Arrangement

[john]

Hey

How do you go about arranging a song? I'm interested in how others go about it.

Like my recordings arrangement does change as the song develops. When writing I nail the melody and song structure, basic chords etc. At that point I have a basic idea of how I want the song to sound, the overall emotions I want to convey etc.

I will rough out small section arrangements in my head or sometimes a basic arrangement for the whole thing, knowing that it will evolve. I like to have a vision in my head of how a video for the song. I always think visualization helps.

Starting arrangement I usually address the bass drum, snare and bass guitar/synth adding them to the basic chords and melody. Starting simple I get the rhythm of the bass and drums to work, then address the bass melody.

Once I have that basic core I'll add in any other melody/harmony parts, then back fill any chordal rhythmic adjustments. I sometimes try removing the original chordal part which makes for an interesting sound and an interesting perspective on the song.

I then go through a cycle of rhythmic and melodic iterations for each part. Usually the core melody doesn't change much, perhaps some tweaks on ornamentation but that is it. Other parts can change more radically during this process.

Nowadays I do a lot of this during the recording process. So I regularly listen with one or more instruments dropped out assessing their impact on the dynamic of the song. Do they add or detract? Do they hold true to the emotion of the song and lyrics?

Anyways, interested to hear how you work.

Cheers

John

[Nightwolf]

Interesting, very methodical, as I would expect from you

As usual I am on the other side of logic...

I tend to write more haphazard and reckless... When something pops into my head, I record it, not worrying about tempo/timing, or even where the changes go, I just let it flow out and try to get a feel for what it is trying to become. I generally start with either an acoustic guitar or piano depending on my mood.

Then I listen, and usually wince a little since the playing is mostly sub-par at this point. Then I hear the second part weeeee!!

I grab another instrument and attack the existing tracks from a different angle, usually Bass or keys/strings. This part I do pay more attention to tempo and timing. What changes work, which ones need to bee moved or re moved.

At this point a decision needs to bee made concerning the original track, namely, can the second player work around it. If so proceed, if not, redo the first part, but only after it solidifies in my head using the second part to lock it in.

Once the second player has locked in the path I redo the first takes and try to get them locked in.

Lately, when the third player comes along, it overshadows the original concept to the point that it is not even needed anymore

Interesting topic, I have never put words to the madness...

[JonathonHolder]

For slower songs I usually completely write the song with just vocals and piano or guitar. I then add a bass line, I actually pretty much use classical harmony for that (bass on the key note unless I want an inversion, plus passing notes). I'll then jam around the bass line for a while, and if I find any nice fills or anything unusual that works, I swap it in.

I then see if I can come up with a lead guitar part. I usually try to write lead parts by just imagining sounds without playing, as that can allow you to come up with unusual ideas and rhythms. Often I'll come up with a line that I would never have written with an instrument, as I can't actually play it. If I come up with anything that fits, I layer it in.

I then get the band together and try out various drum lines. Then, most importantly, I listen to the overall sound and see if it's too busy, if anything clashes, if the sound is even, if it has the right kind of 'energy flow' etc. I then take things out and put thing in until it sounds right. Just last week I completely arranged a song, and then decided it was better with just piano.

For a more rhythmic song, I start with a basic rhythm and then just throw ideas in, arrange a couple of sections, and then sort out the structure at the end. With the drums, I often avoid having high hat on every beat, instead having the hat play another counter rhythm. I think the drums should sound almost melodic, a line that you would want to listen to by itself. I tend to use more riff based bass lines for faster songs, and often I like to match up the lead guitar to the bass, leaving second guitar or keys to fill in the chords.

[Lazz]

When I have a finished song, the changes are already there along with the structure, written out on a lead-sheet. I guess this is the basic arrangement. When the chart gets handed out to the players on a gig, we just go for it while listening hard. There may be some preceding conversation about feel and groove and who is going to take a solo, but any arrangement after that is usually an on-the-spot process, save that occasionally there may be some rhythmic accents that I want everyone to hit so I write those onto the sketch. Otherwise it’s pretty much player-dependent.

The real big fun for me arranging-wise is when I choose a piece forthe larger ensemble pad. This means four rhythm and three horns: trumpet/flugel, tenor/soprano, and trombone. The piece can be one of my own tunes or it could be a cover – the bigger ensemble is intended to be able to do weddings and dancable music for functions and so I like to have a goodly selection of songs people know and can recognise – but I like to do them in a different style from the original source.

So the first stage is to get the idea.

This usually takes around two weeks of running the tune around in my head until I have something alive and threatening – mainly consisting of a ‘feel’ concept along with a bunch of lines and figures for those lovely brass and reed instruments.

After that it’s another two weeks of harmonising those lines and writing out all the parts.

That’s the juice for me – I am slow at it because I’m still learning, but I like the harmonising aspect and I like the therapeutic mechanical meditative aspect of drawing up a nice chart that’s easy to read for everyone under dodgy lighting conditions. I get a huge kick out of the fact that this is not behaviour which is generally associated with singers – so it does me huge favours on the impression front.

The harmonisations which have been giving me the most pleasure are fourths – which some of my own pieces lend themselves to quite nicely – and the use of two significant chords as basic harmony sources. For example, I will take the IV and the V as the two significant identifying 'characteristic' chords of a key and then harmonise each melody note as if it were the top note of an inversion of either of those two chords – gives it a sweet sound and a direct association with the key – great for R & B and pop stylings.

