Welcome to Muse Songwriters Message Board

Register now to gain access to all of our features. 

 

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

HoboSage

Members
  • Content count

    997
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

HoboSage last won the day on July 7

HoboSage had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

52 Excellent

About HoboSage

  • Rank
    A Muse's Muse
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

10,610 profile views
  1. Son

  2. That was funny. LOL And, unfortunately, I agree with you. But, any suggestions on how to better convey this in a more sophisticated way would essentially be re-writing it for you. That's for you to figure out. But, while it may not be easy, it's not futile. You've already cleared the first big hurdle - you know it's not "right" as is, and that means when you do get it "right," you'll know that too.
  3. If you're typically starting with choruses, then you're probably starting with the hook, and the general theme and point of the song. The verses should say something that makes a natural connection to what you're saying in the choruses - they should "set up" the choruses. And, each verse should do it in a different way - you shouldn't say the same thing in each verse in a different way, but have a new take on things that still connects up with the choruses and the theme overall. For example, let's say you have a chorus that uses rain as a metaphor to express sadness. Verse one could be about clouds rolling in setting up the "rain" chorus, and verse 2 could be about a longing for sunshine, which again connects with the "rain" chorus. Also, it's not uncommon for the choruses to express generalities/universals, while the verses provide different specifics connecting to those generalities/universals, and in songs that tell a "story," it's usually in the verses where the specifics of "the plot" are developed in support of more general insights you express in the choruses based on a hook that sums up the point of telling the story.
  4. It would be one thing if you said something like From SR95-7 Bee, because the bee landed on the form you were working on. But, to just say "paper bee" I think implies that the "bee" is made our of paper - that "paper bee" is some kind of abstract metaphor for the paper form itself. I don't think "paper bee" works very well - I know it doesn't for me personally. Not that it even matters, but sincee filing out these forms is for some an uncaring "monolith" and pertains to "half finished academia," don't be surprised if many here in the U.S. take that to mean having to fill out all the paperwork to get another damn student loan so you can afford to continue your college education, knowing you'll never be able to pay back all the loans anyway, and that you likely face a bleak and stressful future because of crushing debt you can never escape. I really dig the slow push of a notional spike into a hollowed brain - very cool wordsmithing.
  5. Yep- if you also have recording capability and can sing or have a singer. Moreover, with the right software and some knowledge of MIDI and/or how to effectively use loops, you can both make and record killer music without knowing how to actually play any traditional musical instrument - and a lot of people dare doing just that.
  6. Granted, it may not have been artfully worded, but I don't think Paul is saying you should be happy if the song doesn't turn out well. He's saying that you should be happy to have found a collaborator who was willing to give it a try, and not let a poor result sour you on collaborations in general, which you kind of implied was the case in your previous post by saying previous collabs were "a waste of time." Trying is never a waste of time, and many never even get to the point of finding a collaborator at all. Never mind. I see Paul spoke for himself.
  7. Though there are exceptions when collaborations end up sounding awesome, by and large, most I've heard sound like songs that were cobbled together - music tracks and singing forcing themselves to fit a lyric, or a lyric being forcibly shoehorned to fit within an arrangement and/or with a melody - and the more collaborators there are contributing, the more cobbled together I think the song ends up sounding. Of course, there are also the technical complications of arranging and mixing separately-recorded tracks that were recorded at different times in different rooms using different gear, and those complications can often literally be heard in the final recording. If you're just a lyricist, then, as SongWolfe importantly points out, in addition to remaining flexible to changing the lyric so that lyric, arrangement and vocals work together best for a song, I think you're likely to get a better ultimate result working with just one collaborator who cannot only perform, arrange and record the entirety of all the music tracks for the song, but who can sing the song too. At most, use only two collaborators - one who can do all the music, and a singer. A finished recorded song expresses a creative musical vision through words, performances, arrangements and recording production. A collaboration expresses that creative vision by the contributions of more than one creative person. It's generally easier and more efficient to share such a creative vision with as few others as possible. Just my opinion.
  8. Respectfully, this is where I think you're wrong. The most obvious option is to do your own recordings - like others do. You can always come up with excuses not to. But if you make your own recordings, you'll eventually want to do multitrack arrangements, and that will make you an arranger, and becoming a songwriter who can arrange different instruments and sounds for your songs makes you a more creative and complete songwriter, not to mention that the vast universe of digital musical sounds is a huge source of inspiration for a musician or songwriter. I'll add that, the technology involved isn't rocket science, and once you get the hang of it, it becomes quite easy and efficient to use. There are zillions of kids all over the globe making damn good multitrack recordings on their tablets and computers who've never played a "real" musical instrument in their lives. You're already starting ahead of the game compared to them when they started. You just have to take the plunge like they did, like I did, and like many others do, and "get with the program." And, that's really the answer to your question about the difference between a demo recording and a professional recording. Given the technology, there really isn't much of a difference today expect for final mastering of the recording, and if your "demo" is to be used to pitch to "the industry," it better sound fairly "pro," because the demos even kids with no talent are submitting do. That's my opinion at least.
