Bands That Should Have Visited Songstuff!

[thelevellers]

Whilst watching Amsterdam doing support for The Bluetones on Sunday I was shocked (although I had already realised they weren't that great) when they made a double error in a song, that I think would have been dealt with pretty quick if they'd visited here...

In the middle of a song they had a little break, all instruments cut out and the singer sang a verse/bridge. Great, I like that in a song, you can emphasise some of the lyric and stuff. Sadly the verse not only had a painfully obvious forced rhyme, but it wasn't even a rhyme! It was close-ish, but really I'm sure a bit of effort could have sorted out the forced sounding-ness and achieved and ACTUAL rhyme...

Is it just me that finds, since joining here (or since starting to be properly critical of lyrics/songwriting anyway) that they notice 'errors' in songs they listen to? I find I do it all the time now, and kinda rate the band according to whether they can get away with it or not - or maybe whether I agreed with their decision to leave it at that!

anyone else got some examples of this to share?

[Steve]

Can't think of anything offhand! But I know in the past I have heard things that have made me wince! And for me to do that, it must have been bad! Can you tell us what the rhyme was? (wasn't?)

[AnneC]

In my undercaffeinated state, I can only think of one thing right now. The other day I was listening to "Paralyzer" by Finger 11 and thought how sloppy the phrasing was on the chorus. Not exactly what Ro is talking about but I couldn't help but think "My God man, just carry over to that next word and it would work a lot better!"

[Steve]

I thought of one. Metalicas' 'Unforgiven II' Where they rhyme ' under wicked sky' with 'this pair of lives'

[neoteric]

Staind. Only to remind them that they need a little variety in their music.

[Spyder]

Honestly, it's all music to me. Some incredibly awesome bands have lyrics literally as long as this;

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blah

Blah blah blah blah,

Blah blah blahBlah blah

Blah blah blah

And their songs have been very influencial. If the song sounds good and seems true and creative, then it's fine by my book.. I don't like sellouts.

[Lazz]

Some incredibly awesome bands have lyrics literally as long as this; Blah blah blah blah, etcetera...

And their songs have been very influencial.....

Influential for whom, may I ask ?

[john]

Hey

Why bother with lyrics then? Then again thelevellers original post was lyrics/songwriting... which include melody and chords and rhythm.

Out of interest, what makes someone or some band a sell out? Surely not their ability to write good lyrics?

I'm gonna go into this, not to beat you over the head or give you a hard time but because it is an interesting topic worthy of debate.

On other boards I've seen threads about "do lyrics matter" or someone saying "lyrics don't matter at all". Fact is what is acceptable is genre specific, and linked to the purpose of the song. If you write rap music that doesn't rhyme and has varying meter it begins to become something that is not rap music (which is ok if you didn't want to write rap music to start with!), if you are writing for any genre where the listeners pay attention to the meaning of lyrics it matters. On the other hand if you wrote a lot of deep meaningful lyrics for Goa trance it's a bit of wasted effort.... BUT... the thing is to write the right kind of lyric for the song, not that there is a right way to write lyrics.

To write the right lyric for a song, even if that lyric is one word, can take effort and skill. Sure someone might write a really good lyric by pure fluke, but even when a writer writes from the heart they are employing a myriad of filters about what to write, even the ideas are shaped by things they have learnt.

To simply not care is a cop out.

A band can be musically influential without being lyrically influential. A band can be really crap musicians and still be influential (something the sex pistols and other punk bands said about themselves). "Influential" is as much a product of marketing and promotion as it is the music, or the songs. I hate to say it but very, very little gets out there (mainstream) without it being accepted by men in suits. Length of lyric isn't a factor either.

Songs (words and music) are about communication. Songs to many are about appeal. To others they are about ideas, fashion, politics, emotions, romance, hate or simply making contentious statements. To writers and listeners they can be about personal therapy, or about belonging or identification. To others they are simply about making money. Normally they are about a mix of several of those depending on circumstance, time of day and mood. But fundamentally they are all still about communication. The communication between the writer and the listener. The performance being communication between the performer and the listener.

There are nonsense songs and songs that make people cry. Sometimes it's the music. Sometimes the words. But most of the time it is a combination.

Why do I go on about it? Well by sticking your head in the sand and thinking anything will do you with no sensitivity as to why or if that is acceptable you undermine your own ability to communicate (like semaphore with one hand tied behind your back.)

I guess the difference between a good song and a bad song is partly one of perspective of the listener, but it's also about the writer's ability to communicate to the listener (at least from the writer's perspective). It's a blinkered view.

When I listen to a song that belongs to a genre, I have a rough expectation of the type of lyric it may contain, even the subject matter of the lyrics. So when something goes against that, with no real benefit to the song, no artistic reason, no creative reason, and no real meaning it smacks of laziness. It smacks of compromise. It says loudly "I don't care about the standard of my work". "I don't care about the listener". To me that is a sell out.

