[Making Money In The Music Biz]

What we need is a collective. There are so many decent song-writer, composers = musicwriters out there that are trying to be independent and try to make it on their own. The trully great will succeed, I'm sure. And so will a couple of lucky ones. But for the rest of us it's an endless battle trying to earn some money with our mediocre products. I'm not bashing 'the rest of us', I'm just saying the average music-writer is mediocre, since that's what average means.

I think we should focus on the possibilties of our internet-generation, instead of the negative points. In the past the average music-writer was doomed. No record-deal = no money. Today even mediocre music can bring in a lot of money, but not on their own. We need a collective. A place where new music is concentrated, without the promise of quality. There are a lot of people interested in new music, but who has the time and possibilities to search thru the enormous amounths and diversity of it. Let's not forget the countles platforms it is presented on. We need a couple of platforms that present this new music to the audience. A few places people will know to turn to if the want to find new music.

The question is how do you organize such a place?

[The Line You Wish You'd Written]

Mine would be "You never give me your money". First line from the song with the simlilar name from the Beatles.

["why Am I Not Famous Yet?"]

If fame is the goal rather than making some kind of constructive contribution, unremitting hard work and constant gigging pales by comparison to applying for a vapid reality television show where you'll be selected for or against on the grounds of God knows what basis...

Either way, at least you're guaranteed to be famous for five minutes.

Amen

[What Do You Do To Promote Your Music?]

I've tried to promote my music on various platforms. I've used reverbnation, myspace and some other I can't even remember. The problem always is that it takes tremendoes effert to get something of the ground on any site that is ment to promote music ( I don't consider forums such as this one a site to promote music). If you want to have some results you have to be very active. Therefor I choose to have one platform to promote my music on. In my case that's Youtube. I like the fact that you can become a partner. I think's that's a nice goal. And it;s a huge community with a lot of people who are on the site out of interest in (new) music and not just to promote their own music. The problem with sites that are devoted to promoting new music is, like Upperlines and Pskains said, that the people on these sites are only interested in promoting their own music.

I use forums such as this one to be part of a community with like minded people.

[Song Title Association Game]

Nancy Sinatra - These Boots Are Made for Walkin'

[The Best Melodic Writers]

Johann Sebastian Bach. No, I'm not kidding. He was a great keyboard writer. The classics are chock-full of phrases and ideas and the old ones are all public-domain now. They get cabbaged all the time.

A "good melody" isn't just a melody, though. It's an arrangement. Rare is the melody (Bach's dum-de-dum-dum de-dum-dum de-dum-dum de-DUM-dum-dum dum-dum-dum-dum ... yeah, you know the one; of course you do. Or, Pachebel's Canon...) that it alone is an unmistakable motive in just a single line of notes.

Yeah, if your are looking for amazing melodists I can recommend listening to

Bach (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faJrlrRJa9A&feature=fvst),

Beethoven (

),

Chopin (

),

Mozart (

)

For every example I gave there are certainly 100 other examples of astounding melodies by every single composer I mentioned. Besides that I didn't mention Schubert, Rachmaninoff, Lizst, Debussey and many many others how also wrote an insane amounth of unbelievable melodies ALL great melodists from our age drew there inspriration from.

Really, there has been written an insanly amount of incredible music in the past 300 years. You cut yourself short like a midget to a T-rex if you neclect all this, because it 'doesn't sound 'cool' or for what ever reason you can think of.

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

We agree. Yay!

Lol, we do!

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

You miss the point, success is a function of perspective. Success means achieving a goal. That goal need not be "to be popular". It could be "how well did it deliver the message you intended to deliver". It can be many things depending on your perspective.

Yep, I missed the point. I assumed you ment populairity with succes and you didn't.

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

Okay... I am not saying popularity equals good. I tried to be clear but something has been lost in translation. That is my fault for not being clear enough. My fault as the writer of the post.

It has to be a factor simply because of mass testing of the song by many listeners.

Longevity is a factor simply because that is mass testing by listeners over time.

Is either absolue and defining? No.

Art comes in 3 forms:

1. Art for the artist (Induldgent, soliloque, a speech or sermon, ego driven)
   
2. Art for the public (Often called a selll out, lacking soul, detatched, arm's length, popularity driven)
   
3. Art for both the artist and the public (Conversational, communicative, driven by many things)
   

Which type you choose is a decision taken by the artist. I try and produce number 3 from above.Therefor, what the listener thinks is important to me.

It's not the only facet. As mentioned in my first post there are several factors, several key ingredients. Because "good" to me concerns the connection and the quality of communication between the writer and the listener as much as suitability, creativity, memorability etc.

Good might mean something different to you. That's why I love talking about this sort of thing because for me it is very useful to understand the perspective of others, because I am interested in your opinions and because it tweaks my own decisions when writing.

