Writing Vs Music (& Vice Versa)

[justsoulin]

Hi All

I've been spending some time reading through various parts of the board, all of which are fascinating. I'm learning so much from you all and understanding things I never knew - THANK YOU!

I'm at a bit of a crossroads though and since I'm new to the board, I would like to hear some open and honest views please on the "hot" subject of:

1. Fitting Lyrics to the Music
   
2. Fitting Music to the Lyrics
   
3. Overcoming our viewpoints on what can/does and cannot/doesn't fit/work
   

Let me explain in a little more detail my predicament. I've been writing alone for years but have now upon finding this board decided to stop being alone and do something with (what I think) is my talent. After listening to so much music over the years, I understand that some styles are structured (beat to syllables), whilst others appear not to be, allowing the music structure to mix with the lyrics (either/or becoming words or the music) and the words to do likewise with the music, but the vocalist in translating the words can allow for syllables not present by adding additional emphasis say (basically a simple few extra "No, No, No No No's" do the trick).

There are also the songs where the verse and/or chorus and/or bridge are shared vocal points, having a completely different syllable count and yet, they both fit.

I think what I'm trying to deduce is that as a writer, I can understand a musicians' need to have the structure of the music and therefore think or require the writer to also conform accordingly.

So if I were to write a perfect six or eight syllable song, the musician is going to be very happy. But if I wrote it and in simply reading the lyrics a seven or nine count line appeared in what may seem a haphazard way, I don't see that as a problem because "Phraseology" (as in how the writer assumes the singer sings or pronounces the words and the speed at which he delivers them), must come into play - surely?

Likewise with the rhyming link. There must be a little latitude as opposed to only exact sounding rhymes - surely?

I'm asking this (and hope you understand where I am coming from), to learn and understand. I don't play an instrument but the music's inside my head, so when writing I "get the song".

Some members opinions are based on perhaps being a trained musician or self taught or a certain genre that they write/create/perform for. Some opinions are from people like me, they can see how it could fit. Every opinion is worth it's weight in gold. I'm just reading (and becoming a "rule" person in my critique) a lot where my "old" way of writing (where applicable) just is not allowable.

But is it right, from what I have read up to now, that lyricists should constrain musicians and vice versa, in the attempt to "not" be creative or as creative as they could be - but just so as to conform with "the rules"? Or does it simply come down to the fact that it all depends upon what you want the end result to do/become?

Let me just give you an example to work from (and this is from listening to the song - there are no "written lyrics" that I can find on the net);

oh oh don't make me be - 6

what you don't want me to be - 7

don't make me do - 4

what you don't want me to do - 7

don't make me go now - 5

to some (other) place you don't want me to go - 11

why don't cha love me - 5

why don't cha (space) lo love me - 7

why don't cha lo ove me - 6

lo ove me - 3

oh - 1

don't make me - 3

don't make me - 3

oh don't make me - 4

don't make me be - 4

what you don't want me to be - 7

please don't let me go no no - 7

i stray and swear that's a jungle - 7

you wanna love me - 5

why don't you lo ove me oh - 7

etc

Now with my limited and correct musical terms, this is an R'n'B number that has a steady guitar rift through it and beat (changes as the song progresses to create the feel of a chorus or bridge).

Although there seems no "flow" to the lyrics, both the words, the singer and the music do flow and fit!

Take another example:

1

(Does your mama know about me?

Does she know just what I am?

Will she turn her back on me)

Or accept me as a man?

2

And what about your Dad?

Did you think of what he'll say?

Will he be understanding

Or does he think the usual way?

3

Maybe I shouldn't worry

But I've been through this before

And I'd like to get things straight

Before I'm knocking on your door

1

(Does your mama know about me?

Does she know just what I am?

If she says forget about me)

Do you think you'd understand?

2

And what about your friends?

Do you care what people say?

Will you accept the burdons

I know will surely come your way?

3

Maybe I shouldn't worry

But I've been through this before

And I'd like to get things straight

Before I'm knocking on your door

1

(Does your mama know about me?

Does she know just what I am?

Will she turn her back on me?)

Or accept me as a man?