I don't think it is the simplicity or complexity of the lyric or the music. It's not the number of words, or variety of words. It's not the success or failure in the charts. It's not about the number of creative ideas, how abstract they are or how raw that expression of creativity is. To me songs that show neglect or compromise on the part of the writer or demonstrate a lack of understanding of the effect of words or music by people who should know better are the ones I would highlight. Those are the sellouts, even if that is for just one song.

It is something almost all writers have done at some point. To meet a deadline. To move on. Because we settle for second best.

For me a songwriting board isn't about patting ourselves on the back, or ignoring problems and accepting below par songwriting, or accepting something on first pass as being "the song" because it was the rawest expression of the idea by the writer. It is about identifying problems and finding solutions, developing understanding and seeking improvement. About expressing creativity with your writing with people who really care about how well a song works, who will be honest with you and truly want your song to be the best it can be.

Then again that's just my perspective!

Cheers

John

*puts away soapbox*

[neoteric]

I always defined a sellout as someone who creates something for the purpose of more financial gain. For example if direction A is the direction the band has always traveled down, but then they see that direction B, despite being outside of their realm, could give them $200,000 more in profit, so on that basis they go in direction B, then that to me is selling out.

I guess you could also say writing for the fans is a bit of selling out. Music is about self-expression and if you're not going to follow your own inner path just to make everyone else happy then you might as well just hand your instrument and the stage over to the crowd.

Edited June 21, 2008 by neoteric

[FinnArild]

It is good to get feedback on your lyrics and music - however, one should not adhere to all of it. What makes art art, is that it is you. Too much "guidance" and it will be little of you left. To little feedback and you will make music that noone else but you like ... ...

I would be so bold as to advice any which band to take a trip into songstuff to gather good feedback ...

[Lazz]

To simply not care is a cop out.....

For me a songwriting board isn't about patting ourselves on the back, or ignoring problems and accepting below par songwriting, or accepting something on first pass as being "the song" because it was the rawest expression of the idea by the writer. It is about identifying problems and finding solutions, developing understanding and seeking improvement.

Well said, that man.

Let's hear it for the quality of caring.

Hooray.

[thelevellers]

*applauds John*

For me the term sell-out varies, from the lazy type sellout that John mentioned, to the money based sell-out that neoteric mentoned. I can think of a couple of people that are odd fits in both categories, one is Green Day with their American Idiot alubm, while (I think) it's a good album, I also feel that they some how managed to sell out to the prevailing emo image, even though they had the punk/emo image all along. The other example is Feeder, their most famous song, Buck Rodgers, is clearly an example of somewhat lazy songwriting, and yet rant has proved over several albums he can write a damn good song - the key to Buck Rodgers is that he wrote it for another band, but when the band manager (or label) heard it they realised it was too good to let go.

So that muddies the sell out waters yet more!

But is there anyone with examples of my original question? (Not to close off the discussion, but I'm entertained by the question) Please note that it can include any aspect of songwriting, so the 'could be better' phrasing that Anne mentioned is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about

[LittleJeff]

i don't need to sell my soul, he's already in me.

[Boff]

Kind of an old topic, but I found something!

In the chorus of Audioslave-Like a stone theres a line that goes like this:

"I'll wait for you there like a stone"

In my ears that doesn't really add up, even though I realize the thought of stones being really longlasting and all..

It would be great to get this topic back alive, it's always nice to know that even the big guys can write really corny lines now and then

[john]

[thelevellers]

Hah! I knew I had forgotten one, shows how long since Audioslave were in my playlist... Maybe time to change that, although that line will start annoying me again (it did for about three months when I first got that album...)

Sadly I can't add any more as I've been listening to some REALLY very good lyricists, the kind that don't like to waste a line... The closest I can think of at the moment is the line "You never got poked in the eye with a spork, You never got sick from all that leftover pork", but seeing as it was Presidents of the USA it's cool, and they did get the word 'spork' into a song... That said, they got troglobyte into another song, and it wasn't even forced in!

Anyone else with some more?

[tommy]

OOO, good topic... Must... Keep... Alive.

I don't have any lyrics right now, but one major song mistake that sticks out is tthe piano mistakes that were made in The Band's version of I Shall Be Released.

[neoteric]

Kind of an old topic, but I found something!

In the chorus of Audioslave-Like a stone theres a line that goes like this:

"I'll wait for you there like a stone"

In my ears that doesn't really add up, even though I realize the thought of stones being really longlasting and all..

It would be great to get this topic back alive, it's always nice to know that even the big guys can write really corny lines now and then

I don't have a problem with that line honestly. The use of stone completes the imagery.