What is wrong with songwriters!!!

[Murf]

Hi Guys/Gals,
Apologies I need to vent a little (or a lot)..and this is going to be long so please bear with me.

I've just spent the last year working with a singer/songwriter on his original material which is quite good and great fun to play..on top of this he's managed to assemble a band consisting of some highly experienced session/gigging musicians who are an absolute joy to play with, so far so good.

Now, the original plan was to demo 12 songs in his home studio and then pick 5 to record properly in a pro studio for an ep which we would then "flog" at the MIDEM festival in Cannes in the hopes of securing a record deal...so far MISSION ACCOMPLISHED yaaaay..we're currently in talks for a 4 album deal with an independant label (with a LOT of money behind them).

Here's the problem..while getting the setlist to-gether we found that the songwriter had 3 "throwaway" songs which he'd written very quickly..(I mean these tunes had a very simple chord structure and were "poppy" with great hooks in the chorus) me and the boyz worked these tunes up and arranged them a bit and now they're VERY radio friendly and the musicians agree they're the most commercially viable songs in the set....alarm bells started ringing though when we went to record the EP for Cannes.

The songwriter recorded the 5 more "muso" songs ie the songs that were very "wordy" lyrically and had very tricky and elaborate arrangements....style over substance shall we say..over our objections to put the more radio/crowd friendly tunes...Don't get me wrong the tracks recorded are great but they're more Album tracks than singles and really are not indiciative of the rest of the tunes in the set.

Come the MIDEM festival where we had two showcase gigs a night lined up for the week...the "commercial" tunes were ommitted from the set list in favour of the more introspective songwritery tunes. Now, this was a problem, because it was the MIDEM festival the punters coming to our showcase were Record label heads, PR people, Managers or A&R which you only have one chance to impress and in fairness they all praised the musicianship etc.. BUT! we were lacking the "HIT" tunes which would grab their attention, so, after the 2nd night of showcase gigs me and the guitarist persuaded the the songwriter to include the 3 more accessible tunes in the set....The next showcase which tunes got the the music industry people talking to us?..yep the three "throwaway pop tunes with the big "Queen" choruses.

So, after all that and after months of negotiations with various labels we opted to go with this one particular independant label who have offered us a state of the art studio with a top notch producer to record our 1st album...BRILLIANT..only the bleedin' songwriter dosent want to put the songs which got us the deal in the first place on the album!!! ...HELLO these are the songs that got us signed in the first place!!

Godallmighty...just because a song has a simple structure and a is commercial dosent mean its not good....musical ego is a terrible thing and this could potentially scupper the whole thing for us.

Thanks for taking the time to read this longwinded diatribe but I had to get it off my chest.

Murf

(ps..if you want to hear an rough example of the tunes "HE" put on the ep check here..

http://www.myspace.com/burnishireland

they're not bad but they're in no way, shape or form any way representative of our actual set)

[Don't_Fret]

Well, great job.

I was just talking about this today. Doesn't matter how musically intricate a song is if it's unlistenable.

[Murf]

Originally Posted by Don't_Fret

Well, great job.

I was just talking about this today. Doesn't matter how musically intricate a song is if it's unlistenable.

I hear ya dude although in this case It's not that the other songs are unlistenable its just that they're not commercial enough (and at the end of the day its not called the music BUSINESS for nothing ) the tunes are "pretty" good but will only really appeal to poets (for the lyrical content ..which in fairness is good..he does have a great way with words) or musicians..my take (and the drummer and guitarist) on the whole thing would be to use the commercial tunes to GET an audience and then introduce the "other" material...at the end of the day the record company is making an investment into a product and if they dont get a decent return on it like any other business they'll drop it like a hot potato.

[Against Will]

Well, I'll go out on a limb and play Devil's Advocate. The road of fame is paved with the corpses of thousand one-hit wonder bands, many were very serious groups with a clear musical vision and path that they wanted to follow. They release one joke/throwaway track that then becomes hit. Suddenly they can't get away from it! No one wants to hear their other songs, they just want to hear that one throwaway track done on a lark, and they want more of it. So the band can either take the money and run with it, producing more cheesy pop in line with the throwaway and hope that it sticks too. Or they can take the high road and keep making the music they want and hope they can dig themselves out of the one-hit pop ghetto, which rarely works. So, either way, they end up fading into obscurity, remembered for the rest of their lives as the band that did that one song. Chumbawumba, the B-52's, and the Doors with those two songs are just a couple of examples. So I could understand a songwriter, seeing that, being concerned with wanting to present an image that is one they feel is consistent with their musical vision.

