Technical Issues In Lyric Writing

[Carnival]

In the lyric forum, I see a lot of comments regarding:

a. grammatical errors

b. lyrics not fitting perfectly to the rhythm and meter of the verse

c. lyrics that 'read more like a poem' than a song

I would like to begin a discussion of these issues, particularly with regard to the following:

1. Is grammer important in lyrics? When is it okay to stray from proper grammer to further the artistic motives of the song? In what form is it acceptable?

2. Should lyrics fit to a perfect rhyme and meter? Or does the imperfection provide the singer with opportunities to express his/her own style and to vary the timing of the lyrics for added interest?

2. What makes a lyric 'read more like a poem". Does this make piece less suitable for music? Is it a matter of structure - of not having the traditional elements of popular music, including a recurring chorus and possibly a bridge or two? Or is the difference more organic, such as the way words are used, or the type of imagery evoked?

I am hoping this will facilitate better communication between the lyricist and the reviewer, by giving the reviewer food for thought before making this type of comment, and by giving the lyricist a context in which to accept the comments constructively.

[musicthom]

very good topic john i need to go think on this one

[john]

hey

good topic.

1. Being consistent with grammar is important. what you don't want is something that breaks flow, and perhaps makes the listener try and work out what you meant, and I don't mean on a philosophical level.

2. Perfect rhyme and meter. Depends what you mean by perfect Meter at least should be consistent. A reasonable singer can play with timing within a rhythm, but if the meter varies, or at least does not vary sympathetically the rhythmic variation will likely sound awkward. Rhyme scheme is also important, being consistent that is. if you use AABB for one verse using the same melody, don't make the next ABAB for example. This is yet again because it can make listeners pause for the wrong reasons and think "that doesn't sound right". I tend to think of both lyric and music as an emotional journey. You want the listener to get the basic meaning, or at least focused on the feel. When there is a non-meaning, structural, or melodic issue it kinda jots them out of the feel. Sure you can break all the guidelines, but there is a price to be paid,even if that is only the risk of making your song harder to digest.

The use of rhyming scheme and meter is often genre specific. Some genres readily accept songs devoid of a rhyme scheme, others don't.

2(2) The less conventional a song is, and the more progressive, the more it reads like a poem. Also you'll find that the more flowery your language, the more like a poem it will read. It doesn't mean it is a poor song, just that like above you may be limited in genres where it will, if only because the music itself tends to have to be more progressive in order to compliment the lyric etc.

does this help?

I've written several articles in the songwriting and lyrics articles section on this site taht may be of some use. Also we are planning a series exploring musical forms which could be of interest.

Cheers

John

[Carnival]

John, you bring up an excellent point regarding which genre the lyric is intended for. Perhaps that would be a better way for reviewers to approach the issue of a piece 'sounding more like a poem.' It isn't necesarily constructive to hear that comment, unless you know what is meant.

If the lyricist states that the lyric is intended as, for example, a country song, but it reads very poetically, has a weak rhyme scheme, and is difficult to imagine being set to country music, that is a very specific criticism that could and should be voiced. The criticism should be about the suitability of the lyric for country music, not it's poetic nature. But in most cases, the intended genre is not stated, and it would seem a 'given' that the music, whatever the genre may be, would have to fit the lyric, and no comment is needed. It is also very possible that the reviewer just isn't able to discern the intended vocal rhythm and timing. I am not very good at it myself, when I read the lyric posts of others. Perhaps a question back to the lyricist, about the intended genr is the most suitable comment, and will open up a good discussion that will benefit all.

I guess that what I am saying is that, until the song is set to music, and in the absence of a stated intention to fit it into a specific genre, you can't say whether it fits. So if there is something specific that can help the lyricist, say it. Otherwise, there isn't any point to it.

Regarding ryhme, it seems to me that the rule here is, "if it works, use it." Sometimes breaking rules works great. The comment should be based on the reviewers ear, not the rules of rhyme.

It is difficult to get people to review lyrics and provide feedback. But I have found forums like this to be the best place to get constructive feedback, and they are extremely valuable. I am new here, but i am impressed with both the content of the posts, and of the caring reviews. You guys are doing a great job driving this train.

My own view is that the reviewers focus should be on the lyricists success in writing compellingly with regard to strength of emotion, imagery, storyline (if applicable), creative or effective use of language, and whether it resonates personally with the reviewer. If all those elements are present, the techincal nit-pickinig can be worked out in the musical arrangement, when and if the time comes - sort of like a movie script. A stand-alone lyric is a component of a song. It is not inviolate. It may often have to be tweaked to make the song the best it can be.

Am I on the right track in my thinking, or am I seriously off base???

