Jump to content

Your Ad Could Be Here

Form, Structure, And Song-writing Language


Recommended Posts

This is following up an initial outbreak of discussion with John that threatened to hi-jack a thread of Matwein's.

It concerns something I am currently writing - and it is becoming quite lengthy already.

This particular piece in the works was stimulated by John's notion (in "Lyrics Critique For Songwriters") of introducing a 'basic vocabulary and further justification of the same'. It is turning into quite a lengthy beast, though, revolving around conversations and considerations of structures and forms. It does NOT look at anything like selecting a title, the fundamentals of rhyme, song plot development, melody writing, harmony writing or chord progressions - but is intended to aid those who. like me, are lyricists, to write in ways that are 'muso-friendly' so that a music writer can get a better handle and do a better job with their words.

It starts with the core idea of repetition - and then moves on to the two basic food-groups of 16-bar and 12-bar forms before edging along to multi-part structures. The two well-known examples I use to illustrate those two starting basic food-groups are "Blowing In The Wind" and "Flip, Flop, and Fly" - for which I need permission before publication. Subsequent examples are mostly from my own work, but there are a few other permissions needed also.

The sub-text of the section on the 16-bar and 12-bar forms involves the identification of 'refrain' and a demolition of terms like 'verse' and 'chorus' as they are commonly used today in our threads here and other pop forums. My intention in this is simply to introduce an awareness of what those terms 'really' mean in the already established traditions of songwriting so that the budding lyricist can communicate more effectively and productively with a pro musical collaborator who would be used to working with such long established more specific terminology.

Between me and you, John - and everybody else who reads this - the flagrant mis-use of the basic terms drives me up the wall on quite a regular basis - 'though I try not to let it show too much. Contemporary useage is cripplingly counter-productive and limiting, and I would like to get rid of it altogether, but have little hope of succeeding. I know. It seems like re-inventing the wheel for no good purpose when the old one works perfectly and the new one is seriously broken. And it also demonstrates a wilful and disrespectful ignorance of tradition and form. There - I've said it. Just like an old fart. But I am a geezer who recognises that nobody can possibly move forward in any area of creative endeavour without a decent understanding of what went before.

The question is - Is anybody really interested ? I know they have to be for the courses I likely get to contribute to next year - 'cos it's worth credits. But what about here ? Am I wasting my time ? Does anybody care ? Would it have any importance to anyone here at all ?

Edited by Lazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for 1 look forward to it and appreciate the effort [smiley=bounce.gif]

You ROCK [smiley=rockin.gif]

threatened to hi-jack a thread of Matwein's.

threatened??

but there are a few other permissions needed also.

Freely given Friend :CLOWNIN:

drives me up the wall on quite a regular basis

Meet ya there at the normal time??

Is anybody really interested ?

Very much so!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Lazz

Sounds like it overlaps with a lot of what I was planning on covering in that section, though I was planning on splitting it into something that covered song forms, and a separate article pulling together the vocabulary referring to the song forms, plot development, title, song focus sheet, songwriter's framework etc articles. I have also been adding definitions into the glossary so they can easily be referred to from the articles. The smaller articles also seem to be more easily digested.

From feedback on Songstuff and about twenty other forums the scope of the articles is very much appreciated, and read and referred to. In each article I was planning to incorporate a dynamic element by pointing at a topic in the forum that contains a live component. For example in the Lyrics Critique for Songwriters article I pointed to a topic in the songwriting forum containing a set of example questions to use during a lyric critique. Certainly the songwriting articles do get a lot of visits.

If during the writing of your article you have any definitions you want added to our glossary, or would like an existing entry updated, just let me know. :)

Nice one Lazz.

Cheers

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freely given Friend :CLOWNIN:

Thanks a lot John - but the permissions needed should be from Little Bobby Zimmerman and Big Joe Turner

I have sent a PM to the other inestimable John - Mr Moxey - with my starting outline sketch.

But here's some of my immediate comments on basic terminology:

Song Structure Terminology

The terminology of songwriting has become laden with contradictions perhaps due to the tendency of current 'pop' writers to develop their styles, and the language they use to talk about them, with little or no regard to the established traditions and accumulated history of their chosen craft and art. There is not necessarily any right or wrong here – although I clearly have my own functional preferences – simply the recommendation that it is necessary to be able to recognise and identify these differences in meaning. Such notions as ‘verse’ or ‘chorus’, for example, will generally represent one quite specific thing to the regular professional jobbing musician, yet apparently mean something completely different to a budding writer of contemporary ‘pop’ songs.

Verse

The second generation of Tin Pan Alley songwriters who were involved with the creation of an American musical theatre regularly adopted the strategy of writing a kind of ‘set-up’, or introduction, for a song – in order to help place it within the dramatic context of the complete staged theatrical piece of which the song was a part.

Numerous ‘standards’ from the ‘Great American Songbook’ originally possessed such introductory verses – even though they may often be omitted from modern performances of the individual songs. (Notable exceptions to this practice include Billy Strayhorn’s classic ‘Lush Life’, where the verse is so essential to the meaning and story of the song that to perform the number without it has become pretty much inconceivable.)

