• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Vocalist's writing sucks

"non gustibus est"

Latin for "in matters of taste, there can be no dispute". When you say something sucks, that is *always* just your opinion. There is no objective "suck" or "awesome", just taste and opinions. You need to learn this to be in the arts. It's true. It's not PC BS, it's PT - plain truth.
 
This is how it happens in my band. Someone will write a song. We will play it. If it's a good song, we'll play it during later practices. If it's not a good song, it quietly goes away without drama (so far so good for the past three years, anyway).

If you want to shape up the skills, you have to embrace the first efforts.
 
Record everything you do. Be prepared to throw 50% of it away, or more.

You have to be willing to separate the wheat from the chaff. There is an unavoidable amount of chaff, especially when you're starting to write.

When you get older, if you keep doing it, in my experience it gets easier to avoid chaff in the first place, and that is when it gets really fun. I sometimes write 2 songs a week, and I never cringe at my own stuff anymore. But, it took me almost 30 years to get here.
 
Yeah, but crap is crap ... in any medium or genre.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't any good.

Quality in art is subjective.

I'd say taste in art is subjective, but quality is different and crap is still crap.

For example, an artist with training employs ideas within the tradition of his/her field and draws upon this history while pushing some new ideas and voila! Art is created.

A bum off the street with zero training throws a sardine can into a bathtub full of stagnant water and drags it off to an art curator who exhibits it... yes, it is still art, yes, someone is bound to like it, but is it quality? No, it's crap.

I'm not saying it's mandatory to have had formal training to be an artist... Tommy Emmanuel is an incredible artist, but he has no formal training and some people may not dig his style. Then there's the struggling artist with all the training in the world, but who just can't seem to get a break because their ideas or execution is simply sub-par on an artistic level – Unimaginative. I know who I'd rather listen to. Listen to pop 40 and you'll hear mostly generic music and lyrics, then once in a while something quality is written in that mainstream vein and it becomes a hit.

Just 'cause something is good, doesn't mean I'll like it;
and just 'cause something is crap, doesn't mean I'll dislike it. That's where the subjectivity comes in...

Art is subjective, whether it's crap or not.

Here's an idea: this post (my post) is crap. I could've made my point much more succinctly if I'd made the effort and better crafted my writing, taken the time to choose words more carefully. Instead I worked too much/long on it and rambled around. So, I'll leave with a couple of Charles Mingus quotes:

Mingus said:
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creative.

Mingus said:
Creativity is more than just being different. Anybody can plan weird; that's easy. What's hard is to be as simple as Bach. Making the simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
 
OK, as a older guy having no idea what Post-Hardcore/Electronicore is, I googled it and listened to some youtube videos. After listening to the "music" I'd say if you just scream the word "vomit" over and over that would be fitting lyrics. Just my viewpoint, of course. :)
 
I disagree. You may like or dislike something but there is no crap. Your level of dislike may be higher but still no crap. We are all different and you can never get everyone to agree absolutely about something as subjective as art or music. Prepared piano comes to mind here.


I'd say taste in art is subjective, but quality is different and crap is still crap.

For example, an artist with training employs ideas within the tradition of his/her field and draws upon this history while pushing some new ideas and voila! Art is created.

A bum off the street with zero training throws a sardine can into a bathtub full of stagnant water and drags it off to an art curator who exhibits it... yes, it is still art, yes, someone is bound to like it, but is it quality? No, it's crap.

I'm not saying it's mandatory to have had formal training to be an artist... Tommy Emmanuel is an incredible artist, but he has no formal training and some people may not dig his style. Then there's the struggling artist with all the training in the world, but who just can't seem to get a break because their ideas or execution is simply sub-par on an artistic level – Unimaginative. I know who I'd rather listen to. Listen to pop 40 and you'll hear mostly generic music and lyrics, then once in a while something quality is written in that mainstream vein and it becomes a hit.

Just 'cause something is good, doesn't mean I'll like it;
and just 'cause something is crap, doesn't mean I'll dislike it. That's where the subjectivity comes in...

Art is subjective, whether it's crap or not.

Here's an idea: this post (my post) is crap. I could've made my point much more succinctly if I'd made the effort and better crafted my writing, taken the time to choose words more carefully. Instead I worked too much/long on it and rambled around. So, I'll leave with a couple of Charles Mingus quotes:
 
If one lacks discernment. I don't know what world some live in, but it must be tough not being able to distinguish crap from gold.

I've never seen a wedding ring made of crap.

I happen to think 95% of all modern music is total CRAP.

Am I right?

Of course I'm NOT.

It really is that subjective.

But in all honesty, no one has made anything I would call "gold" since the Dixie Chicks, and they are the only exception to my rule of no one since 1978.