Songwriting...

[Stimuli]

I just had to start this thread...

It seems on this board the only thing that can be considered valid music is music that falls under the category of "great songwriting"...

however, how do you define good songwriting???

To me, the majority of people seem to think that if you string together a Dm to C chord progression and put catchy lyrics this is what great songwriting is...Neil Young, Roger Waters and Steven Wilson are awesome, but that is not the only thing that is good songwriting...great songwriting can occurr in Thrash and Jazz Fusion too...

To me, the best songwriting I ever hear is not coming from these campfire (sing song) heros but from instrumental music. Songwriting to me is the CRAFTING of the chord progression and the melody. The changes in the MUSIC is what I qualify as good songwriting. It can be fast, slow, weird, ultramelodic, bluesy... it doesnt matter...its the creativity, inventiveness and all around melodic quality of the music that matters...whether there is heart wrenching lyrics or not...Jack Johnson and U2 are NOT good songwriters...just because they make hooky, pleasant, accesible music does not make them good songwriters, if they regurgitate the same boring shit over and over again...

The reason I start this threads is because I was argueing with a bandmate, trying to explain to him that DreamTheater/Liquid Tension Experiment has the exact same level of (if not more) genius songwriting as Opeth, Pink Floyd and Bob Dylan...its just that once they start shredding and soloing non-musicians get borred and forget about all the melody that happened before. My friend just couldn't get rhough his head that "Demon of the Fall" can be considered excellent songwriting...

and now I just read on this board that Steve Vai is a shit songwriter...
So, please... tell me... wtf is good songwriting to you if Steve Vai is shit at writing music???

listen to his song Lotus Feet... that is literally better song writing than almost anything ive heard in the past 5 years...

there are other things to be said but I'm lazy...maybe later...

 

[affinityband]

Steve vai does not try anything particuarly new when he writes his songs, there are always solos, and uses very typical structures. In short he doesnt hold MY attention ( this is only an opinion ). Too me, he doesnt progress. A good example of progression or doing something every once in a while is most of Garms projects. His music is very interesting to listen to and i find quite easy to listen to. It has variety, song structures that are hard to keep track of if you try to keep up. The dynamics in his work move so swiftly its hard to know it has changed at all. Steve Vai in my eyes is just making songs so he can try and live up to his own hype. His hype is solos, 'sophisticated' guitar playing and the rockstar image. He is not my cuppa tea and i find his work very lazy as a guitarist who in actual fact has got alot of skill and doesnt look at what may be the right way of creating music.

 

[Stimuli]

Thats cool...thanks for the intelligent answer...

I've actually never had the chance to listen to Ulver yet, or any of those other projects. I've read a lot about the work and it does sound like it would appeal to me... and be something I consider great songwriting...

I obviously would disagree with you on the matter of Steve Vai, but I think that would be more of a subjective matter...

but generally, the topic isn;t about steve vai, or dream theater, or opeth in particular... its the fact that from my point of you, people only have one view of what "good songwriting" is...

for example, people in my area, will never concede to the fact that something without lyrics is good songwriting...

 

[JoeVice]

the only 'criteria' that i have is that the song has to make me feel something. it has to grab my attention. thats it. for me, there is no absolute way that a song must go about in order to hook me.

there are songs that i flat out don't like. but, chances are, there is someone out there who loves that song. therefore, its a good song. for example, you say that U2 are NOT good song writers. well...i like quite a few of their songs...quite a bit. they ARE good song writers.

 

[daz436]

to me good songwriting makes you think and reflect after listening, it makes you want to listen again purely to discover more about the track, and it makes you want to study the subject and/or topics introduced. this doesnt mean i dont like things that do not do this...

 

[Heckelgruber]

I'm a fan of Pixies, although their music seems unsophisticated enough for even the likes of me to manage on the guitar. I don't really think their songs do anything particularly clever but they do have a great feel. I doubt there is anything that all examples of great songwriting have in common - surely it's too subjective...?

 

[affinityband]

Thing is, guys like the pixies are probably awesome guitarists. But they probably choose not to show it. Out of any of my friends or people i know none of the guitarists that are 'metal' players are any good. The good ones are the ones that like bands like the pixies and indie n that general area. Especially 2 of them who are absoloutley phenomenal players.