It is this ‘set-up’ section which is identified amongst traditional jobbing musicians as the ‘verse’.

In talking about more contemporary ‘pop’ music, however, it has generally become common practice for a ‘verse’ to correspond roughly with the idea of a poetic stanza.

God knows why - can't ask cos I don't believe - they use it in this manner.

But I don't believe this useage is very helpful or productive and just put it down to ignorance.

Chorus

Similarly, amongst the community of professional jobbing players, the term ‘chorus’ is used to refer to one complete statement of the base structure of a tune – excluding that introductory ‘verse’, if it has one.

Vide – the Wikipedia entry under ‘Thirty-two-bar form’ where Richard Middleton is quoted as saying that, in this form. “the musical structure of each chorus is made up of four eight-bar sections” (Studying Popular Music. Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1990, page 46). That is, the ‘chorus’ represents one complete statement of 32 bars.

In talking about more contemporary ‘pop’ music, however, it has again become general common practice for the term ‘chorus’ to be used in reference to one readily identifiable section of a song which is repeated melodically, lyrically and harmonically at regular intervals throughout its performance.

In this context, the use of the term ‘chorus’ may often loosely correspond with the idea of a ‘refrain’.

Refrain

The ‘refrain’ is a structurally much looser term which refers to that part of a song which is generally most easily recalled by the listening audience because of its repetition during performance. Songwriters will often consciously strive to achieve this status for the ‘hook’ part of a composition.

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind

or

Hi-ho silver lining, every where you go …. etcetera

In the usual clumsy terminology of popular music, these two above examples – which should more properly and usefully be called ‘the refrain’ of the song – seem generally and wrongly identified as ‘the chorus’.

But they are not the chorus – they are the refrain in each case.

Edited by Lazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting...language is a living entity. Can you imagine that in German, "overalls" translates into English as "Jumpsuit?" I mean, they just took the term to mean what they figured it meant, and everybody uses the term "incorrectly." It's pretty funny. I forget what they call what we call overalls, but it ain't "overalls."

We're talking about respect for tradition, but we're also talking about "using terminology correctly." The issue of "using terminology correctly" sounds brainy, nerdy, and yes...old-fart-esque. But why?

Stephen Colbert's term "truthiness" comes to mind. It's actually a much bigger issue than we think...and Lazz, your process of clarification is an important one...my question is: "how are you going to sell it?"

I've started selling some eBooks, as my signature shows...and my "flagship" product "was" "How to Write YOUR Songs Down," because I know that the skill of music notation contributes greatly to any songwriter's creative capacities. It's even in the term "song" "writer," that is writer as in someone able to write. Someone who is literate.

John has graciously reviewed the book, and we'll be doing a special for SongStuff members soon. Very cool.

But my point, that relates to yours is that, I decided that I was giving people "what they need" as opposed to giving them "what they want."

That's why I wrote "Become a Better Songwriter Guaranteed!" I speak about the value of learning music notation in the text, but I also concentrate on other aspects of songwriting and unleashing ones' creative potential.

So, it seems to me that you could "work" the same angle. You could make the very legitimate claim that using terminology properly helps songwriters gain better perspective over what they are doing, what their historically-based options are, and how they can forge ahead into new territory without repeating the mundane.

However...is there really a drive for "quality" in songwriting in today's music business? I address that issue by discussing "Internal" vs. "External" success in "Become a Better Songwriter Guaranteed!"

If the drive for "quality" in the music itself is lacking...why would there be a drive for quality in the use of songwriting terminology? ...interesting nut to crack...

Wishing you the best of success,

Dainis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im quite sure I have passed on mistakes & misnomers. I would be interested to know what it is we are all trying to say though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Dainis.

Good to meet you.

I also support the idea of giving people what they need – but only if they want it.

So I’d never really thought in terms of ‘how are you going to sell it?’, figuring that if people are really interested, they would take the trouble to find out, and ask. But I take the point.

When I wrote of ‘my own functional preferences’, when I wrote that contemporary popular useage is ‘cripplingly counter-productive and limiting’, I was simply trying to say, just like you, that there is a better way – that ultimately a songwriter is ‘better-off’ using the conventional forms rather than making up new and redundant terms - in much the same way that someone who harbours serious ambitions about a career as a guitarist is going to be clearly better-off studying music rather than limiting themselves to tablature.

For a pure hobbyist in any field, personal satisfaction and happiness is the sole value and arbiter, and quite right too, but for a person with a career in mind, then in terms of any goals and ambitions, some tools are just more useful than others – like, for example, being able to write your songs down.

Rudi – knowing what it is we are trying to say was exactly the issue. My thoughts on this were initially provoked by a much earlier comment from John about the need for language terms with which to discuss the activity and process of songwriting, and my taking notice of the fact that although such a shared language exists and is happily in productive use already, it still seems there are a lot of people with songwriting ambitions who are ignorant about such things.