Apart from those two little harmonising techniques – fourths and significant inversions – I tend to pay attention to voice leading using the third and seventh tones and adding ninths, elevenths and thirteenths as appropriate for my third note.

Hope that makes sense.

[FinnArild]

Songwriting and arrangement go very much hand-in-hand with me. I work by constantly turning out demos, so arrangement comes in very much organic and layer based. I very often have a base arrangement in place on the first demo. When I do start on the final arrangement of strings, backing vocals or other stuff it often comes by experimenting, improvising and recording at the same time.

Other times ideas to an arrangement comes when I'm "offline", so to speak. Then I try to hum it into my cellphone with an explanation and get it in as soon as possible.

[Lazz]

– the bigger ensemble is intended to be able to do weddings and dancable music for functions and so I like to have a goodly selection of songs people know and can recognise – but I like to do them in a different style from the original source.

Thought I would post a link to an example.

My re-arrangement of a well-known ditty written by Leonard 'music-to-slash-your-wrists-by' Cohen,

[Lazz]

I apologise for the ambiguity and confusion.

First, I was talking about two different techniques which I have had fun with.

1. Fourths

They are 'flexible fourths' for a start - whichever one that fits: perfect, lowered, or raised.

And I was referring (implicitly) only to chordal pads as backings.

Meaning that I might voice an F Major chord as follows:

G (the 9th) for the trumpet

D (the 6th) for the sax

A (the 3rd) for the bone

or....

D (the 6th) for the trumpet

A (the 3rd) for the sax

E (the 7th) for the bone

Does that make sense ?

I use 4ths this way in the pads of It Really Doesn't Matter.

But they can work harmonising melodies also.

2. 'Significant' Chords

What I do here is choose, say, the IV and the V as characteristic sounds of the key.

Then, all I do is line up the 3 inversions of the IV triad next to the 3 inversions of the V triad and also pick a close and handy solution for the odd note out, and that defines my palette for harmonising melody.

We always harmonise downwards, by the way - if you harmonise upwards it means you are in effect making a new melody note - the highest note becomes what we hear as melody note - so harmonies are built downwards.

In the key of F Major, as example, my two significant chosen chords could be Bb (IV) and C (V).

So, harmonising melody notes in the key of F Major, one at a time:

F in melody is harmonised as root position Bb triad

G in melody is harmonised as root position C triad

A in the melody doesn't exist in our two triads so we need a solution of either treating it as a 6th substituting for the 5th of the V chord, or as the Maj 7th substituting for the root of the IV - whatever sounds best.

Bb in the melody is harmonised as 1st inversion Bb triad

C in the melody is harmonised as 1st inversion C triad

D in the melody is harmonised as 2nd inversion Bb triad

E in the melody is harmonised as 2nd inversion C triad

Any other non-diatonic accidentals - idiomatically unlikely - can be resolved like the above A.

The result being that each harmonisation is a clear sonic statement of either IV or V.

A eureka moment for me.

The horn figures in the Cohen example linked two posts above in this thread were written using this technique.

No big deal really - but it works for me.

***

If I'm going to use parallels, I'll generally stick to 3rds and 6ths which is a really smooth siken sound.

There's an old band called Supersax which orchestrated Charlie Parker solos this way.

So it's great on fast moving lines.

***

I'm still only a beginner.

I depend largely for arranging on books by David Baker and by Dick Groves.

****

Dunno if that helps - but I hope so - it took a bloody long time to type !!!

[Lazz]

Ah, I see what you mean. Thanks for the explication. You meant harmonizing the upper note on a fourth where the fourth occurs in an inversion. Makes more sense now.

Well.

Glad it makes more sense.

But no. that's not exactly what I meant.

The fourths are one things : the inversions something else.

[Lazz]

I'm a little confused why you call those voicings an F Major..... ...if there's no bass and these are the only chord tones ..... Both of these voicings create a tension not normally found in a major chord.

It was loose talk, I guess - ignorant of what might be our shared taken for granted assumptions of understanding.

Ambiguity rules.

On their own, in limbo. sans context, I have no idea what decision I would make about giving either of those two groups of three notes a name.

So you wouldn't be alone there.

But it wasn't actually claiming that either were an FMaj7.

Merely offering two examples for fourth voicings I might choose as backgrounds played by three horns while an FMaj7 chord was going by.

(Backgrounds that I refer to as 'pads' - and that could be completely wrong - dunno for sure what other people call them.)

Illustrations of an arranging technique I use which has a particular sound I enjoy.

Their successful and effective happening assumes and rests upon FMaj7 being taken care of by bass and chord axe(s).

And those notes are all regular pukkah FMaj7 scale-tones.

So they thicken up the Major chord nicely for me rather than make tension.

That's just the way I look at it.

Maybe there is tension.

But I am intrigued also by the way you looked at these notes, though.

Gives me other stuff to think about.

You know, I have never taken the time to properly get to grips with the concepts revolving around 'bitonality' - like the Brecker Brothers' approach, f'rinstance - but, from what I vaguely recall, I suspect there is a lot of useful mileage can be squeezed from thinking in terms like G9/FMaj7, or Em11/FMaj7..... stuff like that.

Interesting food for thought.

Thanks.