Is There A Software Package That Approaches Songwriting This Way?

[Badger]

I have a book by Rikky Rooksby, published by Fall River press.  The name of the book is "The Song Writer's Manual."

 

What I want to know is, is there a software package that approaches assembling a song the way the book describes?

 

What I want to do is define the key(s) that the song will be in, that is, the primary chord, and have the software disable all the chords that don't fit with that chord.  Then I want to define the time signature and have an empty chart pop up into which I can drop the remaining chords, the ones that weren't disabled, in various combinations.  Then hit GO and listen to the chord progression to evaluate and maybe tweak it until I have a good product.  

 

I haven't ever heard of a package that does it that way.  Is there one?  Or should I get to work on writing one?

[john]

A good book.

I haven't heard of one exactly like that. I was thinking of doing something for Songstuff that is in that neck of the woods though. I have done some design work on it and have coded some up to test concept, though the finished product will be realised in a different language. In my version you work within chord progressions, where whatever chord your are at will then have a number of options going from most common next chord down to least common next chord. You can audition it at any point. At any point you can say what your starting chord is and it will then render the progression in that key simple. It would be a simple revers to do even closer to what you suggest (set key and the chord suggestions are algorithmically derived from the progression but auto rendered in key and very little further to do exactly as you suggest. As to when we do such a tool depends on several factors. It could be on our development list soon or it might be a little while, it depends on a number of factors.

[Rudi]

Theoretically any chords could be used to 'fit in' with any chord you could select.

 

There are however more likely combinations of one sort than others.

 

For example if you selected Bm, then Em and F#m would give you a basic three chord trick. Though D, G and F# would be the next most likely inclusions. Though if using F# you would be more likely to want to remove F#m from the initial selection.

 

Then A and E might appear as further options, but as before Em might then lose ground as a possibility.

 

All this is before we go anywhere near a 7th, 9th or augmented chords.

7ths could apply to any of the above triads, but augmented would probably be of more use only to F# or F#m.

Diminished chords are only really used in a transitional way (linking more basic chords together), So if you didnt know what you were trying to link, the diminished chord would just sound odd.

 

Youre probably much better off taking the time out to learn commonly used chord progressions.

 

What you are asking for is a bit like saying 'If I select a colour, I want a program to blank out all the other colours that dont fit with the selected colour, leaving me all the ones that do.

 

 am not familiar with the book you mention, but the basic idea you propose is flawed IMO.

 

Rudi

[john]

Well, to be honest, band in a box is closer to that because it uses riffs and loops and it's interface is geared towards assembly line composition. It actually why I dislike BIAB lol But then this has been an evolution since midi loops and later audio loops evolved.

Just wait until lyrics composition goes the same way.

That said, just about every short cut tool that has trivialised skills from carpentry to making videos, photography, musicianship etc. removes the need for any skills to achieve a basic and evolving level of results. Sad but true. Creativity and almost any skill you had to work to develop are fast becoming obsolete. It's not just songwriting!

Oh and I do get that doesn't mean we need to like it or accept it It just is.

[Kel]

Try this website, it does the lyrics for you.

 

Then from here you can put together a chord progression.

 

Then go this website to learn how to best put it all together.

 

See, it's easy!

Kel

Edited September 22, 2013 by Kel

[TapperMike]

Egad no love for BIAB?

 

With biab when you write out chords they don't have to fit the key blindly.  Key. is just a reference it uses for simple transposition. 

 

In regards to all notes and chords must stay within a given key for a song...Well I'm sorry but someone should get a refund on that book.

While it's important to have a basic understanding on how chords and notes fit in a particular key.  It's also very debilitating as far as a songwriter and the more you study the works of other artists the less truth you'll see in it.

 

Generally I'll strum a few chords while I work out the progression then put them down on paper or... sorry John.  I'll insert them into biab It gives me a quick direction same as writing to paper.  As I usually know what type of arrangement best suits what I'm doing on guitar or ztar. I'll pull up a style from biab's library mute all the the instruments save the drums (don't kill me Tom) With the drums and my primary instrument defined I'll work from there to fill in the gaps.

 

Band in a box is a favored tool in college jazz programs across the US and many classes require it.  As a performer in group or solo settings and a teacher I've found biab indispensable. It's the only software program without fail I'll open everyday aside from my browser. I learn jazz standards more quickly then standard notation software or print. I use it as an improvisational tool and backing band while performing covers.  I've used it to not only expand my knowledge but my approaches as well.  It's been a weath of information. 

