john

Hi Vince Welcome to the Songstuff family! Dive in, post away

Hi and welcome to Songstuff! Good to have you with us

Hi Gang You could write other people's songs. There are tens of thousands of songs.I thought at least asking these questions might yield some interesting and varied answers, and hopefully an enjoyable discussion! To get us started, please pnonder these questions.... What drives YOU to write? What are you looking for when you write? What, if anything, do you get from the process? What do you like about writing songs? What do you dislike about writing songs? What inspires you to write songs? Are you trying to achieve something with writing songs? If so, what? If you were to pick one of your songs to represent you, a song that sums up who and what you are as a songwriter, it embodies it.... what song would it be? Please post the song and the lyrics. If you haven't recorded it, can you post up the lyrics? Would you record a 1+1 to let us hear it? I look forward to your answers. Cheers John

Hi Firtly, there is no absolute, right answer to these questions, but I am really interested in your perspectives. There will be common ground between answers. Answer each separately. Please don't look at other answers. At this stage, it is YOUR opinion I am interested in. From the WRITER'S perspective: What is the purpose of music? What is the purpose of lyrics? What is the purpose of a song? From the LISTENER'S perspective: What is the purpose of music? What is the purpose of lyrics? What is the purpose of a song? Please don't discuss it between yourselves yet. Keep this between yourself and the questions. Don't read anyone else's post. Don't comment on someone else's post... yet! I would like to keep it that way for about a week. After we have gathered ansers, in a week's time we can talk it all over. Cheers John

Hey ZombeeKat, welcome to our family! Good to have you with us.

Ah! I thought you meant instead of. Not to worry. There are other strategies that can be used, though I would say they are generally additions, not replacements.

Which is the natural, organic activity, and organic fan growth. My suggestions above are for going beyond that, to try and increase the rate of growth, especially in the early days. There are a variety of ways you can increase followers, shares and likes beyond that ofjust posting on twitter. In fact, asking for shares and likes etc on twitter itself tends to be ignored. If you were in a band with 4 others, it is unlikely you would have any issue about asking your bandmates to share your music.. It doesn't need to be an either / or situation. We aren't talking about high pressure sales techniques lol WhatI suggest above isn't hugely intensive. In fact, very similar to what you and Richard do on a regular basis. You both started interacting on twitter because of a connection outside twitter and a suggestion that you cooperate with each other. That set of interactions has introduced you both to a lot of people, and not only that but introduced you as fun interesting people. All good. What I am suggesting here, for others, is no different. We work with what we can, and hopefully it recruits enough willing helpers to our cause just because they are nice and they like our music. That doesn't mean we should avoid other methods

Well there are 2 main ways of working: A default position of liking, commenting, quoting, retweeting of and posting about fellow network member’s music posts. Buzz building organised campaigns using pre-made promo materials, on specific days and times and of course posting, retweeting, quoting, commenting and likes. Number 1 is pretty easy and can be fitted in around our normal lives quite easily. Look at Richard and Jenn’s interactions to get an idea. You can have fun but keep it music related. If you do it right, you will see your followers grow Number 2 takes preparation and coordination. Get number 1 going. Remember to talk about your own time, how it is going in the studio, your excitement about specific songs etc. People should find your stream interesting, engaging and active. You need to dilute the posts where you ask them to buy or listen to your music... less “me, me, me”. Talking about other’s music helps break that up but it keeps it firmly about music. Even if you dislike my music, you can still talk to me about my music, and/or my music activities. You can still wish me luck and more. More later...

Keeping is separate is a good idea. That said, you should consider keeping it active by not just talking of your own music and it’s development, but also talk about writing songs, Music you listen to and your view on it, and of course the music of and your interactions with your musical friends, and eventually your fans. It is far better to have an ACTIVE twitter. Make 8 posts a day. Only 2 a day should be about your music. There is more to it than that, but it is a good start.

sings "I'll be there...."

