band I assume Mike has little or no direct knowledge of. But, of course... tens and perhaps even hundreds of millions of fans world wide can't possibly hope for their opinions to carry the weight that Mike's musical opinions do. The point however, more has to do with Mike's lack of understanding of why classic metal was considered by it's fans to be so powerful. Why it was so popular, or why it was considered to be not only great music, but intelligently composed music, in the way that it emulated, and so successfully borrowed forms and styles taken straight from classical music. Another group of musicians who would, I am sure, take umbrage at Mike's post. At the very least they would have laughed outright at his postulation (yet another in a seemingly endless series of posts we must all suffer on this site... made by so called "modern" or contemporary musicians who appear convinced that the only valid musical form is the three and half minute radio ditty!) that the build up that opens the song "Aces High" by Iron Maiden is overdone, or too long, or too repetitive, or that the song as a whole runs too long. Mike should give a listen to another of Maiden's great, and most beloved tunes: "The Rhyme of The Ancient Mariner" I also wonder what Mike would describe as an acceptable length for Beethoven's 5th, 7th, or, most of all, his 9th symphonies...? Does the work of classic rock artists such as Yes, or Emerson, Lake and Palmer, among so many, many others, also fall within the realm of work that "runs too long", or "has too long of an opening or segue"...? What is Mike's opinion, I wonder, of Emerson, Lake and Palmer's song; "From The Beginning"... a tune some might consider to be more artistic and intellectual than much of metal music... which had an opening segue MUCH longer in duration than is that on "Aces High"...? Harry Chapin... Bob Dylan.... Jim Morrison... or, how about Frank Zappa... an artist Mike lists as one of his influences... all penned and performed songs with long opening segments, and run times in excess of 5, 6, even 7 minutes. Is the work of all these artists subject to the same stupid, arbitrary standards, or rigorous (as well as arbitrary and stupid) level of critique Mike reserves for metal music? It's enough to make me wonder if Mike knows the first thing about his so called list of influences beyond their stage names. "Aces High" was specifically designed by Iron Maiden to be used as the opening song on tour for their "Live After Death" tour. In other words, in much the same way as an opening theme serves a specific purpose for a movie, the song served a specific function, and was arranged accordingly. You don't have to be a fan of either metal music or Iron Maiden to easily and very rapidly learn these facts. Avoiding any search criteria that stems from my knowledge of metal music, I was able to determine all the facts I list herein in less than 5 minutes of searching on Google, using only "Iron Maiden" and "Aces High" as search queries. In any case, the main reason the song maintains it's popularity among metal and Maiden enthusiasts is likely owing the fact that hearing the song invokes for them memories of the concert tour, or at the least, the video of same, which was one of the most successful metal videos ever released. Incidentally, I've been a member here for almost six years. In all that time, I have discovered that those members who ARE, in fact, devoted fans to metal and hard rock music (other than myself, perhaps) are not only among the most courteous of all posters on this site, but also among the most thoughtful. When responding to posts such as this one, REGARDLESS of the genre of the music involved, metal and hard rock musicians have, over the years, proven themselves to be among the most helpful, and most sincere correspondents on the site. It is a crying shame that remarks such as those made by Mike, and the repulsive, repugnant, bigoted attitudes behind them, have caused a number of splendid members, and great posters, who also happen to be hard rock or metal artists, to abandon this site for lack of welcome by posters such as Mike. All the poster wants comments on is the vocal performance. Everything Mike said is therefor less than useless. It is actually badly counter-productive, relative to the OP. It is idiotic, poorly thought out, arrogant, ignorant babble like (Mike's post) that leads directly to flame wars. For it all but forces someone like myself to respond, and that with few holds barred. Lastly, as someone with a well earned reputation for outspokenness on this site (and others, believe me...!), I find myself shocked at the insensitive nature of Mike's comments. In my opinion, there needs to be an administrative review of who is able to utilize the descriptor: "senior member"... such being a more loaded moniker here, on a musician's site, than it is, perhaps, elsewhere. I consider this to be especially true for anyone describing themselves as a site author. If I were a less charitable man, I might find myself writing John privately at this point to inquire just what kind of mock-intellectual riff-raff he's letting through the front doors. Jeezus. I shall post my remarks on the performances by Sinpan27 in a separate post.
  5. Arrogance

