Donna

What a cool thread!

Here's whatI wrestle with. Existing lyric which needs changing, but the vowels and syllables themselves are already what I'm used to, and usually what I want. Sometimes the consonants, too. This would be for a lyric which already has melody, or a definite rythym I am set on. Example: Existing lyric: She stole from a peach tree New lyric : Theiving for a fruit unknown The new lyric may be what what's required for force of expression, poetry, whatever, but I need the "ee's" from peach and tree, need the "ole" from stole - or at least the "oh". And, not necessarily need them because they make the next or preceeding line work. Ditto, the syallables and the way these lay. This kind of thing may be why MaCartney's Yesterday apparently had a working title of Scrambled Eggs. Any hints??

Hey- I think I've figured out some things. First, it's easier going direct in this household, anyway. Less intrerference. I have a new Seagull acoustic/electric and went to work last eve on Phase II of my project (recording guitars 1 and 2) Secondly, now that I'm able to get better instrument separation on existing tracks (just in the past couple of days), the guitars are coming out more distinct. Thirdly, I did mute effects spilling onto existing tracks and put them just on the guitar while recording *it*. I'm getting pretty excited and can hardly believe things've come this far....listening on 2 dif. sets of speakers, the snare, kick, cymbals, toms, bass, guitars one and two, organ and strings are sounding separate. And all that, on two tracks....it's basically four conglomerates: drums, sequencer (bass/strings/organ), guitars 1 and 2. But it's been something trying to get the sequenced lines a coherent whole in itself. I'm keeping pretty detailed records and wish I had some grid paper for a soundboard...you know, I've made a lot of circles lately, filling in the eq/trim/effects for each stage. I think there's about 3 substages within each stage. Will try again micing guitar at some point, maybe sooner rather than later, but it seems to be sounding pretty good going direct.

Mon Capitaine, I think I understand, but am not sure. However: Ah, but what drove Johnny to be so stupid? Is he just stupid? Then why write a song about this unless there's something engaging about him? Maybe there's something behind his loyalty to this bum of a girl that makes it interesting. Hey- I just read a novel about an medival girl betrothed to a man she barely knew - but her betrothed entered a monastery due to wounds of war and unfit for married life. She was of such mettle that she disguised herself (even to him) as a monk and cared for him til his deathbed several years later. It's full of mystery and heroism - some would say she was stupid, tho. ...that's what I meant about considering one's self a storyteller. I guess some folks could be helped by asking "who what where why?" That abstract form is beautiful, though. The thing is, even if the idea can be expressed in one line, life is dynamic, the song is. And I say that being a great admirer-er of conciseness and editing! People need to know how the idea manifests as (the way you move, etc;) and the story in your song may need it as well. The bare idea while it is the core needs something more....maybe it'd be like cooking without spices, or even heat. Just plop down the basic food groups, raw, there's your food (idea)...maybe not even a plate or utensils to eat wiff. I think JB may've hit the nail on the head, about being too close to gain perspective. It happens....

Oh - just wanted to add that musicially this happens with me as well (reminds me of Finn talking about the "themes" he comes with, to string together). Well, I had a beautiful theme written over 16 years ago, and now I'm pretty sure I'll be finally using it. That's not helpful for what you're working on presently, Mon Capitaine, but maybe you having something of old (idea or actual lyric snippet) that's just been waiting to be used with the present unfinished stuff? A long shot - but then again, maybe not!