Longevity, now that's a whole other topic on it's own, but it is also a part of the generic "good".

As the writer good is a measure of success, and success is a function of perspective. ie it is a subjective quality.

Surely we can find some commonality on what good means? Hooks? Structure and form? Memorability? Use of language? Even in discussing popularity as one facet of a song I think it demonstrates a breadth of opinion, feelings and meaning, but there are common elements of what it means.

All though where quite on the same level. When you say: 'Good means something different to everybody. That is excactly my point of view.

I still don't agree, however, when you say 'Good is a measure of succes'. If something is succesfull it doesn't necesarily have to be good. That saying popularity equals good. And I think that equation has been proven wrong a lot of time in the past.

I think what we can do to make this thread worthfull for the OP is to state what we personaly think makes for good lyrics.

I'd say interesting topic, immatiative use of words, steady rhyme, double rhyme, build up/form.

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

but the flaw in the above argument is that your examples are arguing things that later became fact. were as lyrics are not facts and there is no right or wrong opinion when it comes to art. But if you base it on popularity then i think you pretty much covered the argument against popularity being the deciding facotr of a good lyric. It really isnt, i would say that a good lyric is imaginative well written and either thoughtful or catchy with plenty of hooks contained with in it. Popularity is a terrible way to measure quality for almost anything really.

Yeah, you're right. Art is subjective. There might be some fysical laws we haven't discovered yet that even disprove theories that I metioned above. So maybe 'the thruth' doesn't excist at all. Who knows.

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

I just spent 30 minutes posting a reply to this. I then accidentally closed the window before posting it.....

Popularity is a factor worth considering. Less popular songs are less tested.

For me it comes down to (popularity wise) am I only interested in my opinion, or am I interested in every one else's. After all I know mine. I share my perspective partly in the hope it helps someone else, and partly because it gives other people the chance to consider my opinion and offer suggestions that may modify my own opinion, my own understanding.

Another significant part is considering what people generally think. I write songs for other people as much as myself. My songs are 100% me, but 100% me connecting with other people in a musical conversation. If I want my message to connect I have to consider what other people connect to, what other people like and dislike.

In part that is the role that generally accepted songwriting guidelines (not rules) play in writing a song. They are the result of collected wisdom.

There are no absolutes.

Gijs, true, we all decide what we consider to be "good" or not. There is no alternative. What we can do however is learn from others and adjust what we think is good and why. In posting here we share our knowledge and people consider it and perhaps offer suggestions we ourselves consider and incorporate in our understanding.

If we hope to connect with others via songs, then we must be interested in what other people think. After all it takes at least two people to take part in a conversation, but it is with the speaker that the onus of being understood belongs to. In otherwords we have to make ourselves understood, we have to talk in a way that the listener will understand, and that means understanding the listener. Otherwise we are speaking purely for our own benefit.

A good song is like a good meal. You are the chef. We are your peers in the kitchen, the listener is a diner in your restaurant.

We have a list of ingredients which known recipe's tell us of combinations that have been proven to work.

So here we are in the kitchen, tasting each other's recipes. We offer our opinion taste wise, but we also have our opinions on what diners would enjoy eating. Not only that, we have our opinion on the meals others will enjoy eating so much that they talk to other potential diners about it.

As chefs we might offer tweaks to improve the recipe you create and seek similar when we offer our creations for a taste test.

There is a generally accepted wisdom on flavours, known combinations of ingredients that appeal to people. For example if I suggested adding salt, not sugar, to make cake frosting do you think most people would like it or hate it? Would you like it or hate it? I think we could all agree that very few people are likely to find it palatable. All the other ingredients and how they are combined might be perfect but that one ingredient can ruin it.

Reinventing the wheel takes time and energy that I would rather direct towards improving my own abilities.

At the same time I accept that to learn what other people like I have to listen and consider what they say. To learn what others know, I have to listen to them. My understanding is not perfect, it will never be perfect, but I can improve it.

Asking ourselves what makes a popular song also considered to have "good lyrics" is a good question to ask. And the reverse. To ask that of unknown songs is an exercise in prediction.

We have our opinion on what is good, but it is folly to not understand what others consider good and incorporate that so that our own songs improve.

Just my two cents on something that should not be overly contentious, and definitely should not be made personal or taken personally.

Ok, good post! I agree in the sense that other people can help you grown as a writer (of any kind). The problem, however, remains that the OP asks what are 'good' lyrics. You can say good lyrics are lyrics that are proven to be populair. It was a populair believe that the earth was flat a few centuries ago. Does that mean that that was good? We have discoverd that that was in fact bad. With lyrics this kind of total rejection of ideas will not be able to happen probebly, but when Beethoven premiered his Grand Fuque a lot of people left the room. They where saying that his harmonic language was not good. This was a populair believe. Does this mean his harmonic language was indeed bad? It was a leap forward and it is now considerd populair believe that is was, indeed, a leap forward.