 

And after stating all that.  If you really want to compose/write it starts with you not a program.  Get a solid grasp of your instrument and a pen then go from there.  A program won't make you a songwriter

[Kel]

I have BIAB and ChordPulseLite. I've only had BIAB a week so still learning how to use it. Not in any big rush. I've been using GuitarPro to write with for over a year, but you still have to key everything in by hand unless you write some "standard" accompaniment to use while working on melody. I haven't got around to doing that lol.

 

Kel

[john]

There are many pros to BIAB etc.

My issue with such tools is not that they exist, nor that they can accelerate the creative process, but rather that for a lazy person they can shortcut the process to the extent that they replace the skills or the need for them. I get they can make things accessible, but for some they can become a legitimate endpoint rather than a stepping stone.

For example, a songwriter who knows how to write lyrics, how to play an instrument can use BIAB to speed up their drafting process to get a draft track. This is not the same as a finished track, at least to me.

Others however will see what is created as an end product. This removes the need to deal with troublesome other band members or pesky years of learning instruments or how to record music etc. The result is often predictable, safe music that is about as challenging as snap.

A lyricist for example could:

Learn an instrument

Collaborate with a music writer

Or use a tool that replaces the need for knowledge or someone else who has knowledge with something pre-done

The first takes time and effort and patience, the second takes that plus tolerance, the last is more easy, accessible and closer to instant by comparison.

Most things have pros and cons. Years ago all synths had to be programmed each and every time, then came saved patches along with patches someone else had taken the time to make for you. Much faster to learn to use and only fear of sounding like everyone else and pride stopped exactly that happening.

Samplers had the same issues. Initially everyone created their own samples, then came sample libraries.

Loops the same. As sample loops got longer samplers went from individual sounds to loops of sound, we had to make our own, then came loop libraries, midi and audio.

At each stage were those who took time to still craft their own, and those whose interest lay elsewhere and were happy to skip that step and just use the library sound. Each time creatives get complacent to the extent of just using the library stuff en masse music itself sounds very familiar, Same-y, safe, unchallenging. It happened a few years ago with Reason too, to the extent that anyone who knew their stuff could spot a Reason track a mile away. Trouble was those that didn't know their stuff were perfectly happy being able to bypass years of learning, to sound close-ish to chart songs (mainly because they used the same patch and or loop) and suddenly everyone was a "producer". When everyone could create music simply by spending $30 on software. It set that as being the price being a musician was valued by all but the most driven and passionate. Then they worked out how to get a hacked copy. Lol

We now live in a society where musicians are about as special and respected as Starbucks coffee. It's become so de-valued that many don't pay for music or see why they should and many artists even think the only right choice is to give away music they create while they have a day job... That there should be no such thing as a pro musician. Soon when tech completely catches up that will be the way for songwriters, writers, photographers, artists, the whole lot of the creative industries and beyond. Maybe eventually we wake up and flip the "do interesting stuff" button and go back to sleep. At least until something is invented that flips it for us.

And that is the point. It's here at least Tom and I can agree. We design ourselves into obsolescence.

True those that want to do it the old manual way always can, though not without those that do it the modern auto way looking on with bemusement, puzzlement. Perhaps creativity will be reduced to picking the programme that picks things for us?

The demise of civilisation, all the fault of BIAB lol

I jest of course. It has it's uses to streamline and to accelerate, but please let's not find it acceptable, ever, as the creator of the end of the line product, for that way lies the dark side. Sadly, I think that is at least part of the target market, which means that before long, it will be the market, full stop.

Long live the pain of skills hard earned, and of collaboration partners we could happily strangle lol

Maybe music and musicians will become like carpenters and furniture? Only wealthy people get carpenters / cabinet makers to make furniture, everyone else uses flat pack furniture. Maybe soon most folk will listen to music written and performed by software, while wealthy people will employ the 1,000 or so individuals worldwide who can actually write a song or play it? Lol

I stress, my issue is not the existence of the tool, or how accessible it makes achieving something for those lacking a skill, rather it is the lowering of standards and mute acceptance that because we don't have to we shouldn't or that modern means better in all cases or because it's not instant it's not worth waiting for, or that because it is difficult that it is not worth working hard to attain.