    It's a very confuciusing subject...
  6. Arrogance

    Was it actually Confucius.... or Homer Simpson...?
  7. Arrogance

    I a coming to this thread late. I will try to be brief. I am arrogant. Yes, yes, it's true. Those who are hearing this for the first time, please, try to remain calm... the shock will pass quickly. At first, I knew this to be true because of how many times I was told so by others. Now I know it to be true because I have learned more fully just exactly who I am, and embraced that reality. For me, the revelation formed itself thus: Am I arrogant? Yes. Do I have reason to be? All things being relative, as others, including the OP, have previously stated... yes. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Well.... Few things can be proven to be true for ALL human beings. One trait we all share is that we don't know a damn thing when we are born. It doesn't even matter, however, if you could give a new born baby all the life experiences of a full 85 (give or take) years. An additional ingredient is required in order for knowledge to become wisdom, and that is reflection. And reflection occurs over the course of a full life time. That time is necessary! More time is actually needed to absorb and digest information than is needed to acquire that information in the first place. I am not saying that wisdom is the sole province of the decrepit. But there is a reason that the curve for the retreat of youthful over-exuberance, in all of it's many colorful manifestations, and the curve for a cultivated store of true wisdom are mirrors of each other. As one decreases, the other tends to increase. This whole thing is leavened, of course, by the variations in relative intelligence, arrogance, personal beauty, and energy level of individuals. Bur it is true enough for us all as a species that all human societies are riddled with tales, parables, axioms, and witticisms regarding this swing. Thus, symphonious7 (nice made up word, that, by the way...), I see your insights, as posted herein, as being relatively normal, and the course of your life to be on track, with regards to how you reflect upon how you employ the gifts you see yourself benefiting from. I too, was overly arrogant in my youth, I still am arrogant. Even to the point of occasionally acting against my own best interests. But not often. Such is one benefit of being 55, intelligent and introspective. So worry not, my friend, that you care enough to place yourself under the microscope of true self evaluation, at all... says much that is good about you.
  8. What does it mean to succeed?

    Well... yeah.... sort of. I mean; - yes... we are of that older mind set, but we (here meant to include, let us say, all members of SongStuff) do not control anything, or at least do not control much. I consider myself to be an observer and commentator now, Tim. Often, my reflections, here or otherwise, are born of those observations. But there is little I can personally do to alter either the current disposition or the course of the industry. What I can do is lead discussions, or begin them at any rate. Such is a service often provided by a previous generation, and one for which I consider myself to be, at least marginally, suited.
  9. What does it mean to succeed?

    Your noggin is fine, Dave. I fixed the typo seconds after reading your post. Yes, Elizabeth, that WAS a UFO...
  10. What does it mean to succeed?

    All taken care of, kimosabe. I won't leave ya hangin'...
  11. What does it mean to succeed?

    Amen, Dave. And remember: puff, puff, pass.
  12. What does it mean to succeed?

