Setting up a quiet, dedicated environment is good advice in my experience. My project for this year has been to write, consistently, every month. I try to record 4 songs a month with at least one original. The key to this project has been to establish a regime: 3 nights a week after work, after the kids are washed up and in bed, I go to my space and I record.
I haven't always hit the 4 song mark every month this year but I've been pretty consistent.
Prolific authors tend to do this and I realized this is how I manage to keep up with software projects as well. So why not music?
My theory is that creativity can be made into a habit.
Should perhaps be titled: "How to Write an American Indie-Rock Song". There's a lot to the world of composing outside of acoustic guitar and verse-chorus-verse.
(SYNOPSIS: practice, learn some basic music theory and try not to be boring)
I don't really disagree with any of this, but that's because it's not really saying much of anything. It's kind of diet and exercise articles. If they're honest (i.e. "avoid unhealthy foods, burn more calories than you take in"), then they're boring fluff. Whereas if they try to present exciting secrets (e.g. "do this gluten-free paleo detox cleanse and you'll never have to exercise again!"), then they're gimmicky junk. Maybe some topics just aren't that "blog-able".
Your not wrong, but I just want to make an aside about how I think 'obvious' is a dirty word. Things are only ever obvious when you already have domain knowledge, which you can't assume of everyone even in something as ubiquitous as diet. Yes, once you understand hobbies or dieting the vast majority of down to earth honest advice is going to be HIGHLY boring and repetitive. But Some people still might not have got the message, and some messages are worth repeating to help them out. All this withstanding, I also don't feel like this stuff is HN material.
As for the suitability of posts about music, generally speaking... I'm fine with HN casting a wide net. SO many random hobbies trend their way to the top of the front page for a few days here and there. In almost all cases, I find them more interesting than the usual "meta-discussion" tangents about which CSS and fonts a submission uses.
A crucial part of English-language songwriting, and something that is all too often missing from these types of introductory articles, is the importance of "scansion" [0], or "flow." Essentially, it's the concept that the stressed beats in a melody should correspond with the stressed syllables in lyrics. Sounds simple, but it's all too common in the writing process to fixate on a well-written line that matches the number of syllables but not the stress pattern - there's nothing like placing stress incorrectly on a preposition to make a song feel "forced."
In many ways, this is a big part of what makes songwriting a true engineering process - every line becomes a problem with well-known constraints, where you can apply creative solutions from either side of the problem... but you have to meet the constraints. (Of course, you can break it intentionally for effect - for instance, Eminem in "Lose Yourself" mis-stressing "that easy" to fit into a rhythm scheme alongside "gravity" - but this is done consciously.)
A key component is to make sure that the mental bandwidth required for this engineering doesn't interfere with creativity; getting that balance right is essential. It's why I generally wish people thought of songwriting software more as IDEs, with contextual information about potential bugs surfaced through third-party UI plugins. (Sadly, most professional notation software is closed to any meaningful modification.)
When singing along with songs that I have not fully committed to memory, I am always surprised how the word that I have in my mind is not the selected one. I have a "formal" choice while the song writer has chosen an artsy one. The writers choice was always a lot more pleasing than mine. To extend on that, often sentences are structured in a very unique manner but still grammatically correct way. I would never think about that style of sentence construction. Definitely an art form.
> A lesson I learned not that long ago was to constantly critical analyse my work. Does it hold the audiences interest? is it too long? too short? Compare it with hit songs, what makes them a hit? What’s good about it? what’s good/bad about your idea in comparison?
I disagree with this. Do self-indulge. If you don't write a song for yourself first and foremost, why write it?
> Love, Religion, War, Peace, Politics, People, Family, pick any theme you like, but DO pick a theme, otherwise you’ll have nothing to write about and the song will be aimless.
I disagree with this even more. If the theme didn't pick you, if the lyrics aren't like a child you have to give birth to, no matter who may find it ugly or dumb, maybe keep it in your private folder, but keep looking, because as long as you're writing something where you can put the pen down, it's still not it. Make it so good and real that it doesn't matter who likes it, but rather whom it likes.
> Look at Pink Floyd’s concept album, “The Wall” as an exercise of using related fictional/non-fictional themes to drive a whole album.
I think The Wall was born out of very deep experiences. I would believe the writers if they said they "picked a theme" and such, but until then I'll think they just let it out, and the patterns emerged naturally. I certainly notice this in my stuff, I don't care about being consistent or poetic, I care about being correct. I get carried away and then I question myself. If it withstands questioning, or makes me grin like the cat that ate the canary, I keep it (in my public folder so to speak), and then I often find parallels after the fact. As some guy said, the great advantage of telling the truth is you don't have to remember what you said. One time I took good bits from all sorts of song attempts that didn't quite strike me, and put them together, adding some glue and changing some things. Now I can't even tell where the "seams" were, it all seems like it's meant to be that way... but I bet if I changed the order around some, it would also seem that way. Don't analyze too much, it's a fool's errand -- play and listen from your heart.
> Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.
As a long time songwriter, I would say the very best songs come when you pick up an acoustic guitar and just thrash it out quickly. Thinking too hard is the enemy of songwriting. I write all kinds of music, from electronica to metal to ambient, and they all start on an acoustic guitar.
Understanding harmonic theory (mainly chord progressions) and harmonic rhythm is important because it allows you to know what may work for your next chord. You don't want to interrupt the flow of energy when you have to stop and search for the chords in the key you're working in.