[john]

Hey

You're not seriously off base, and I appreciate why you feel you want to contain reviews into something you consider more useful but in this you as the reviewee (so to speak) asume a few things:

A level of competance in the reviewer

That people will read guidelines on how to critique

That it is a one way conversation

As a reviewee it takes some effort, sometimes, to get a qualitative answer from reviewers. Not that i am suggesting any complacence in helping improve the quality and usefulness in reviews. I recently wrote Lyrics Critique for Songwriters in a bid to help lyricists new to critique to get the most from the experience.

Of course specific genres have specific needs, and often a writer hasn't even considered genre. I find most reviews across the board tend to go towards the common factors, the more general the board, the more general the comments. That includes taste,a dn what people consider "generally acceptable". What is maybe hidden is writers awareness of common song forms, and their assumption of each other's understanding of those forms. I think in reviews, reviewer reference either formally or informally their knowledge of standard song forms. In the case of informal knowledge, reviewers may have difficulty expressing why they think something or why something doesn't overly work for them.

On rhyme scheme, don't underestimate the value of consistancy. I agree variety is important, and view what some call rules more as guidelines. But, pushing the envelope is better done understanding what you may be compromising or benefiting by taking certain directions.

Almost completely across genres, imho, breaking your own rhyme scheme (including the absence of a scheme) tends to be a bad move, especially line end rhyme structure. It can work, ut it is the exception to the rule if that makes sense. In this way songs tend to be stricter than poems. Using rhyme sets up and expectation within the listener. When you break that it jolts the listener a bit, or more likely they can't quite put their finger on why they don't gel with a lyric. As ever there are always cases where following any guideline is not the right thing to do.

A song is the union of both words and music, and you are correct, there are always tweaks during that process, but that integration itself is not always the same. For many writers the melody is the key, not the lyric, but in other genres it is almost the other way around. So just how the tweaks fall is dependant on the writer. That said, I think a lyric should in work standalone (generally) in the same way that a good stand alone melody would. By writing consistently we reduce the tweaks as both the lyrical meter and the melodic rhythm are fundamentally compatible and consitent. When a singer applies interpretation is during performance, not the writing stage.

One more thing. there is a large(ish) body of writers who write across genres. They write using commonality and a subtle blend of spices from across their repertoire. In this they are looking to write a song that appeals to artists from many genres. They are not necessarily intended to be the performer themselves.

For this last reason more than any other I find reviewers gravitate comments towards the broader appeal measure of a lyric or song.

I've lots more I could write, but I'll catch my breath, rest my fingers and... over to you

I'm sad, I seriously do love discussing this shit

Cheers

John

[Carnival]

That's a GREAT response, John. Thank you. Directing reviewers toward a certain quality of work is like herding cats. I guess as reviewees, we should be thankful that someone cares enough to read our work and put some thought into it, and I mean that sincerely. If we don't find the comments helpful we can ask the reviewer about our specific concerns.

[john]

Hey

Thanks

Critique is really a conversation where opinions are expressed, an understanding is achieved amongst participants and recommendations for any further work are made. Both reviewer and reviewee should learn something by the experience, even if it is just learning how different people work, but you should get their perspective.

Critique is often confused by people looking for a pat on the back, or people who exchange simple comments. The crux of the matter is it is about learning about your work, from anothers' perspective (as the reviewee) and learning how to make observation, express opinion, and make recommendation without prejudice on the part of the reviewer.

Too commonly I see reviewers (on other forums of course ) castigated by the reviewee for expressing a viewpoint that doesn't wholeheartedly say "it's a good un". The thing is every opinion is valid and out there. By understanding misinterpretation or how we started well but lost the audience etc. we at least stand a chance of learning how our own phraseology is solely responsible for the listener's understanding. We may not then anticipate every interpretation and spot every bump in the road, but each time we do write a new song our writing evolves.

Sorry. I'm waxing lyrical I'll stop now. I was off on one there.

Cheers

John

[faintofheart]

1. If the artist wants to... I think it's always acceptable to ignore grammar intentionally... that doesn't make it good. It depends... usually it's fairly obvious when someone just didn't pay any attention to the grammar and when someone meant to defy grammar laws. Lots of rap is great and there is not a damn bit of grammar in the best hip-hop.

2. If you can sing it and it sounds good and it gets the point across... who cares?

3. On that note... "reading more like a poem" is exactly that... reading. Songs generally are expected to have some flow about them but when we read certain lyrics, it will sound like a poem. It all depends on the song. Hm... I think of a song like Vacant by Dream Theater-- it's sung, it's a song, but the lyrics if read sound more like a poem whereas many other songs flow with lots of music.

It's not a bad thing to tell a lyricist that his lyric reads like a poem, nor is it bad to have odd meter. When i mention one or the other i usually do so because the lack of metrical consistency seems to hurt the overall flow when read. But always, i try to say that if it can be sung well... it's not a big deal.