Of course, I can't say for sure if this is what he's thinking and he's not just being a snob. And I realize that in the music business you have to play the game a little. But it's a very slippery slope and business & music don't always see eye-to-eye, and when they don't, it's usually business that wins.

[canopener]

Originally Posted by Against Will

Chumbawumba, the B-52's, and the Doors with those two songs are just a couple of examples.

The B-52's? Rock Lobster was a tacky song, but I wouldn't call them one hit wonders.

[Against Will]

Originally Posted by canopener

The B-52's? Rock Lobster was a tacky song, but I wouldn't call them one hit wonders.

Maybe it's generational, but for me, their one-hit is "Love Shack". And I don't mean it in a derogatory sense, I mean that if you were to talk with the average "layperson" on the street and were to bring up the B-52's they'd talk about "Love Shack", which isn't all that representative of The B-52's catalogue. Same with "Tubthumper" and "Light My Fire" with the other two.

[Smallmouth_Bass]

Is this a band or a solo preject? If it's a band, there should be a democratic way to work the catchier tunes into the repertoire.

(Nice fretless on Fallen From Grace, by the way)

[Murf]

Originally Posted by Against Will

Well, I'll go out on a limb and play Devil's Advocate. The road of fame is paved with the corpses of thousand one-hit wonder bands, many were very serious groups with a clear musical vision and path that they wanted to follow. They release one joke/throwaway track that then becomes hit. Suddenly they can't get away from it! No one wants to hear their other songs, they just want to hear that one throwaway track done on a lark, and they want more of it. So the band can either take the money and run with it, producing more cheesy pop in line with the throwaway and hope that it sticks too. Or they can take the high road and keep making the music they want and hope they can dig themselves out of the one-hit pop ghetto, which rarely works. So, either way, they end up fading into obscurity, remembered for the rest of their lives as the band that did that one song. Chumbawumba, the B-52's, and the Doors with those two songs are just a couple of examples. So I could understand a songwriter, seeing that, being concerned with wanting to present an image that is one they feel is consistent with their musical vision.

Of course, I can't say for sure if this is what he's thinking and he's not just being a snob. And I realize that in the music business you have to play the game a little. But it's a very slippery slope and business & music don't always see eye-to-eye, and when they don't, it's usually business that wins.

EXCELLENT Points and I agree with all of them however in this case he's being a "snob", as I said the "commercial" songs are fantastic I mean I couldnt write songs like that to save my life (think Jellyfish spilt milk era or Queen and you'll get the idea...PLUS we as a band can pull them off live ..harmonies and all)..but for some reason because the songs arent "complicated" with 10 chord changes every 12 bars he somehow thinks they're inferior when in fact I think he has a great gift for writing catchy, memorable pop songs....In this case it seems like he's "shooting off his nose to spite his face"...Now, having said that all the songs are great and we have a signature sound for all of them and we have a fantatic live show...whats frustrating is that he's dismissing the songs which got us the interest in the first place because "their easy"

As a session musician I've experienced this many times over the years with songwriters, they'll have some great songs but they wont use 'em because "the chord changes are too obvious!!" ***??...To really p**s off a songwriter just say "AH, thats a great song, reminds of the Isley Brothers...etc...they go CRAZY when in fact I'm paying them a compliment but for some reason they seem to think they have to be 100% "original" which in fairness is impossible...(hell even Mozart robbed (cough) quoted from Bach

The "commercial" songs I'm talking about aren't novelty songs they are really good the problem (in the songwriters eyes) is that they're too simple musically......why is that a bad thing??

[Smallmouth_Bass]

A good song is a good song, regardless of how many chords it has or how simple it is.

[Murf]

Originally Posted by Smallmouth_Bass

Is this a band or a solo preject? If it's a band, there should be a democratic way to work the catchier tunes into the repertoire.

It's a "band" project allegedly but we (the band) were recruited originally to work with the songwriter...in fairness he's very very good as regards sharing the "kudos" and we all have an equal say in arrangements..it's just his attitude towards "simple" songs which baffles us.