Here's my method: Quickly write on guitar -> quickly record raw acoustic into computer -> write down chord progressions -> start replacing harmonic elements with other instruments -> change chord voicings to add interest -> add drums -> establish melody -> record vocals -> add elements that create variation/interest (one-shots that only occur once and break up any repetition) -> mix.
Written a few songs. This article is good advice and it captures the process really well. It honors the sporadic nature of idea generation. #2 is incredibly true, just capture them, even if you're driving on a highway! You'll never get the moment back...
#3 and #4 are novel. I'm glad I've learned about them now.
#5 and #8 is a matter of schools of thought. I don't agree. And perhaps because I've written 10 verses drivelling about love. :) I think that if the 10 verses are adequately compelling, through construction and message, then it can lock in a listener. Pandering only to what works in hits is limiting, in my view.
#6, #9, and #10 is also evidence of a mature songwriter. H/t.
16 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 46.9 ms ] threadI haven't always hit the 4 song mark every month this year but I've been pretty consistent.
Prolific authors tend to do this and I realized this is how I manage to keep up with software projects as well. So why not music?
My theory is that creativity can be made into a habit.
"It's Never Too Late to Learn Guitar"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15008078
(SYNOPSIS: practice, and take lessons)
"How to Write a Song"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15011198
(SYNOPSIS: practice, learn some basic music theory and try not to be boring)
I don't really disagree with any of this, but that's because it's not really saying much of anything. It's kind of diet and exercise articles. If they're honest (i.e. "avoid unhealthy foods, burn more calories than you take in"), then they're boring fluff. Whereas if they try to present exciting secrets (e.g. "do this gluten-free paleo detox cleanse and you'll never have to exercise again!"), then they're gimmicky junk. Maybe some topics just aren't that "blog-able".
As for the suitability of posts about music, generally speaking... I'm fine with HN casting a wide net. SO many random hobbies trend their way to the top of the front page for a few days here and there. In almost all cases, I find them more interesting than the usual "meta-discussion" tangents about which CSS and fonts a submission uses.
exactly
http://www.simonhawkins.com/?p=340
In many ways, this is a big part of what makes songwriting a true engineering process - every line becomes a problem with well-known constraints, where you can apply creative solutions from either side of the problem... but you have to meet the constraints. (Of course, you can break it intentionally for effect - for instance, Eminem in "Lose Yourself" mis-stressing "that easy" to fit into a rhythm scheme alongside "gravity" - but this is done consciously.)
A key component is to make sure that the mental bandwidth required for this engineering doesn't interfere with creativity; getting that balance right is essential. It's why I generally wish people thought of songwriting software more as IDEs, with contextual information about potential bugs surfaced through third-party UI plugins. (Sadly, most professional notation software is closed to any meaningful modification.)
A useful start is this chart http://www.donaldsonworkshop.com/baraboo/songwriting/chordma...
Dude was an alien.
I disagree with this. Do self-indulge. If you don't write a song for yourself first and foremost, why write it?
> Love, Religion, War, Peace, Politics, People, Family, pick any theme you like, but DO pick a theme, otherwise you’ll have nothing to write about and the song will be aimless.
I disagree with this even more. If the theme didn't pick you, if the lyrics aren't like a child you have to give birth to, no matter who may find it ugly or dumb, maybe keep it in your private folder, but keep looking, because as long as you're writing something where you can put the pen down, it's still not it. Make it so good and real that it doesn't matter who likes it, but rather whom it likes.
> Look at Pink Floyd’s concept album, “The Wall” as an exercise of using related fictional/non-fictional themes to drive a whole album.
I think The Wall was born out of very deep experiences. I would believe the writers if they said they "picked a theme" and such, but until then I'll think they just let it out, and the patterns emerged naturally. I certainly notice this in my stuff, I don't care about being consistent or poetic, I care about being correct. I get carried away and then I question myself. If it withstands questioning, or makes me grin like the cat that ate the canary, I keep it (in my public folder so to speak), and then I often find parallels after the fact. As some guy said, the great advantage of telling the truth is you don't have to remember what you said. One time I took good bits from all sorts of song attempts that didn't quite strike me, and put them together, adding some glue and changing some things. Now I can't even tell where the "seams" were, it all seems like it's meant to be that way... but I bet if I changed the order around some, it would also seem that way. Don't analyze too much, it's a fool's errand -- play and listen from your heart.
> Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.
-- C. S. Lewis
Understanding harmonic theory (mainly chord progressions) and harmonic rhythm is important because it allows you to know what may work for your next chord. You don't want to interrupt the flow of energy when you have to stop and search for the chords in the key you're working in.
Here's my method: Quickly write on guitar -> quickly record raw acoustic into computer -> write down chord progressions -> start replacing harmonic elements with other instruments -> change chord voicings to add interest -> add drums -> establish melody -> record vocals -> add elements that create variation/interest (one-shots that only occur once and break up any repetition) -> mix.
#3 and #4 are novel. I'm glad I've learned about them now.
#5 and #8 is a matter of schools of thought. I don't agree. And perhaps because I've written 10 verses drivelling about love. :) I think that if the 10 verses are adequately compelling, through construction and message, then it can lock in a listener. Pandering only to what works in hits is limiting, in my view.
#6, #9, and #10 is also evidence of a mature songwriter. H/t.