IN the baroque erea fourths between two voices was considerd bad, because they felt is was to harsh, to dissonant. That was a populair believe. We believe now that a clash of a c major with a an c minor chord is dissonant. Whil people still think about it that way 100 years from now? Tritones where considerd devlilish. This isn't a populair believe anymore.

The same goes for lyrics. Populairity/ what others think might display the populair believe at this moment, but it will most likely change. If you always test your lyrics/music/art to the populair believes you will sty within that circle. That's a deathcentence for creativity. If you look at the most populair artists from the last 80 years. Where these considerd populair by the time they started out? Or did they develop somthing that has grown populair.

Galileo was convinced the earth revolved around the sun in stead of the other way around in spite of what almost everybody else was saying around that time. Who's point of view is more populair now?

I agree that you can learn from what others tell you about your art. But you should not try to listen to them in terms of good and bad. You are the only one who can dicide what is good and what is bad. First of all, because it's all relative and subjective. Second of all because populairity is by no mean a token of what's good and what's not.

It is kind of a responsibilty to try and find out for yourself what's good and what's not. If you make the wrong decision you might never earn something with your art. And it's true that aiming for a populair market is one way to earn money.

But if that is what the OP wants to know, then he asked the wrong question.

[Composing Instrumental Songs]

Writing instrumental 'songs' doesn't have to be that different from 'normal' songs. It kind of depents on the style you are after. If you want to write classical-periode style music there are other things to focus on then when you want to write baroque-type compositions. You could write 12-tone like Schonberg, or avantgarde.

Maybe you could pick a style you like and listen to some composers from that periode. Read some theory that explains something about the style. You can spend a lifetime learning about one style-periode, so there's lot's to explore I'd say.

In essence you often use baroque, classical, romantic, etc. idioms for pop-songs as well. So it will probebly be beneficial for your songwriting process too.

I would suggest a book by Schonberg, named 'The essentials of composing'. It explains what the basic elements of compostions are and builds on that to teach about writing more larger forms. This is all directly applyable in songwriting as well.

[New Musical Style]

My Band is looking to do some recording of Metallica/Iron Madien style music. Not there songs but our own songs kind of styled and played as they would. We mainlly do music more at the style of Slipknot/Children of Bodom, and as the Songwriter for my band, I'm used to write that style of music and I just can't get it right.

Maybe you can be a bit more specific. What excaclty can't you get right? The riffs? The rythm? Something else? Everything else? Everything?

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

I don't agree with that at all. Certain criteria does exist that determines whether a lyric is good or not. I believe you are referring to the listeners opinion of the lyric rather than the lyric itself. Now, that opinion is important, but it could be biased, or based on any number of things, but that doesn't necessarily make a good lyric bad or a bad lyric good. Nothing makes a bad lyric sound good better than a great melody.

Well, ok. Then what are those criteria? You say a great melody, but what makes a melody great?

You use the word good and great, but isn't good subjective to begin with?

Maybe the confusion is that the OP can be interpreted as the question: What are criteria for lyrics that are most likely to become popular. But populairity and 'good' are not interchangable words. But I won't be putting words in your mounth.

What are the criterai for 'good' lyrics? And in what way can you objectify the word 'good'?

[What Defines Great Lyrics?]

Hey Randy

It depends on the function of the lyrics. Some lyrics the main function is only to convey emotional snippets that compliment the melody and arrangement, others deliver a message, others tell a story. Sometimes the lyrics are the most important component of the song, others again they are playing the supporting role. So....

What makes good lyrics?

• Memorability
  
• Suitability to purpose
  
• Ability to evoke suitable emotion(s). Often an emotional journey.
  
• The integrity of the lyrics (emotional, themeatical etc)
  
• Connectability, accessability
  
• Good lyrics also tend to show the singer in a good light, even in protest songs!
  

More contentious is the fact that it doesn't matter how good the song is if no one knows about it so... I'll add:

• A good quality, effective promotion campaign
  

Fundamentally fans need to want to listen to it, over and over again... and want to share it with other people. That is only achieved when you have all of the above.

And for longevity:

• Subsequent, periodic promotion campaigns
  
• A fanbase
  

There are some good tips in here. I don't agree that good lyrics are dependent on how many people hear them, but I understand where you are coming from.

In the end I dont think there is a formula for good lyrics. It all depents on your own personal taste. If you like the lyrics, that means they are good. Probebly one of the most difficult things in making music is there are no rules. That gives alot of freedom, but also a lack of direction. And the most succesfull (in terms of expending the horizon) are those who made their own rules.

The best advise I can give you is dicide for yourself what makes good lyrics and what not.