Then again, I am probably just old and obsolete. Lol

[Kel]

The demise of civilisation, all the fault of BIAB lol

 

Unless the software, any software also makes coffee, we are all safe from this happening.

 

I wonder if I can download an App for my Android that will aspiriate my blood for me so I don't have to go to all the trouble of breathing? I'll do a search!

 

 

Kel

Edited September 23, 2013 by Kel

[Rudi]

No reply from Badger yet....

 

I have a book by Rikky Rooksby, published by Fall River press.  The name of the book is "The Song Writer's Manual."

 

What I want to know is, is there a software package that approaches assembling a song the way the book describes?

 

 

 

Could he, in fact be Rikky Rooksbe? Researching a quick sequel?

[Badger]

Some good comments here, but I must say that they don't address, either positively or negatively, my reason for wanting this tool.  

I played trumpet in high school, and after graduating I searched for something else I could play.  I finally settled on two instruments: the pennywhistle and the bowed psaltry.  I can read music well enough to play them, but never had any instruction in writing.  So I bought the book.

After reading it I thought that a program as described might help me break into the writing world.  

 

I have used several notation editors, most lately Magicscore Maestro, but those all seem a bit tedious.  By the time the tune I've worked out in my head is about half entered, I've forgotten how the second half was supposed to go.  I can't do it any better with pen and paper because I'm a slow writer.  Same problem applies.  I need something that will let me take down an entire tune in seconds, so as not to lose it.  I'm not talking about something to write the tune for me.  I'm talking about something that will let me write down a tune faster than it can fade, and it seemed like plugging in the chords in the format from this book might just do that.

 

Some of you have disparaged those who don't want to spend the time to learn these skills, but by doing this you're also excluding another group:  Those who don't have the riches that will be charged to learn them.  Perhaps there are people who could be really talented at creating music, but they can't because they can't afford to pay to learn the techniques.  Why should that person miss out just because the tools that could make it possible for them to do it less expensively were shunned by the industry in order to discourage the lazy?

 

So... the consensus seems to be that the software I want doesn't exist.  In that case I'll put you all on notice.  I'm an engineer who is strong in programming.  I intend that the software will exist.  As soon as I can create it.

[john]

What Tom said regarding capturing the idea, plus...

Some of you have disparaged those who don't want to spend the time to learn these skills, but by doing this you're also excluding another group: Those who don't have the riches that will be charged to learn them. Perhaps there are people who could be really talented at creating music, but they can't because they can't afford to pay to learn the techniques. Why should that person miss out just because the tools that could make it possible for them to do it less expensively were shunned by the industry in order to discourage the lazy?

Why not teach yourself? When it comes to songwriting I am self taught. There are millions of self taught guitarists and pianists who have also taught themselves both theory and notation. Plus there are loads and loads of free resources, so no, I am not excluding a group. Cost prevents nothing as there need be no cost at all other than time. Additionally, to aspire to letting software do it for you ( in the case laid out in replies) doesn't help the songwriter in the long term. Knowledge is the liberator. Skill is the key that unlocks the door. A tool that does that for them makes it accessible in one way but ultimately leaves the writer dependent, not empowered, constrained, not free to express.

Now a tool that augments is different.

I would also point out that the tool I described does NOT write the song for the writer,, it merely suggests the most common next stage in a progression based on theory and common practice. The writer remains filly in control.

If the tool you suggest does not write for the writer either, then surely we are in general agreement? Lol

As an engineer, however, I can happily praise your drive to find a technical solution, while questioning the need for the tool.

Why not sing or play the melody, record it, then use pitch recognition to turn it into notes? Or simply listen to the recording and transcribe as Tom said? Job done

Honestly I am not seeking to ridicule or otherwise, but any engineer worth his salt would be happy to both question a design and question the need for a design... Unless of course you are solving purely for the challenge, but even then you should be happy to analyse both need and design? Perhaps some use case analysis would be helpful.

[Rudi]

you're also excluding another group: Those who don't have the riches that will be charged to learn them.

 

 

Do you means there's money to be had out of teaching what we know?

 

You dont need any money to learn songwriting. You need a keen interest and a pair of ears.

[Badger]

Based on that statement, I'm now asking myself if your original question was even a sincere one. Sounds more like a veiled attempt to generate interest in a software project that you're already developing.  I'm hoping that's not the case, cause there's very few things in this world that I detest more than someone deliberately wasting my time. Hopefully, I've misjudged your intent. But either way, you won't be getting any more of my time. You've already taken plenty! 