We've got to stand tall

Can't stumble or crawl

We've got to be strong

For love that's so right

Can't be wrong

And every day I see it grow

And I don't want to let it go

I guess that's why I gotta know

In the above, the "1's" have a slight variation (the 2nd one to the other 2), the "2's" vary. Only the bridge (3's) are the same!

I'd call this a "standard" song - would you?

So what I would like to know is, must I learn how to be syllable and rhyme perfect to understand the music more and how it "should" all fit together (the rules) before I can write a "good" song, or can I carry on learning new techniques as I am here whilst still keeping my (non-conformist) creativity alive?

Hopefully the time it has taken to write and ask you all shows how serious I am :D

Thanks for reading and replying.

[MikeRobinson]

I believe that the general topic you have stumbled upon is called prosody, as discussed in this Wikipedia page.

The art of "writing a song" really is two different but related crafts: the writing of the melody, and the writing of the lyric. Lyric-writing is "a lot like poetry, but not quite." And of course, there is more to the notes than just melody: "arrangers" take the initial germ of the song-idea and develop it into what can be played.

The various parts of the completed musical experience do co-operate with one another; sometimes by similarity, and sometimes by contrast. It seems to me that music-writing, in all of its aspects, is "rather like a sonnet." It is a rigorously-defined thing, within the auspices of which you can do absolutely anything you want.

[Retrosaurus Rex]

Let me just give you an example to work from (and this is from listening to the song - there are no "written lyrics" that I can find on the net);

Take another example:

Hey,

Slight concern about copyright here... since the purpose here is clearly educational, and you're not claiming this as your own, it's probably OK to use the examples, but propriety demands that you acknowledge the author(s) and the compositions you're citing from...

[justsoulin]

So Mike, are you saying "don't follow the rules"?

Rex, no problem - yes these are not mine and if I gave the impression they were, apologies (the point of the examples was to show finished songs with ref to my post questions and not who sang it, who wrote it). I'm showing examples of actual songs that were put to vinyl and so went through the whole process and became a finished item. In the first instance I don't know who the writer of the words is and in the 2nd, Tommy Chong and Tom Baird. I hope that clears that up for you.

Regardless of who the writers are, I know we can "all" cite songs that go against the rules and others that go with the rules. But reading within this section of the board alone, the general feeling I get on this subject, is that musicians are posting replies to advise lyricists how to write.

So Rex, any other comment though on the actual subject?

Tell me please if I'm being unclear in anyway.

Edited March 19, 2010 by justsoulin

[john]

Hi

Really there are a few variables in the mix here. The biggest is genre. Some genre's it is all about rhythm, others melody, still others lyrics.. and yet more some mix of 2 or 3 of the components, that is part of what identifies it as one genre or another. The thing that would be identified as being most important.

Each genre has rules and guidelines. Sometimes those rules need to be broken, but it is far better to know that the rule/guideline exists and to crash through it with knowledge about what you are doing and why.

For maximum portability of songs it is best that the lyrical rhythms and the melodic rhythms match up, simply because it does make them more portable, they can move into different genres quite easily. True there are some lyrical and melodic styles that do allow for a great amount of leeway, but yet again your oohs aaahs and yeah baby now's can help with portability of a song, but I work under an assumption, that being that at writing as many of songs issues are negated as possible to allow flexibility in arrangement. It is the framework that supports all else, if you build it shakily, that's as good as it's going to get.

That doesn't mean that performance interpretation won't happen, but it does mean that the singer is not trying to solve issues created during songwriting... they are focused on performance to it's best.

When reviewing I look for measuring against general concepts, unless the reviewer directs me otherwise, or if to me the genre is very apparent.

So for example, we know that repetition is an accepted way to enforce a message and to establish a hook. So someone writes a song with no obvious vocal hook... very few songs do that because it puts all the weight of hookyness on the music. So i make a comment about that, not to say it is right or wrong.. it is after all just my opinion... my take is that it should be brought to the writer's attention so they can adjust or not as they see fit in the full knowledge of what advantage they are gaining or giving away.

the same goes for melodic rhythm and lyrical meter... there are obviously many styles where it is less important that they match up, pretty closely.