 

[Rick from Oddyssey]

Good songwriting has many aspects and ways of being made. A very repetitive song can be as good or better than an elaborate prog song (Lightning Crashes by Live is a good example in my opinion) and vice-versa. Lyrics are an important part of songwriting, no matter what is being said through the lyrics, and still, instrumental songwriting is as pertinent as songs with lyrics, etc... It's all in the tastes, musical education,etc.

One thing I consider to be bad songwriting and that I hear more and more, probably due to the fact that recording is now mostly done on computers, is what I call the Copy/Paste syndrome. Parts and riffs glued to one another without pertinent transitions (transitions, I find, are what makes a song more interesting and good transitions are part of good songwriting). An example of a band afflicted by this, especially on their last album, is Old Man's Child. Excellent riffs, excellent musicians, but if you listen carefully enough, you will notice in almost all of the songs on Vermin that riffs and licks and beats succeed themselves endlessly, yet without transitions to justify these successions and make them interesting. Which is why this album was a let down affair for me. This is why I am a huge Opeth fan, because, even though there are many riffs, licks, chops, beats within one song, they flow naturally because of Mikael's concern for good transitions. Transitions are the punctuation marks of a song, allowing it to breathe. That's why I think it's the most important part of songwriting, being a songwriter myself.

Cheers !

 

[vampyrouss]

But, some songs work really well with no transitions, if its meant to suddenly change. As in deliberatly badly structured because it fits the song, or bands style, I like that.

But yeah, horrible if it just sounds like they couldn't come up with a way to join it so they just slap it against the previous riff.

 

[FRUGiHOYi]

Good songwriting has many aspects and ways of being made. A very repetitive song can be as good or better than an elaborate prog song (Lightning Crashes by Live is a good example in my opinion) and vice-versa. Lyrics are an important part of songwriting, no matter what is being said through the lyrics, and still, instrumental songwriting is as pertinent as songs with lyrics, etc... It's all in the tastes, musical education,etc.

One thing I consider to be bad songwriting and that I hear more and more, probably due to the fact that recording is now mostly done on computers, is what I call the Copy/Paste syndrome. Parts and riffs glued to one another without pertinent transitions (transitions, I find, are what makes a song more interesting and good transitions are part of good songwriting). An example of a band afflicted by this, especially on their last album, is Old Man's Child. Excellent riffs, excellent musicians, but if you listen carefully enough, you will notice in almost all of the songs on Vermin that riffs and licks and beats succeed themselves endlessly, yet without transitions to justify these successions and make them interesting. Which is why this album was a let down affair for me. This is why I am a huge Opeth fan, because, even though there are many riffs, licks, chops, beats within one song, they flow naturally because of Mikael's concern for good transitions. Transitions are the punctuation marks of a song, allowing it to breathe. That's why I think it's the most important part of songwriting, being a songwriter myself.

Cheers !

Well, I partly agree with you. I think good transitions are important, but not completely necessary all the time. For example, you mention you like Opeth because they have good transitions, but I feel that's not true for their first couple of albums. A lot of the time it seems like different parts of the songs were just glued together. Still, I love those albums. Good transitions can usually make a song better though. I'm in the process of recording a song I have written and I took a lot of care to make sure it didn't sound like I just glued riffs together.

 

[Jude]

Songwriting...it's all subjective, but I know good songwriting when I hear it, or rather I know songwriting that I like when I hear it. And verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus doesn't = bad songwriting, you can still have an incredible song with a structure basically like that (Halo by Porcupine Tree, for example) due to the other elements of the song being strong.

 

[Rick from Oddyssey]

Well, I partly agree with you. I think good transitions are important, but not completely necessary all the time. For example, you mention you like Opeth because they have good transitions, but I feel that's not true for their first couple of albums. A lot of the time it seems like different parts of the songs were just glued together. Still, I love those albums. Good transitions can usually make a song better though. I'm in the process of recording a song I have written and I took a lot of care to make sure it didn't sound like I just glued riffs together.

To be totally honest (and at great risk of being bashed ) I only like a few songs from Opeth's first two albums, the majority being on Morningrise. My Arms Your Hearse and afterwards are albums where the "juice" is, in my most humble opinion. So I agree with you concerning the early Opeth releases. And no, transitions are not necessary at ALL times, I agree there also. It's just that to me, they are really important, they are the points of evolution within a song, and they can upgrade the next part only because of the way they bring them, but I take note of your point, because in the end, too much is just like not enough. Thanks for the insight !