My intent in being willing to share information.about the established terminology is, as I stated above, “to aid those who. like me, are lyricists, to write in ways that are 'muso-friendly' so that a music writer can get a better handle and do a better job with their words.” For, if you are a lyricist wishing to collaborate with a literate musician – one who knows how to write it down – you are going to be much better-off speaking and writing in the language they understand.

Couple of other things for Dainis:

First, at my personal end of the music business there is definitely a ‘drive’ for ‘quality’ in song-writing.

Secondly – this overalls-jumpsuit translation seems pretty provocative. One term has roots in regular working-man’s life, while the other has roots in the job of being an air-man. I’m not ready for German construction to be quite so unexpectedly loose. I would like to understand more about how that translation worked in this particular case.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not ready for German construction to be quite so unexpectedly loose. I would like to understand more about how that translation worked in this particular case.

Hmm... Have I missed something here? ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question is - Is anybody really interested ? I know they have to be for the courses I likely get to contribute to next year - 'cos it's worth credits. But what about here ? Am I wasting my time ? Does anybody care ? Would it have any importance to anyone here at all ?

I would be very interested. I just wonder where and when the emphasis on writing 'verse, chorus, came from? I suspect that most of the younger lyricists here, those that don't play an instrument for example, are more interested in becoming great and wealthy lyric writers, without giving much thought as to how that goal may be attained? I have read a few introductions to that effect! I have also noticed, with my own collaborations, that lyric writers seem pretty unwilling to change a lyric once it's been written, with small regard to the musician trying to write a suitable melody and score! I have come to the conclusion that a lot of lyric writers are hoping to find an easy path to future wealth! I do however, think that writing in any form can only be a good thing! and should be encouraged at any and all opportunities!

In the pop culture of today, the most common form known to anyone not associated with the music business, and encouraged by live acts that actively seek audience participation, is to get the amassed ensemble to join in with the 'chorus!' or sing along to the 'verse' It's been like that for a long time in my experience! And I suppose that in my ignorance, I am one of those guilty of perpetuating this dire falsehood! I'm not saying that it's right, but it's the popular way! I doubt that many here have ever crossed paths with a professional musician, or are ever likely to? I am eager to learn from anyone who knows better than me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too. When I think I know it all, will be the time to quit. I dont think I will live that long. Bring it on Lazz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'm guilty, I reckon.

Can't quite recall, but I'm sure Dr.'s Biales or Callahan spelled all original terminology out plainly in theory One (and One and a half - no one, not even the savants could get better than a course "C" grade - Dr. Callahan was on the moon!) But maybe I dropped out before that happened. OK: that was legit classes, where we studied modes and counterpoint and parallel fifths (anathema sit!!) ; the Mass we studied ALL YEAR, long before I was Catholic, and I's downright bewildered as to why we had to learn the Introit, Kyrie and so forth - and Dr. B was a Jew! But BOY he loved the Mass, and sat in with the orchestra at St. A's whenever he could)

In Jazz College, which was popular theory...maybe Art Maud (the Limey and classical guy) did tell us what verse/etc; really meant.

But forever I've been on the pop usage. Philisophically, logically, how can I argue against proper terminology?

Would I use it, tho...Lazz, you could probably influence me to more than anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I am ignorant of any classical learning about music history and terminology, so this thread is a revelation to me, even though this is the first new post in almost three months here. If the discussion has moved to another thread, somebody clue me in. I have been concerned that the termnology we use does not allow us to communicate our thoughts very well regarding musical and lyrical structure. I would like to learn more, and I would use what I learn. I'm nerdy that way, and old enough to know that nerdy has it's cooler aspects [smiley=bounce.gif]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

great thread Lazz.....if u can add some more i am waiting for it.....and now i have much clearer vision and concept of how song works....maybe in my next lyrics you will see some improvement....

Love, Prayag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Prayag.

I found that I had bitten off much more than I could comfortably chew at one sitting.

Now it's turned into something of a Frankenstein's monster.

What was intended as an article has become unwieldy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lazz, I think I would definitely be interested.

We are in the *communication* business, and an important key to effective communication is a shared language. I don't know (because I don't know enough) whether the whippersnappers have impaired the development of music by ignorning or misusing its vocabulary, but I sure would agree that music can be enhanced by using a shared vocabulary.

Harkens back to medieval magic, in a way. The practitioners thereof used to maintain that if you wanted to use something, or use it to its full potential, whether it be a demon, spirit, element, person, or spell, you had to first know its name. Interesting insight.

I also--as an aside--feel that geezers need to be supportive of each other. So I would probably seriously consider purchasing your book, even though I have yet to buy a book on songwriting through nearly 30 years of songwriting. But I sure would want to read yours.

Carry on.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Your Ad Could Be Here



  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $1,040.00
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By continuing to use our site you indicate acceptance of our Terms Of Service: Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy, our Community Guidelines: Guidelines and our use of Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.