    Tom, Tom. Dear, friend Tom. Of all the curmudgeons who seem to inhabit this site, you are without doubt my favorite. I mean that from the heart, my talented friend. The above is hogswallow, and perhaps more accurately describes your own frustration with the state of the industry than it does accurately reflect or address the subject of this thread. First off, it may be rehash to you, but I craft my posts. I know what I write... what I wrote. What you reference with the above suggestion isn't it. I submit that if you go back and re-read the OP, you will find that it is not at all about whether or not the opportunities that used to exist for performers are gone, or if it is worth it to go independent. It's about having people describe, and then perhaps discuss how they perceive the road they might take to achieve real success in the music business. I wrote of my own experiences, and hopes for success, only because an initial point of reference seemed to me to be an integral part of the OP, Something needed to help frame the coming discussion. I almost always include my own point of view in each post I write, But that, in and of itself, does not usually constitute the gist of my posts. Tom, don't you think that such a discussion... MANY such discussions.... is required? Young people coming up still discover they have skills and talents. Young people still have dreams. No matter the state of the industry, young artists and performers are still going to have to decide, each one individually, how to pursue that goal, once a decision is made to try and have a career in music or music entertainment. Or, would you simply, arbitrarily deny all and sundry the chance to make such a decision, or go on such a journey, whatever new form it may take...? How it used to happen, meaning, for example, young bands playing night and day, slogging out a low level, often seemingly endless series of gigs, writing tons of original songs and hoping a handful have real appeal, and then, in most cases, having no better plan that a hope and desire to be "discovered" by some agent of the labels, no longer holds true. Yet, even today, young artists (or at least young, pretty, out going personalities... talent can be and is, taught) are being signed, and groomed, to be stares, by the labels. You need only tune to any pop, R&B, Hip-Hop or similar format radio station, or click through to any number of pop related entertainment to see that this is so. Over the last two decades, however, it has become less and less clear how one might go about pursuing a career as a creative musician, once one makes the decision to do so. I wrote the OP hoping to discover how various people here see "the road to personal success" laying itself out before them. If you read the entire thread, you will see that, although there has been some drift in various skewed directions... what I asked for, I got. Since the opportunity to go out and pursue a career as you suggest is no longer an option for me, I for one will not be doing as you suggested brother Tom. It is my fervent hope you do not take that, or this response, to heart. To amend my OP, however,, I will tell you one thing I sometimes think about: It may seem cynical or even slightly paranoid to some, but I often feel that the very best opportunities for stardom or great success as an artist are either reserved by wealthy parents for their kids, or handed down, like gentrified estate holdings, from generation to generation. How many stars today, in all forms of entertainment, are the children of former stars? How many boy bands, or divas, or any hot, young new act, are such because of, and owing to the ability of their parents to pay for intensive, grossly expensive, in depth training once some measure if raw talent is observed in their offspring? Sometimes it feels as if the most wealthy among us are gobbling up so much of the very best of what America (still) has to offer, they might end up drawing unwanted, and most undesirable attention down upon themselves. It certainly would not be the first time such a revolutionary redistribution of resources occurred in our society. Anyone remember a little soiree known commonly as the American Revolutionary War? or, hell... even The Civil War? Now there's food for thought, if you ask me.
  13. What does it mean to succeed?

    I was going to chime in with exactly this point. The record labels, production companies and promoters care for nothing, except money. The purpose of chaining new talent to a label is for the purpose of having total control over that artist's work, whether it be the songs they record, or the performances they put on. Even today, young artists give up almost all control over what they create and when and where they perform. Back in the 70's 80's and 90's, the usual; gambit was a "three record deal"... which sounded like an incredible opportunity to a group of young kids just hoping to get out of their small home towns. The truth of the matter is that more than half of all careers in music never go as far as three records. So, effectively, this gave control over a new artist's career to the record label. In house producers would always "look" at a n artist's ideas. If a young singer or group could make great songs, they'd be allowed to. To do otherwise would be foolish. But the control... thew decision making ability, always stayed with the label during that first contract. When I was making my play, we knew all of this. While out playing our guts out week after week, we'd occasionally run into a scout, or a producer. They go to clubs to find bands, after all. Or used to anyway. And most were usually willing to be pretty forthright about how things worked. Why not be? They knew they had us all the short and curlys. Doing things on an independent basis was incredibly difficult then, even if you had lots of money, which most bands did not. As far as today? It's all a mess, on many levels. I tend to think a whole bunch of angry, petulant, anal retentive old bastards have to die off before we will see any real change in the music biz. I also don't know what shape it will all take, but I do believe this: if the labels don't stop trying to maintain total control over new talent, the music industry will end up only ever appealing to a younger and younger crowd. Anyone over the age of about 27-30 years of age is already seeking their entertainment, to an ever growing extent, from other sources. Plastic performers and canned personalities mostly hold little to no appeal to anyone who is even marginally grown up.
  14. What does it mean to succeed?

    Some really lovely music there, Tim.