I Hey Trying to make a dent on social media on your own is very, very hard. Close to impossible. All the more so when you would prefer to use your time for making music. The best way to make progress is to join a network of people you can work together with to promote each other’s music and other activities. If you are completely new to Twitter you will need to build your initial audience. I will post some strategies on how to do this on a separate topic. As general guidelines for members of the Twitter: Follow each other Activity is essential, so be active Post 8 times a day 1 new posts 2 comments (no quotes) 2 retweets 3 quoted posts Like loads Use trending hashtags and use Twitter collective hashtags Mention other collective members regularly Use Twitter to have conversations with other musicians, especially Twitter collective members, all about music and how to make music. Plan “campaigns” arrange with other Twitter collective to be online on specific days, even specific times, to start collective actions. Make extra effort to share, quote and interact with other twitter collective members. Regularly mention @Songstuff. Here are some twitter users to follow (their member name here, if they have one, in parenthesis): @john_moxey - @john @MXYMusician @Guitarman_2016 @Jigsaw_Sequence @Richard Tracey @MaheshOnMusic @Mahesh @LisaGgates - @Lisa Gates @JennDollMusic - @Jenn Please add your Twitter handle below. Follow the list above, then make a post mentioning the members you add, plus Songstuff and #twittercollective. Songstuff members I think should be on this list would be @Peggy, @The S @Geraint @Pahchisme Plaid @Sreyashi Mukherjee You can can imagine if we get 30 twitter users working together that their reach can be very big and the impact far more significant than what you could achieve as an individual. Success for any member, with anything going viral, is success for us all. We will all benefit. So take it seriously and try, just try.

Hi and welcome to Songstuff Lola! Good to have you with us.

It is still healthy to look at what can be done to address any issues that do arise. For any system to work it requires the buy in of all concerned. It doesn’t take many agitators to break a system for all the rest. We we can only float out ideas to discuss them. If others members like or dislike them, they are adjusted or dismissed accordingly. There is nothing wrong with what we have, but it does require both writers and critiquer’s to be considerate of the other, and to have a realistic understanding and expectation of the process. When that breaks down or there is a lack of tolerance, problems occur. David mentioned one issue that requires awareness on the part of critiquers, that of the snowball/avalanche effect. Perhaps awareness and willingness for members to call it when they see it is all that would be needed? That said, my original post was more about consideration on both parts, and awareness that new members are very much an unknown quantity. That was always the case, and that awareness was always needed. Of late, some of that foundation has been strained. The new site rule changes just clarified existing rules and penalties. My critique process suggestions were very much in response to points raised in topic. As for trolls, if you see it, report it. The more it is indulged or responded to, the more mods need to unpick to see who originally bated who, if they can.

It's not about being dishonest or lenient. It's not about making poor observations. Going by your analogy, what good would a teacher be if when you went along they spent the lesson listing what you don't know how to do without point you to some solid areas of work, giving you working methodologies, pointing you at good books etc. Teachers have to decide what you can absorb when you are new to a subject, and then divide it into lessons. At some point they have to decide what they will teach you and when, precisely because they know they will overwhelm beginners very easily. They ensure you understand each bit before they move on to teaching you the next. This is not teaching, but it does have a learning element. That aside, my suggestions so far have mainly revolved around taking the heat out of critique and trying to help it stay on point. None of us are served well by unnecessary and entirely avoidable arguments. It isn't fun and it isn't constructive.

It's on both. However, it is the one offering critique that will feel they are wasting their time the longer they spend on such a topic. That said, most members do both roles. The fact is that it is the OP's song. They are always gioing to have creative control. Last point on that is that there tend to be more beginners posting for critique than giving critique... in part because they feel unconfident about offering an opinion, no matter how much they are encouraged. It's just the way things are. If you want to waste time convincing someone that doesn't want to hear what you say, fair enough. You know, and we know, that in such a situation it is common that the person whose material is under critique in such a scenarion is likely to get defensive if you keep pressing a point. My suggestions are in part aimed at reflecting the realism of the balance of experience, and the avoidance of arguments and of wasted time.

I'm sure I have a prize here somewhere...? I did look and certainly can't do this currently. It would be pretty strange if you could see the OP's original posts but no one else's reply. That brings it down to a private conversation between two members... a PM. As Richard says, the problem then becomes that no one can benefit from the insights people have other than the OP and individual reviewer. Equally they cannot benefit from someone else's insight when they spot an issue with a proposed solution or can provide a less extreme solotuion etc. I think if instead we have a good think about policy and how it can help. For example, if instead of immediate critique a member posts a quick summation of what they would like to discuss about the song... and the OP then chooses a max of 2 people to discuss their song with? During the process if someone else observes something they can ask to join on that specific perpective. If the OP wants that input they can then give the person the go-ahead to join... otherwise it's thanks but no thanks... I want to stay on point. etc. While we can't lock people out, we can have policy and guidelines to refelect the above.

Hey Larry, welcome to Songstuff! Good to have you with us.