John, can you explain what you mean by "2 (a)"? The overgeneralizing/overlapping? I know I've had this obstacle before, meaning #1 both (a) and ( - I marked your paragraphs and changed format a bit for easier reference. I did find that in those cases sometimes the idea was not meaty enough - and I was NOT interested in magnifying or adding on to it. Or, for some other reason while the idea was big enough, I couldn't amplify. What did happen in one instance with such a lyric, was this: the original idea was that of a woman's pain and longing (which was absolutely palpable to me, after seeing a certain documentary). I wanted to tell her story. But I could not communicate what I felt. Somehow I ended up writing instead a completely different story and the only thing left of the original idea was "pain and longing". Re: #3 - that's a toughie when combined w/ 1 & 2. I would advise keeping your edited solid lines. A couple options spring to mind. One being to consider yourself a storyteller (maybe you have already done this? I hadn't really, until Last Train). I found that took a lot of pressure off, to finish the idea. It is true, the lyric ended up going somewhere I hadn't intended, and maybe didn't even want, but the more I could consider myself more as reporting or as a detached sort of recorder, the more options opened up for me as to finishing the lyric. And I was able to quickly pare down those options, once they revealed themselves. As far as getting caught in editing loop before the idea is down...either you have finished the idea (seriously) and need the beginning, middle, end to fatten it so the listener can glean SOME kind of completed picture - or it just stands alone, to be either put with some other gem verse someday, or not. That's my opinion anyway. Or - maybe putting it down for awhile, do something different and out of your routine and life, to help get you dreaming or whatever it's called, thinking in a different way, letting go somehow. I fear this is no help at all ~ but Cheers anyway. Donna

Wanna collaborate? lol I shall reply later, when able. Very good topic!

Got a new axe today! It's a Seagull acoustic electric, spruce top, hard case.

OK - that link looks good and another overview to my Songstuff eq/freq. charts. Cool.

Tom, that makes sense (verb spilling side to side uopn mixdown)....I'll just be needing to mess around a bit and report back. Mr. P, I remember the Phil Spector guidelines - start out 12:00 and pan out from there if needed - to hopefully avoid any holes. I'll check the freq. link, t/y.

Prometheus, thanks for chiming in! You know I'll save/retain what you've just said about the low string 84 htz and all. Hey, do you know of a link that lists the instruments and all that to their frequencies? I'm a bit muddled right now and not able to search it out for myself...

Hey Tom, That is a very good question. Which makes me stop and ask myself. * Yes, I want them to sound independent. BUT, I also think, owing to the differences in guitar parts, it might warrant differentiation in sound itself. One guitar is a bit dreamy, with suspended notes and more ring, while the other is grounded both in triad notes being emphasized and anchoring kind of rhythym. "A clean split" sounds like too much of a degree, but maybe it wouldn't be. In any case, I welcome your suggestions, because even if they don't apply in this case, I'm sure they will in another.

Tom~ It's totally OK. Donna (aka the artist who's posted one song in 13 months)

No worries! I am grateful for your help. Yes, I am using two mics each time I record a guitar part. And no guitar amp - it's a straight acoustic. Possibly anticipating your next question, the last time I recorded guitar I used two "Nady" DM-70's - the info says "dynamic, neodymium cartridge, unidirectional cardoid" (is that a condenscer mic?) It's sold as a drum mic and was hot as pistons when placed on the toms, and great sound I thought! Some good soul gave it to me. Otherwise I use an SM58 or 57 can never remember, and a condenscer mic. One mic placed in front of me, off to the left, aimed at about 4th fret. That's more so I won't bump it when playing. One mic, almost straight in front, aimed off to the right of soundhole. I've done it other ways (to the bridge and 12th fret -maybe didn't mess w/ trims and etc; enough).

ATom, I guess I have "track eq" then?

Great questions. 1) No - I'm using two mics per guitar line 2) No: but the portastudio's mixer has 2 channels for eq on effects. Actually, I suppose it could be any channels, but I use them with 5 and 6...they're plugged in that way. Per the picture, channels 5 and 6 - Trim is red, eq orange (two gains and two sweepable freq per channel) + pan and faders...the blue/green are effects volume (so to speak), kinda like the montior mix gains.