 

No, I haven't started this project.  I was and am more interested in getting a tool that will let me do a quick and dirty transcribe of a song from my imagination into a written form, and the tools I've seen just don't serve. I think this tool would be helpful for that goal.

 

I posted the original question because it seemed that if it existed and I just couldn't find it, you all would be able to tell me about it, and if it didn't then I would know my only recourse was to decide whether to step up to the challenge and bring this new tool into the world, or just keep laboring the hard way.

 

For the sake of others like me, I've decided I'm going to get to work on creating the tool.

[Badger]

That's lovely, but if I recall, the tool you originally inquired about would do a whole lot more than give you a means to quickly get an idea down....before you forgot it. Had that been your original question, the answer would have been a resounding YES! Boom boxes & hand held recorders have existed for years and they allow exactly that. Matter of fact, those are what I've always used for quick recordings of impromtu ideas. You simply keep one handy, quickly fire it up, hum your idea, or roughly play it on whatever instrument happens to be handy. Problem solved!....the idea is down, so you won't forget it....and you can return to it for further development whenever it's convenient. That's what I've done for over 20 years and it's worked great!

 

Problem solved!   

 

 

Fact is.....that wasn't your question.

 

<snipped bit where he quoted my original post...>

 

I'm sorry, but there is little or no resmeblence between the two. Let's be fair here....don't be outraged at us for answering a question you asked incorrectly. That's entirely your doing. Good luck with your sofware.

 

Tom

 

Point taken.  I'm not always that good at describing what I need, but better at describing what I think will fill that need.

[Just1L]

I would know my only recourse was to decide whether to step up to the challenge and bring this new tool into the world, or just keep laboring the hard way.

 

For the sake of others like me, I've decided I'm going to get to work on creating the tool.

 

Instead of wasting your time "stepping up" to create a culture of simpleton button pushers, you could step up and learn how to play your instruments and record them... the hard way.

 

As far as your software idea goes though, you'll surely succeed. The current thought process for the masses is to dumb down and do everything the easy way. And considering it will be 100% free software, I'm sure you will get a large amount of people wanting to use it.

 

Just my 2 cents.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Just1L

[john]

For the sake of others like me, I've decided I'm going to get to work on creating the tool.

Do you use a design methodology? What language do you plan to write in? For what platform?

For software development OOD is the approach I usually take, firing loads of use cases at it and capturing the design in UML. I just wondered what you plan. A mobile App? Air? Desktop app? Web app?

[Badger]

Do you use a design methodology? What language do you plan to write in? For what platform?

For software development OOD is the approach I usually take, firing loads of use cases at it and capturing the design in UML. I just wondered what you plan. A mobile App? Air? Desktop app? Web app?

 

I'm most comfortable with Visual Basic.net, although I've also done C++ and can do stuff in assembly if needed. I've never tried to write for anything but a PC; no mobiles, etc.. Just desktop.  Although this tool as a mobile app might let someone quickly capture a chord progression or melody for later review... something to consider.

 

For Visual Studio, I'll usually create the user interface first, planning out how I want stuff to work on the fly.  Then the pseudocode goes into the various controls and forms as commentary, and finally the actual program code gets inserted between the lines of pseudocode.  

Is that what you mean by methodology?  

 

I'm not sure what OOD is.  Object Oriented Design, maybe?  Yes I usually try to do that.  Minimizes rewriting of code.  You can use stuff you invented for the last program in this one.  Get stuff done quicker that way too because a lot of your code already exists.  Not to mention you can sometimes go online and find other people's modules they've posted and drop them right into your program, with minimal or no 'adjustment.'

 

But we don't want to turn this into a programming discussion...  If as and when I have something I think is worth something, I'll let the forum know in a new thread.

[Kel]

It will be interesting to see how you "program" when you don't have a grasp of the knowledge required, unless I've misread or misinterpreted or even forgotten what you said earlier.

 

Good luck though.

[Badger]

It will be interesting to see how you "program" when you don't have a grasp of the knowledge required, unless I've misread or misinterpreted or even forgotten what you said earlier.

 

Good luck though.

 

Really?  You think because I wasn't sure of the meaning of a jargon acronym, that means I don't have "a grasp of the knowledge required?"