Hi and welcome to Songstuff Tito. Your signature is locked until you reach 20 posts, after that you can set it as Hobosage describes

Hey IJ, welcome to Songstuff

It is not about compromising honesty, but we all know that HOW we say something can make a difference. Also, critique is not just about acknowledging problems, but also the good points. In critiques on our boards often the latter is neglected... The other biggie is about overwhelming people with a list of problems. If you spot 20 issues (for example) in the writing of a beginner, it does not compromise honesty to address only 2 while acknowledging that more exist... for example : “I can see a number of potential issues you could address, and strengths that could be built on, but I would suggest we just focus on 2 aspects just now. I think it would be more straightforward to prioritise. We can look at the other aspects later if you want?” It is honest, it allows you to prioritise the issues as you see them, and it doesn’t overwhelm. It also provides some balance and allows critique to be digestible. The purpose is to help improve the song, and to help the songwriter. The approach I mention doesn’t compromise that. In fact it nurtures it. As far a trolls go, trolling in the guise of critique does happen. Being deliberately provicative during critique is easy to do. Introducing sarcasm and ridicule is a big problem... and it happens. Combine listing a load of negatives only, with offering no solutions, offering nothing actually constructive, and presenting it in a way that ridicules the writer or makes a joke at their expense, may be entertainment for the person doing it, but for the person on the receiving end it can be a very different experience. Now I know almost all members want to help. Just like learning to write better songs, members can learn to more effectively offer critique. That should come as no surprise! Most members will be unaware of why people leave. Why people become reluctant to take part. Because I am admin I get a bit more insight. Members sometimes tell me. To give you an idea of how serious it can be, I know of at least one person who gave up writing after receiving a barrage of negatives, ridicule, no constructive comments other than vague suggestion. The member left. I asked why. They told me. Generally the reaction is not as severe. Now I know a great number of people have benefited from our forums, but we can improve the process. We can make it more friendly, more accessible, without compromising honesty. We can make it more useful and less fraught. Surely that is beneficial to all? Perhaps members would be willing to take to take part in critique of their critique process? I think it could be very useful.

No, but you have to be organised and active. Ideas like this have a shelf life (as you have discovered). You have to strike while the iron is hot. Best done when you already have drum and bass sections done so you can quickly create.