Hey all, Once again, need your help...and thanking you in advance. I think my question on guitar sounds would apply even if I wasn't bouncing tracks, btw (working w/ a 4-track). It could also apply for co-lead vocals, I suspect. Anyway, in the configuration of the song I'm working on, at least the rough draft goes like this, including panning: a) drums & sequencer (organ/strings/bass) - panned almost fully left and right -tracks 1 & 2 two acoustic guitars, w/ chorus effects - panned about 10 o'clock/2 o'clock....this is where I'm doing the bounces or pingponging of tracks. Where one guitar is recorded along with playback of tracks 1 & 2...then the whole process repeated for 2nd guitar. c) two tracks left open for vox, panned almost straight center. As far as goes, first I'm having trouble in the sounds of the acoustics being distinuished from one another, after they've been recorded, that is. Once I've done the "bounce" with the 2nd guitar, there's no going back, if something's amiss the process of needs to be redone. So the eq and so on must be set pretty much as I go and cannot be individually tweaked upon mixdown. Secondly, when I record the guitars w/ chorus, all seems well...but when mixing and I add some reverb for the whole thing, the chourused guitar sounds seem to disappear. Any ideas why? Thirdly...when you guys say "cut at ___" or "boost at____", a lot of times this doesn't make sense to my ears. What I'm beginning to suspect (am I right to?) is that it might NOT make sense to my ears, because of something Prometheus had stated: that nothing in 100 yrs of using this (multitrack recording technology) would suggest having each ind. track sounding great, will equal a great mix. That's it's the whole which must be considered. I hope I'm making sense in these questions.

Steve, thought provoking post. Maybe if we're ever stuck, a change in the writing process might get things moving again. Maybe we'd be best off writing with a certain method-technology according to seasons in life or mood. Maybe one reason I'm happy not using the pc is because the writing method-tech has pretty much been the same since day one.

John, that's great! Yeah, I'm planning to enter.

Hey Nick, have you yet posted your acoustic number? I'd like to hear what you've done with the engineering/mix aspects. Thanks~

What way do you find most productive to start writing a song? Do you start with a song concept? Do you start with lyrics? Melody? Rhythm? It varies, but lately, it begins with an image, or a feeling to convey, so in a sense there is a concept, but also it's detective work - finding the song. In the past the lyric was usually first and as I wrote, the rythym and melody would come. Do you have a common way of developing your original idea? Yes, by simply playing it things often develop. Also, by playing it, it becomes familiar and development can come into one's head while simply going about the day. At what point do you start recording? Almost immediately. Thank goodness for blasters with built in mics!

John - now calling it a brain dump puts things in perspective! I'd never put a name to doing this, but once the lyric was there on paper I thought it kinda sacred (not *I* sacred). Mon Capitaine, I think you got me out of doing this. The little Christmas contest last year. Or maybe it was the whole board. But somehow in conversing with other writers, a new detachment came and I had periods of looking at the thing as something to shape - both lyric and music. Hard to explain. What I remember specifically was looking at the brain dump/sacred lyric and asking, "is that the way I want the story to go?" So first, I thought of the lyric as a story. Second, I acknowledged that story could go any of a dozen ways...then thirdly, I kinda found "which" way, just by what I thought might be an interesting story, or one I was at least comfortable with. Some lyrics are so personal that comfort becomes a necessity. I didn't at all agree with the Lord of the Rings filmmakers doing this, where they declare "We thought it wasn't so important that Gandalf [or whoever] said "their" line, but that SOMEONE said it." With writing original material, though, one can put the personal in and yet add other things, which can obscure some of the too personal - in a way "having someone else" say it, so that both expression and comfort are in a nice balance. Detachment I think is a fruit of this, or maybe a cause. But those three are a good trio! That's what the board has taught me.

I didn't like the Martin acoustic I tried, and the Cort is now off my list, too. Electric...that one of Bleem's he let me try, long ago. I'm no help

t/goodness you've given the key, hari, else i wouldn't have a clue... now i iv v, i can understand -typing w/ a very tired 3 yr old on lap

Case closed! Truly, Mon Capitaine just gave the whole recipe.