[john]

Hey

1. Exactly, consistancy of approach is key.

2. I guess the point I would make is that if you can make it easier to sound good when sung by being cognisent of the issues of meter and rhyme, then it is worthwhile puting in the effort to being consistant. It should be all about the song, not our effort (or lack of it) to make the song as good as it can be. You can get away with driving without motor insurance, but I think most people wouldn't consider doing it, let alone for long periods. Yes it happens, but it is not advisable.

3. I completely agree that how it flows is the important thing, though I would say that some genres of music are more sympathetic to poetic approaches to lyrics than others. Does it matter? Of course it does, but how much it matters is largely a matter of genre and personal interest in making a song as good as it can be. I mean, why settle for second best? It is different if it is appropriate to the song, but in general lyrics are very important to songs, otherwise all songs could simply be "la la la". Just because we sometimes get away with pushing these boundaries does not mean that we should stop caring. A song can get a point across with the hook line, but a well written lyric can get that point across in a more convincing, more empathetic way, a way that elicits more of a favorable response from the listener.

I do agree on your comments about "if it can be sung well" but I would also add "if it can be identified with by the listener easily". After all music is communication, and simply because it is said well does not mean it is understood or identified with by listeners. Our job as writers is to facilitate both of these facets within our writing and not just to let something go because it takes some time to look at alternatives.

As ever there are always cases where you could argue differently, but I believe they should be the exception to the general rule (guideline) not the standard approach.

I'm enjoying this

Cheers

John

[Steve]

1. If the artist wants to... I think it's always acceptable to ignore grammar intentionally... that doesn't make it good. It depends... usually it's fairly obvious when someone just didn't pay any attention to the grammar and when someone meant to defy grammar laws.

When I read other peoples lyrics, I get slightly frustrated when spelling and grammar are completely ignored! There is a huge difference between

They're

There

Their

But writers still mix them up and confuse. If a musician did the same, it would sound dreadful, but lyricists seem to think that it's ok? It's not ok! If you want to write lyrics, do it properly! have a dictionary around and a thesaurus. If you want to make it a serious option in your life, take some time to learn the craft! Constructing a song is not just a case of scribbling down some words. It's an art that needs to be practiced. Like anything worth doing, you need to work at it! There are lots of lyricists looking for collaborations with musicians, but they seem indifferent to what a musician may be looking for! A well crafted lyric is usually a joy to read. Something thrown out without even a spell checker put over it, is an annoyance!

[Nightwolf]

Some very good points here, awesome thread, thanks Carnival!

I wish I had more time to devote to an answer, such is Life in the big city!

I always preface my reviews with "if you already have a melody then go with it" the thing is most Lyricists that post for review just write Lyrics and some are looking for Musicians to collaborate with. In this case form is very important since the Musicians will be responsible for finding cadence and melody, it should jump out of the page and into the players head.

Certainly more info when posting would be good, I thought about a simple guideline post of what should be included about the Lyric when posting Lyrics for review.

John mentions "jolting the listener", that's ok too, sometimes we do that on purpose to wake folks up. It is done more often with Poetry than with Lyrics, as most folks think Lyrics should sit in the back until we decide to take notice of them.

From a simple country tune, to a prog anthem, all we can do is try to make the review as helpful as possible with the information given. More information would obviously yield better results.

I generally skip the pat on the back thing, if I take time to work through your Lyric, I probably printed it out, took it with me to meditate on it for a bit and try to figure out something I can say to make it better. This does not imply that it was not good or great before I touched it, in fact it means the opposite, if i took the time, then I think it is a worthy Lyric to begin with or I would not bother. If I don't get to it, that does not mean I read it and blew it off obviously, we all have Lives to lead..

[Carnival]

As the provacateur of this topic, I have to tell you that I am learning more from every one of you, as well as from other topics in this forum of a related nature - far more than I expected. It has opened my eyes, first and foremost, to the obvious but heretofore unconsidered (by me) concept of the lyricists responsibility in understanding some fundamentals of song structure, and it's importance in collaborating with the musical composer.

It has also helped me to realize that there is a grey area between proper lyrical structure and the 'ear-pleasing-but-rule-breaking', or less structured lyric, and that the better the structure, the easier it is for the musician to work with. And that in the absence of this strong structure, notes about the intentions of the lyricist are valuable.

I am working on a new lyric now, with this new information in mind, and I can already see some improvement in my writing with regard to it's suitability as a song lyric. It's VERY exciting to me. I plan to post several of my better existing works over the next few weeks, and I will be interested in seeing if I get more criticism about the structure of these pieces as opposed to the new ones. I think I already know the answer - "It reads like a poem."

[john]

John mentions "jolting the listener", that's ok too, sometimes we do that on purpose to wake folks up. It is done more often with Poetry than with Lyrics, as most folks think Lyrics should sit in the back until we decide to take notice of them.

I agree, but there is good jolting and bad jolting, intentional jolting and unintentional jolting.

it's a jolt to the left

and jolt to the riiiigggght.