Originally Posted by Smallmouth_Bass

(Nice fretless on Fallen From Grace, by the way)

Cheers that was a nightmare to record 'cos unknown to me the studio had 4 subwoofers built into the control room and I happened to be standing in front of one of them while recording the track so all I could hear was BOOOOOMMM!! (thank God for lined fretless basses and pro tools )

[Peter McFerrin]

The B-52s had a fine career long before "Love Shack." As vapid as it may be, that song brought the money and fame that their more challenging earlier work should have given them.

Question about the music industry in the British Isles: how is it that independent record labels are able to do so well there? Is it that record distribution is much easier in the UK and Ireland than in the US and Canada, maybe?

[Against Will]

Originally Posted by Peter McFerrin

The B-52s had a fine career long before "Love Shack." As vapid as it may be, that song brought the money and fame that their more challenging earlier work should have given them.

So did the Doors, but whenever there's a TV spot or something on them, 85% of the time there's "Light My Fire" playing in the background. There are other good examples but those were the only ones that came to mind.

[r6mile]

What about Knocking on Heaven's Door? It's a really amazing song, very well-known all around the world, and it only has 3 chords throughout the whole song! I think it's more of a good thing, because what the people like and remember easily are simple songs.

[flatwounds]

Remind the songwriter that Tomorrow Never Knows only has the one chord(ie, no chord change). I don't know about anyone else, but that Beatles songs gets stuck in my head all the time.

I ain't complaining.

[trog]

Will the label not pummel him into submission? I would have thought they'd be rather eager to get your catchy radio-friendly songs on the album. You know, the ones they signed you for.

[Murf]

Originally Posted by trog

Will the label not pummel him into submission? I would have thought they'd be rather eager to get your catchy radio-friendly songs on the album. You know, the ones they signed you for.

That is exactly the case...in fact during one of our meetings when he spoke about the "direction" of the first album I told him not to forget to include the more accessible numbers and he said "no, I'm thinking a different direction altogether"...straight away the label boss said "no you have to put those tunes on".....I'm just worried he'll pull a Diva type strop and refuse to do them....(he's like that he tends to go off all guns blazing without thinking of the long term consequences of his actions)..and if that happens its back to square one

[Lazylion]

Originally Posted by Murf

during one of our meetings when he spoke about the "direction" of the first album I told him not to forget to include the more accessible numbers and he said "no, I'm thinking a different direction altogether"...straight away the label boss said "no you have to put those tunes on".....I'm just worried he'll pull a Diva type strop and refuse to do them....(he's like that he tends to go off all guns blazing without thinking of the long term consequences of his actions)..and if that happens its back to square one

Yeah, you definitely want to have that settled before you get in front of the label folks! Don't spook them!
I can definitely understand fear of the "Achy Breaky Heart" syndrome. I wouldn't wish that on anyone! So do both. That way, you can become known as a band that does both. Sometimes simple is good, other times complicated is good. You want as big a pallette as possible, right?
IMHO, the best bands are the ones capable of VARIETY, not the easily categorizable ones. Good luck!

[tkozal]

Singers are more like actors, and usualy need to be fled from as soon as possible.....sounds like you got yourself a live one.


FLEE!!!!!

[MysticMichael]

This kind of self-absorbed behavior really just comes with the territory. It's not so much their singer selves that can be problematic. It's their songwriter selves...

Last night I played at an open mike night at a local bar. As expected, the place was thick with singer/songwriters. While I listened to them - and played a few tunes with a couple of them - I noticed how few of them have any sense of how to even play with accompaniment.

They drop beats. They mess with the tempo. They make chord changes irregularly - apparently whenever the urge strikes - not necessarily when the song calls for it, etc.

Since so many of them are so accustomed to performing solo - and so inexperienced playing in an ensemble - and because many of them apparently have a sense of such complete entitlement to do whatever they want (since after all, it's their song), they tend to be oblivious to any other concerns - creative or business...

In a sense, this is the price you pay for collaborating with someone with his/her own individual musical vision to pursue - and the talent & skill to translate it into actual notes and lyrics. It can make for an uneasy alliance - and a difficult compromise - as with so many other facets of the music business...

MM

[agreatheight]

Maybe he doesn't want to be a pop star, so the pop songs got dropped. As a singer / songwriter it seems to be his decision to make.

The songs on Myspace sound pretty good to me, though.