In general, imho, melody is thee component that dictates what happens... but that is me. I have written lyrics first, music first and a whole lot that were written together. if I was approaching a Dylanesque track I'd write lyrics first, if i was approaching a pop track it would be melody first (ok well maybe title first but not always lol)

the point is they are all guidelines and opinions, they are not rules. But i would say ignore them at your peril. Don't follow them, but know why you aren't following them and know why your song will work despite going against a guideline. After all, sometimes it is the breaking of a guideline that makes a song... after all isn't it diversity that people love?

Yes and no. They like a lot of what they are used to, with a little of something new... get the mix too much of what they are used to and they find it bland, unexciting, could be better, get too many something news and they find it too out there, hard to connect with etc etc... so the secret is in the balance.

i wrote an article a few years ago that may be of some interest.. truth is I could write it better now but hey ho

why does everything have to be black and white? truth is it doesn't.

cheers

john

[MikeRobinson]

So Mike, are you saying "don't follow the rules"?

I really haven't written much yet, so I am hardly qualified to say. It seems to me, from what I listen to, that musical writing conforms to many rules (it is grounded in mathematics, after all) but it is endlessly creative as to how you can work within those rules. Maybe the right word isn't "rules," because that word in English implies a penalty for going against them, which music really does not have. Maybe it's a language, and the more you know about it, the more you can say. I'm learning. And "babbling notes."

Edited March 19, 2010 by MikeRobinson

[justsoulin]

Thanks John, your words as always help me in my quest, especially;

the point is they are all guidelines and opinions, they are not rules. But i would say ignore them at your peril. Don't follow them, but know why you aren't following them and know why your song will work despite going against a guideline. After all, sometimes it is the breaking of a guideline that makes a song... after all isn't it diversity that people love?

and

Yes and no. They like a lot of what they are used to, with a little of something new... get the mix too much of what they are used to and they find it bland, unexciting, could be better, get too many something news and they find it too out there, hard to connect with etc etc... so the secret is in the balance.

Mike, I'm in a similar boat and therefore reading and soaking up others opinions here on the board - taking stock so to speak. That's what's making me ask now, which I think is a good thing.

[john]

Hey Just to go a little further, there are 4 main categories for me:

Songs genres that are:

• strongly dictated by the integrity of the melody
• a balance is struck with flexibility in both lyrics and melody
• strongly dictated by the integrity of the lyrics

For example:

Dylanesque ballads are pretty strongly lyrically aligned

Rap derived tracks where the melodic rhythm and rhyme scheme are very important (yet there is room for negotiation)

Dance / pop tracks where melody is king to the extent that in some genre's the lyrics more or less add shape to the melody and not much more

Thinking about songs in that kind of way can help you get in the ball park of deciding what should give and what should take, however i would still apply the "it is a guideline, not a rule" approach... if you can make it work then....

One thing I can't remember if i mentioned before (and can't be bothered re-reading) is how lyrical meter and your melody align with natural language phrasing.. do it poorly and a line can sound unnatural, forced (which can work depending on the genre).

Say for example we have a melodic phrase that is:

half note half note rest half note

then obviously fitting in a 3 syllable phrase could get trick in a strongly melodically dominated piece... if this is a key melodic phrase then it stands to reason that if the melody has to stay rigid, then the lyrics need a tweak.

similarly if we have:

halfnote quarter note quarter note

and we fit:

... try. I could....

over this, that may work well, however

(des)peration

that might sound unnatural

tempo. If you are playing a slow lilting melody, evocative of a relaxed mood, the last thing you would try doing is to over stuff a 5 note melody with say 15 syllables (resulting in 15 notes) without reasonably expecting the feel to change... this may be ok if you do want the feel to change! however you can also reasonably expect that perhaps you might get away with 7 or 8 syllables (if you can add the notes in a sympathetic way)

however on an uptempo number fitting in your 15 syllable line with the resulting notes may be pretty hard at 180bpm! In fact perhaps fitting in 1 extra syllable becomes difficult.