Hi Gang I’ve been looking at how Critique is conducted, and how it could be better. I’ve been looking at quite a few angles: How useful it is to WRITERS How useful it is to REVIEWERS EXPECTATION What PROBLEMS members encounter How much FRICTION can be involved (and why) How our critique section appears to GUESTS and NOOBS How it reflects on the site (is it attractive to POTENTIAL MEMBERS) How much it has an effect on MEMBER RETENTION (because it surely does) My purpose here is to make suggestions to our members regarding critique, and to try to outline that we deal with a large number of combinations of perspectives and skills. Critique needs to happen in as neutral and comfortable an environment as possible. It can be VERY uncomfortable for the uninitiated. This should be a much more pleasurable experience for all concerned. 1 & 2. As it stands I think it is useful, but is largely dependent on MINDSET and EXPECTATION. 3. Members tend to be either detailed and blunt/to the point, or they are more forgiving and less direct. Members with work being critiqued can be a combination of these: Nervous Defensive Very Confident Unconfident Closed to change Open to change Eager to learn and improve Believe they know it all Looking for ideas Looking for lines/words to use verbatim Looking for confirmation (a pat on the back or round of applause) Looking for confirmation, belief they are absolutely right Personally too attached to their work Arrogant Unappreciative of effort of reviewers Unresponsive (no response to comments) Selfish (all about them) Argumentative Fear their work will be thought of as inferior Unaware of process and method of critique Members offering/giving their critique of a posted work can be a combination of these.: Considerate Direct Detailed Judgemental (They know it all, their way is the right way etc) Vague Focused on the Negatives (completely forgetting what works, what is good) Biased Arrogant Antagonistic / Provocative Thoughtful Helpful Constuctive Destructive Offer suggestions /solutions Fail to offer suggestions/ solutions Argumentative Focused on their ideas being adopted Flippant Well meaning Skilled Unskilled Absolute Experienced Fear their skills are not good enough, or that they will be challenged and their opinion ridiculed Wrapped up in the challenge Unaware of impact of words on writers Feeling responsible for effectiveness of critique Feeling no responsibility for effectiveness of critique Other factors that might influence activity are if writers fail to perform any reviews. That can annoy reviewers. Lack of time can make people more blunt than intended. Text as a medium can distort emotion. What you say with humour can sometimes come over as ridiculing or nasty. Our critique section can be daunting to new members or guests. It can appear almost violent. This makes new members less likely to take part. If members have a bad experience they communicate this to others (on and off our boards). It can cause members to drift away. It can put prospective members off ever joining. Suggestions Expectation of writers needs to be improved. I think a “Getting started in Critique” video might help improve expectation? That might make it more approachable and help new members have a realistic expectation of the critique process. I will keep my suggestions and observations for writers, beyond the above, to a follow on video on the critique process. That said I would say, don’t mistake a reviewer offering a lot of detail as a personal criticism. They are trying to help. Offering critique? Reviewers tend to be experienced members. Experienced members set an example for other members of the expectation of behaviour.. what is okay, and what isn’t. Not just on the critique boards, but right across the forums. Rules help set the the backdrop, and some of the tone, but the active members are responsible for setting the overall tone of a forum or individual board. Specifically on the critique board, balance is important. I see so many critiques that are a list of perceived failings, whilst rarely mentioning what works. Critique often stops there. Critique should be: Observation Analysis Suggestions Discussion This should apply to positives, not just negatives. For example: “I love your use of emotive language. It really helps engage the listener and makes it easier to connect with the song. It also helps make the chorus all the more forceful. One suggestion would be to use more extreme versions of the same emotions or using adverbs to magnify or modify meaning. Like the difference between “sad” and “desolate”. It could be made more interesting by modifying it too... “gentle desolation”, “tortured desolation”. Just an idea for you to consider. At the end of the day, the reviewer’s job is not to persuade the writer to change their work. It is to highlight possibilities, explain mechanisms, offer perspective, offer suggestions, discuss the song... and leave it to the writer to decide what they want to do. Avoid being antagonistic. There is no purpose in offering opinion in such a way that it elicits a defensive reaction. When dealing with an experienced member I know they will appreciate my blunt, to the point observations etc... because they are used to critique. They won’t take it personally. Equally I respect them and know they like that direct discussion. Importantly, not everyone likes critique that way. There is a temptation amongst some experienced reviewers to try and cram in all their observations in one or two posts. That can easily overwhelm someone new to critique. After a couple of points they just hear “They think my lyric is crap” and either respond defensively, or they crumple... even to the point of giving up songwriting. Critique should NEVER come to that. Far better to expand awareness an issue or two at a time. For writers with a number of regular issues it is more important that they progress. There is absolutely nothing wrong with you prioritising the observations you make, or for you to say “I can see other things we could talk of but I think making this change would make a real difference. If you agree it helps, awesome, but it is up to you.” The writer is the one in control. If you don’t know the writer, assume they are not used to critique until you know otherwise. Instead of investing 30 minutes in an in-depth critique and possibly feeling agrieved when your well thought out critique is poorly received (possibly for some of the reasons outlined above), try out picking out one issue at a time... and if you detect a strong resistance to ideas... don’t spend more time trying to persuade. Say, “Fair enough, it’s completely up to you” and walk away. Avoid passing further comment such as ”Fair enough, it’s completely up to you, but I think you are crazy” That effectively is a personal comment. Be content that you identified the issue to them, and offered a solution and were willing to discuss it. If you can’t identify a solution, don’t make the observation unless you are actively pressed on a point. True we are not running a nursery, but the reality is that member experience and resilience varies massively. STAY ON TOPIC... THE SONG. KEEP GENERAL SONGWRITING POINTS AND PHILOSOPHIES FOR A DISCUSSION ON THIS BOARD. During a song review it can be quite emotive... especially when the writer has a strong personal connection to a song. Making general songwriting points during a review can appear like a general criticism of the writer. Even if you feel that way, just like other personal criticism, it is best avoided... if only for the sake of a pleasant environment. I hope this is of use and I welcome discussion on the subject. Cheers John

I could be wrong, but I thought the OP meant how much were rappers making from songs they release that use beats they got from beat producers for free. The producers let the rappers use them thinking they will be on free mixtapes, but rappers then upload to iTunes and make money. At least, I think that is what the OP is saying! Truth is, you take any bunch of people who don’t know how the music industry works, and who put in very little effort into learning, is it any surprise that creators of any kind are taken advantage of? It isn’t just rappers and beat makers. It isn’t just a certain age group.... though I think it is more generally a bigger issue for the less experienced. It goes with the whole get rich quick mentality that fuels American Idol and a few million YouTubers. We live in a world where so many feel entitled, who want to be instant millionaires, want everything for free, don’t want to put in any real effort to get there, who want zero inconvenience, and who want someone else to be responsible. They want it on a plate, preferably when they return from a nice vacation. The solution is to learn. To look for the right answer, not quick, inaccurate or entirely false rumours.

Hi and welcome to Songstuff Mudloop. You can always get better at critique. An important way to look at it, is that if you cannot effectively critique someone else’s music, how can you effectively (the emphasis on effectively) critique your own music? The point being that if you improve your skills in critique in general.... it greatly benefits your own music. Plus, you develop skills faster because you are not encumbered by personal connection to the songs you develop your critique skills on. A win win scenario. Good to have you with us.

Hey Ever had gear envy? Sorry, but this just looks like too much fun.