Jump to content

Your Ad Could Be Here

How many songs do you write a year?

By Alistair
in Songwriting

 Share

Recommended Posts

Newbie

Alistair

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Help me.

I want to try and understand.

I can see that pop isn't necessarily rock.

But isn't rock pop anyway?

What does it all mean?

And why am I so insignificant?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lazz

It isn't your concern. You are a higher consciousness as a jazzer!

niiiice! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Newbie

FinnArild

Posted
Posted
Help me.

I want to try and understand.

I can see that pop isn't necessarily rock.

But isn't rock pop anyway?

What does it all mean?

And why am I so insignificant?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here's my take on it: Pop stands for popular music. Rock is the music style that started out as a youth rebellion with their protest against the pop music (Jerry Lee, Elvis, ...) and became popular and turned into pop music so an other, harder and more "protestive" rock style emerged which again became popular until we got the "satan-speed heavy-hell devil-trash rip-your-guts-out-and-blow-yourself-a-tune-on-em look-how-fast-I-can-play-them-drums-no-matter-if-it-sounds-good" rock ('n roll).

This will in turn go be so popular that the most provocative music you could play is something resembling wiener waltzes wich will then turn into a youth rebellion; circle complete.

Why (or whether) you're insignificant, I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

Steve

Posted
Posted
No not at the time. The 'were' relates to them not being around anymore. Surely 'classic' can only be conveyed later. But, anyway, you either love the Beatles or you don't so none of it matters anyway! ;D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree! rolls up sleaves

The nature of the magazine you were reading would not consider portraying Destiny's Child as the worst rock band ever! Mainly because they are a POP act. The same goes for the Beatles. They do not, never have and never will be classed as a Rock band. Therefore, in the eyes of the readership of that dubious publication, the Beatles suck! I am not defending the Beatles, I think lots of their stuff DID suck! But I dare say a magazine entitled 'Hip-Hop Hooray', or 'Jazz, the Canadian angle' would find it easy to assemble 100 reasons why Motorhead suck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

Alistair

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I disagree!  rolls up sleaves

The nature of the magazine you were reading would not consider portraying Destiny's Child as the worst rock band ever! Mainly because they are a POP act. The same goes for the Beatles. They do not, never have and never will be classed as a Rock band. Therefore, in the eyes of the readership of that dubious publication, the Beatles suck! I am not defending the Beatles, I think lots of their stuff DID suck! But I dare say a magazine entitled 'Hip-Hop Hooray', or 'Jazz,  the Canadian angle' would find it easy to assemble 100 reasons why Motorhead suck!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So Steve, you're disagreeing with me agreeing with you that the Beatles were probably a pop band? Hmmm...

You are right that Classic Rock WOULD take such a stance, although they feature loads of stuff that you could argue whether it is rock or not.

I thonk we agree that the Beatles are classic though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rookie

hariossa

Posted
Posted
I think they've earned 'classic' status. I am not a huge fan of the Beatles. I do like some of their stuff though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that the beatles have songs for every taste...

you may not like them, but there's always a pair of songs that you like...

... unless you're a BEATLE HATER!!! :P

but yes, they are more than classic, they are a huge link of the chain because they opened everbody's mind worldwide, and not only musically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rookie

hariossa

Posted
Posted (edited)
I don't hate the Beatles but I don't share the popular view that everything they did was genius.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you're right, you can trash most of mccartney's songs... :D

Edited by hariossa
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

Steve

Posted
Posted
you're right, you can trash most of mccartney's songs... :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats a little unfair! I think I prefer MacCartneys stuff! Lennon was crap on his own, turning out dreary protest songs and slushy love songs. Macca went on to turn out some great pop albums!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rookie

hariossa

Posted
Posted
Thats a little unfair! I think I prefer MacCartneys stuff! Lennon was crap on his own, turning out dreary protest songs and slushy love songs. Macca went on to turn out some great pop albums!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well, I used to share flat with a "paul lover" so, I'm not going to argue with you because at the end is just a matter of taste... for me paul just did a couple of nice songs and the rest are just "silly love songs"... I loooove youuuu! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

Alistair

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In the 'albums you hate' thread, I should have added 'Wings At The Speed of Sound'. I shared a flat with a guy who played it to death. 'Silly Love Songs' is right enough! (I liked 'Band on The Run' though, just to even it up)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

tgrover

Posted
Posted
In the 'albums you hate' thread, I should have added 'Wings At The Speed of Sound'. I shared a flat with a guy who played it to death. 'Silly Love Songs' is right enough! (I liked 'Band on The Run' though, just to even it up)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BAND ON THE RUN IS A GREAT TUNE>>>>>>>>>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

Alistair

Posted
  • Author
Posted
BAND ON THE RUN IS A GREAT TUNE>>>>>>>>>>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The whole 'Band On the Run' album is great, althougu it is a while since I listened to it.

"Jet! Whoooo-ooo-oooh!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

Alistair

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Which leads us onto a debate (which has nothing whatsoever to do with how many songs yuo write a year) on whether that was really ironic or merely coincidental!

But perhaps not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbie

tgrover

Posted
Posted
Which leads us onto a debate (which has nothing whatsoever to do with how many songs yuo write a year) on whether that was really ironic or merely coincidental!

But perhaps not!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

either way the song jet aint as good as BAND ON THE RUN!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Newbie

pyromaniak2k

Posted
Posted

i only started playing guitar and writing in october 04 and since then have written 8 but have only recorded 5(6?) coz the otherones are either crap or in a key that i cant sing in...maybe should revise them ones n see if i can slavage anything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Your Ad Could Be Here



  • Current Donation Goals

    • Keep The Lights On - Make A Donation
      Raised $1,040
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By continuing to use our site you indicate acceptance of our Terms Of Service: Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy, our Community Guidelines: Guidelines and our use of Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.