The intangible quality we play with is feel. When you have a very regimented track perhaps the backbone is there that will support more flexibility from the singer regarding playing with the timing and the feel, however on some tracks perhaps the vocal holds down the rhythm tightly while the guitar is a bit looser... you get the point (I hope)

Also part of feel, and going more globally and thinking not just of the singer but the track as a whole... how does your action impact the feel? is it an enhancement, or does it break the feel in a less than satisfying way?

there's no doubt lots I have neglected to mention or only partly mentioned. It's a big topic, but i think a little thought here is worthwhile.

As solely a lyricist or solely a music composer there is another factor... how easy is it for the other half to be written? By adding in variation and complexity we can significantly impact the work of another. By using some form of conformance we can make it easier for that task to occur... likewise the writer or writers should not really have to depend on the singer squeezing the timing during performance. This is perhaps different when the singer is part of the arrangement process. I guess i just go by the maxim that i want to my bit well and give the performer every chance of making it a fantastic recording. If they subsequently play with the timing during the performance it should be because of "feel", the emotion they get singing the song, not because I had to squeeze in an extra syllable throwing the rhythm (or the same from melodic tweaking perspective)

hopefully my ramblings made sense and i hope i haven't repeated too much from my previous post lol

Cheers

john

[justsoulin]

Thanks John. All this is currently in (& on) my mind and I'm trying to educate myself with music alone. That is I am reading about melody, composing et all and trying to learn how all the musical variations fit together on a score. Basically I'm trying to create the basics of the song musically that will give a composer more of an idea of the songs ability "in his language", whilst gaining an understanding of how my song doesn't quite fit or work - and all this without playing an instrument or knowing how to write music. It's a big task!

Thankfully, I have ability, I have the need and want to learn and I've found a number of programs that help me. But there's a long way to go yet for me (just in learning each programs ways LOL).

I think what you're saying came home to me recently when I had to fit a song into a fixed and rigid tune. My 1st attempt almost worked and my 2nd attempt did work. I've yet to know the result though of my 2nd attempt.

[MikeRobinson]

I do know that over time there have been many collaborators (Oscar and Hammerstein, et al) where one person did nothing but music and the other did nothing but lyric. I think it's two very different kinds of writing that nevertheless has to be done in close cooperation.

Edited April 9, 2010 by MikeRobinson

[Lazz]

there have been many collaborators (Oscar and Hammerstein, et al) where ..............

That's unintentionally very funny, Mike.

Like saying "Paul and McCartney".

Oscar Hammerstein was a lyricist - and a damn great one - also mentor and de facto foster father to Steve Sondheim.

He is a good case in point, though:

Jerome Kern was an early composer-collaborator of his who would hand Oscar finished and complete pieces in which would not allow a single note to be changed. Although many of their songs justifiably became part of the 'Great American Songbook' and were (and still are) constantly re-interpreted as 'standards', he absolutely detested any and all changes to what he had originally scored. A real stickler and task-master with whom Oscar nonetheless thrived on a rigorous music-first basis.

Their first project was "Showboat" - which, despite few if any here being at all interested in the form, was a revolutionary landmark of musical theatre.

Later on, when Lorenz Hart become too messed up to function, Oscar would replace him as partner of composer Richard Rodgers. Rodgers was much more flexible and accommodating than Kern and, to Oscar's surprise, expected the lyrics to come first.

Oscar learned rigour and discipline from Kern.

He also learned about the essential musicality in language and structure which equipped him to provide such eminently productive libretti for Rodgers.

The first Rodgers & Hammerstein collaboration was "Oklahoma" - another significant milestone in musical theatre.

Oscar is well worth taking a good look at.

"Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II" is essential reading - borrow it from the library.

His introduction to the book, 'Notes on Lyrics', is acknowledged as a classic text - make yourself a photocopy to keep.

.

[MikeRobinson]

Heh.

I just browsed through this thread again, and very closely re-read what John said (twice), and then what Lazz said ...

... and I think I'm just gonna spend the rest of the evening re-reading that, and thinking about it.

This site is such a great resource. Thanks so much.

Edited June 22, 2010 by MikeRobinson