I have to bring something up : I find I really enjoy the discussions taking place on this particular forum. I don't find (or rarely find) the usual teenage banter that disgraces such forums. On the contrary, I notice the high amount of open-minded people (musicians and otherwise) whose opinions I often find enlightening. Thank you all, here's a big to all of you !

 

[opeth8]

I agree that the 1st two albums definitely seems to be glued together. BRI is the greatest example of them all. The newer albums definitely showcase stronger or more well contsructed songs from start to finish, but I love the guitar work on the 1st two albums.

As to what constitutes great songwriting...... Not a clue ????

 

[biggsy]

to me good songwriting makes you think and reflect after listening, it makes you want to listen again purely to discover more about the track, and it makes you want to study the subject and/or topics introduced. this doesnt mean i dont like things that do not do this...

absolutely. tracks that you can listen to over and over and still discover more about everytime are the songs that i think have 'great songwriting'. i like songs that dont make me think about them and want to listen to them again and again, as long as they sound good. but they arent as special as the songs with 'great songwriting'.

 

[Misseriah]

DreamTheater/Liquid Tension Experiment has the exact same level of (if not more) genius songwriting as Opeth, Pink Floyd and Bob Dylan...its just that once they start shredding and soloing non-musicians

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO

I AM a musician and I have been for a long time, and I still think shredding is metal's gayest attribute. There's no musicianship to it. It's all technique (just like being good at a video game.)

 

[Kerry King]

I AM a musician and I have been for a long time, and I still think shredding is metal's gayest attribute. There's no musicianship to it. It's all technique (just like being good at a video game.)

I completely disagree with your criticism of shredding. However I agree that very often bands become extremely cerebral... I find DT's solo sections (on 6DOT and TOT especially) sometimes going overboard.

Now in terms of genius songwriting, DT cannot compare to Opeth. Transitions in Opeth's music are very smooth, yet they manage to write progressive music without catchy choruses and still sound refreshing. Demon Of The Fall? Yeah, thats a pretty great composition as well... just the way the narration is done and how the music sets the mood for whats going on is brilliant. Also the Acoustic section which gives rise to the tormenting 'Demon, demon of the fall' and then later the way the song changes its mood again (as the ghost watches her flee 'run away run away run away').

On the other hand, one of DT's most popular songs (although one of my least favourite) The Glass Prison has a bunch of riffs rapidly appearing one after another. The transitions are out of place (?) and sound too delivberate and misplaced. My opinion anyways.

KFK

 

[Don Corleone]

i say it's all about feeling. good musicians FEEL they have crafted a good song when they're through with it.

 

[Misseriah]

I completely disagree with your criticism of shredding.

Your post wasn't too bad (lol). OK, imagine that metal bands, instead of using the electric guitar, used violins and violas. Now imagine that you're getting into this music, and it's getting dramatic and engrossing, but suddenly the guy breaks out into a mentally confusing violin solo. Just wanking the shit out of his violin. Do you think that would sound good? Why is shredding only "good" for the guitar? Because shredding is slightely more tolerable with the guitar. Metal is really the only genre that uses shredding as an attractive feature to fans. Why? Anyone can shred if they've played long enough. There's no musicianship to shredding, its basically "Hey look at me, I can play my guitar really, really fast."

 

[Kenneth R.]

trying to explain to him that DreamTheater/Liquid Tension Experiment has the exact same level of (if not more) genius songwriting as Opeth, Pink Floyd and Bob Dylan...its just that once they start shredding and soloing non-musicians get borred and forget about all the melody that happened before....

LTE maybe. DT? no. not even close. And of all those bands, I'd say Floyd is clearly the winner, yes, even before Opeth.

Songwriting is crafting a musical portrait that accurately and easily conveys the meaning or message you are trying to express. the difference between a good and bad songwriter is felt in the strength of that connection. imo, this is at least a thousand times more important than technical proficiency.

 

[Disgustipated]

Pink Floyd are amongst the top five greatest songwriters off all time. I've no idea who the other four are.