  9. The timing/prosody of your singing is a bit off in the first verse, which may have a couple of lines that are too wordy to work best, but you settle in well after that. I think this a really good song, but I think it's missing something musically that it could really use - a true chorus. What you label as a "chorus" sounds to me like a rise/pre-chorus to a chorus that never actually comes. After the second rise/-prechorus, that's when I needed to hear a new progression and vocal melody singing a true-sounding chorus. But, what you did was strum the same chords for a bit as a reset, and then it was just more of the same, and that's when I lost interest. I think if you sang "day" in "and the light of another day" at at the end of the second prechorus on a higher note, then you could follow with a true chorus structured something like this: the light another day [something here] the light of another day [something here] [something here ending in a rhyme to "day"] the light of another day Then, after the first true chorus I would have just one more verse and pre-chorus, and then close the song with repeats of the true chorus. Just my opinions based on what I would do given the music. P.S. I see now this wasn't your lyric, so you were no doubt constrained by that. It's not impossible, but with full disclosure I think it's unlikely that any song with this structure of a one verse followed by a chorus repeated four times could keep my interest without having me wanting to hear something else musically in the song - especially as a 1+1. It's a fine lyric, and you have a damn sweet verse and prechorus for this song using the lyric. But, I respectfully suggest that the song would best be served if the two of you worked together to come up with a true "in the light of day" chorus for this, because musically, that's what I think it really needs.
  10. Recording studios? Wow. "Let's do the time warp again."
  11. P.S. And to further clarify, you're not just holding notes, you're adding extra ones, and adding extra syllables to words and sounds that should not have extra syllables, and sometimes, you're repeating whole words - e.g., "alone-alone."
  12. I don't mean this as a insult, just an observation. But, I really think some singers are "prosody deaf," and they can't fix that problem, if they can't hear it. To my ears, there are very conspicuous prosody problems all through the song because of the way you sing it - starting with the way you unnaturally drag out the very first "a" in the very first line - then there's "bur-urrrrr-RRR-ing/soul," then "tru-u-U-Uth," then "alo-o-One/alone," etc., etc.
  13. As a performer, you need some practice to best convey this song. But, you play and sing without disabling fear and with passion, so you've already cleared the biggest performance hurdle. I think this has the makings of a really good song, but it's a ways from being there. With both your finger picking and your strumming, you're not locking in chords with a discernible root/bass note to make the chords sound "right," and your'e not playing with a consistent rhythm. I can maybe help you figure out a better way to play this, and when I have some time to do so, I will. But, remind me. Are you in standard tuning? I have some lyric tweak suggestions to make, but I'll hold off on those until you get the guitar arrangement worked out better, because right now, how you sing things isn't really in sync with how you're playing the guitar - causing you to unnaturally drag out certain words, etc. But, I can hear how this could be sung in a much smoother and natural way. For example, by resolving the chorus with "and I'm all alo-o-o-o-o-o -ne, in this," instead of repeating "alone" again. If it's at all possible for you to do, you should record just the guitar on it's own track and then sing the vocals on it's own track. At the very least, record just the guitar so you have that to sing to in working out the best way to sing this. In trying to figure out the best way to sing a song (which has a direct relationship to specific words you should sing), it's harder to do if you're also playing the guitar at the same time. David P.S. Don't ever be shy about sharing your demons with others through your songs. If you play this well and sing this well, you'll connect with people, because we all have demons. You can show others different facest of you with other songs.
  14. Respectfully, saying we are here to turn ourselves into gardens is much more than an assertion you should expect me to accept because it's metaphorical. It's you saying you have the answer to the BIG question: Why are we here? And, you're not just speaking for yourself. "We" includes me, and you're preaching your metaphorical fully-realized-you garden nonsense to me. Joni didn't say she had the answer for why we are here. She just expressed her desire that humanity somehow get back to goodness and simplicity. You don't have some profound answer for why we are here either, Bro. If you wanted this to be an honest song, then after pointing out what we are - star stuff and conscious carbon - you'd admit that the big question of why we are still looms, and you'd close the chorus with: "But, why are we here? . . . Why are we here?" That would make this a powerful song any thinking person could relate to. Unless, you just want to say our existence was inevitable given the multiverse. P.S. Joni's metaphorical garden makes sense because it refers to a place where we need to be - not what we need to be. She does not say: "And we got to get ourselves back to being the garden."
  15. Blocked? Write a song about fiber. I don't think a verb like "washing" is a good choice. I think "forces of nature, pushing/pulling you inside out" would work better. Laying on a feather? What's that's supposed to mean? It sounds to me like they're just words to have a rhyme to "weather." I personally think you're too hung up on the whole "weather" thing. I think the main forces of human nature giving us most of our problems are inertia and fear. Stick with stuff about being trapped in the rut of your own thinking, being unable to break away and doomed to succumb to your habits, being afraid to make a change or take a chance - things like that. The weather stuff seems like a different song to me. "Forces of Nature" is a cool hook and title. But, either have "forces of nature" be a metaphor for human nature, or have the song be about Mother Nature. I don't think you should try and mix both in the same song. Just my personal take on it.