Song composition: Technicality? or Musicality?

[doylea5]

my opinion: if starters pa ang mga musician, mas ok kung mas musical sa sugod.. melody oriented then gradually mu imporve dayun ang songwriting adding technical skills to it..providing na dili "sobra" ang pagbutang sa technicality.. eg: a song may be TOO difficult since all parts are technical, some people might think "OMFG! this sh**t is sooo crazy, way out!" - but for sure that song will end up as 'no good' , it'll suck.. k mrg DILI mana requirement na technical ang whole song pra nndut.. a song MUST have a balance of technicaityl ug musicality.. so i think naa juy simple na part ug 'kuti' na part.. mirag most song parts that really create an impact to the audience are basically the simple but melodic ones..technicallity just probably adds spice to the song.. ..? >>TAASA

[helixveji]

taas dyud...medyo nagets nko imong punto, nihang pd akong mata...

[love_stinks]

I've always been a frustrated lyricist and poet all my life [ipinanganak akong may baong papel at lapis, hehehe], I always thought, as long as the lyrics is good, it will carry na the whole song. But well, Sophie Fisher of Music and Lyrics had a nice way of describing the importance of both music and lyrics in a song. If I remember it correctly, she said something like this:

Music is like the physical appearance of a person, meaning, it's always the first thing that attracts a person to listen to it, the first thing that tells a listener, "hey, check me out!" or "hey, listen to me!". But just like getting to know another person, the lyrics is the person's attributes that you get to like (or dislike) as you get to hear/know the song more

Nice analogy di ba?

[Carlo Borromeo]

It's really sad that there are still people who guage the quality of a song or the level of musicianship on how fast a guy can play, how many chord changes there are, how odd-timed the beats are. None of that matters. Music is not a sport, it's not a race, it's not a boxing match.

Speed, dexterity, how high a note a singer can belt how, how fast a drummer can roll, none of that matters. All of these are tools and should be used when necessary, or when the need arises, but should never be the basis of quality.

Music is an artform like literature or film. Do you judge the quality of a book by how many hard-to-understand words you found? The grammar? How many pages it has? The paper that was used? No, you don't. If you did, then you're an idiot. You judge a book by how good the story was. Did it move you? Scare you? Make your laugh? If it worked, then it worked.

Do you judge the quality of a movie by how great the special effects or the sound is? Take note that except for a few exceptions (Lord of the Rings, Titanic), the Best Picture winner at the Oscars and the ones who get the technical awards are a different set of people. I can usually tell how BAD a movie will be when I'm watching their THE-MAKING-OF trailers, and all the people being interviewed can talk about is the art direction, the sound, and the special effects. Don't believe me? Watch THE-MAKING-OF videos of the Star Wars prequels.

Back to music. For me a song works if I can relate to it. If a song is supposed to make me wanna rock out, songs from AC/DC and The Rolling Stones, Audioslave, a few Greenday songs, they always work. I don't worry how easy or difficult the song is.

Do you think an AC/DC song would improve if it were played by Dream Theater? I thought so/didn't think so.

There you go.

[CuJo!!!]

It's really sad that there are still people who guage the quality of a song or the level of musicianship on how fast a guy can play, how many chord changes there are, how odd-timed the beats are. None of that matters. Music is not a sport, it's not a race, it's not a boxing match.

Speed, dexterity, how high a note a singer can belt how, how fast a drummer can roll, none of that matters. All of these are tools and should be used when necessary, or when the need arises, but should never be the basis of quality.

Music is an artform like literature or film. Do you judge the quality of a book by how many hard-to-understand words you found? The grammar? How many pages it has? The paper that was used? No, you don't. If you did, then you're an idiot. You judge a book by how good the story was. Did it move you? Scare you? Make your laugh? If it worked, then it worked.

Do you judge the quality of a movie by how great the special effects or the sound is? Take note that except for a few exceptions (Lord of the Rings, Titanic), the Best Picture winner at the Oscars and the ones who get the technical awards are a different set of people. I can usually tell how BAD a movie will be when I'm watching their THE-MAKING-OF trailers, and all the people being interviewed can talk about is the art direction, the sound, and the special effects. Don't believe me? Watch THE-MAKING-OF videos of the Star Wars prequels.

Back to music. For me a song works if I can relate to it. If a song is supposed to make me wanna rock out, songs from AC/DC and The Rolling Stones, Audioslave, a few Greenday songs, they always work. I don't worry how easy or difficult the song is.

Do you think an AC/DC song would improve if it were played by Dream Theater? I thought so/didn't think so.

There you go.

Haha!! nice one carlo... i have been saying this for the longest time..

[EZRA]

It's really sad that there are still people who guage the quality of a song or the level of musicianship on how fast a guy can play, how many chord changes there are, how odd-timed the beats are. None of that matters. Music is not a sport, it's not a race, it's not a boxing match.

Speed, dexterity, how high a note a singer can belt how, how fast a drummer can roll, none of that matters. All of these are tools and should be used when necessary, or when the need arises, but should never be the basis of quality.

Music is an artform like literature or film. Do you judge the quality of a book by how many hard-to-understand words you found? The grammar? How many pages it has? The paper that was used? No, you don't. If you did, then you're an idiot. You judge a book by how good the story was. Did it move you? Scare you? Make your laugh? If it worked, then it worked.

Do you judge the quality of a movie by how great the special effects or the sound is? Take note that except for a few exceptions (Lord of the Rings, Titanic), the Best Picture winner at the Oscars and the ones who get the technical awards are a different set of people. I can usually tell how BAD a movie will be when I'm watching their THE-MAKING-OF trailers, and all the people being interviewed can talk about is the art direction, the sound, and the special effects. Don't believe me? Watch THE-MAKING-OF videos of the Star Wars prequels.

Back to music. For me a song works if I can relate to it. If a song is supposed to make me wanna rock out, songs from AC/DC and The Rolling Stones, Audioslave, a few Greenday songs, they always work. I don't worry how easy or difficult the song is.

Do you think an AC/DC song would improve if it were played by Dream Theater? I thought so/didn't think so.

There you go.

Totally agree - to simply put it: It's all about serving the music.

[SMOKOYZKIE]

It's really sad that there are still people who guage the quality of a song or the level of musicianship on how fast a guy can play, how many chord changes there are, how odd-timed the beats are. None of that matters. Music is not a sport, it's not a race, it's not a boxing match.

Speed, dexterity, how high a note a singer can belt how, how fast a drummer can roll, none of that matters. All of these are tools and should be used when necessary, or when the need arises, but should never be the basis of quality.

Music is an artform like literature or film. Do you judge the quality of a book by how many hard-to-understand words you found? The grammar? How many pages it has? The paper that was used? No, you don't. If you did, then you're an idiot. You judge a book by how good the story was. Did it move you? Scare you? Make your laugh? If it worked, then it worked.

Do you judge the quality of a movie by how great the special effects or the sound is? Take note that except for a few exceptions (Lord of the Rings, Titanic), the Best Picture winner at the Oscars and the ones who get the technical awards are a different set of people. I can usually tell how BAD a movie will be when I'm watching their THE-MAKING-OF trailers, and all the people being interviewed can talk about is the art direction, the sound, and the special effects. Don't believe me? Watch THE-MAKING-OF videos of the Star Wars prequels.

Back to music. For me a song works if I can relate to it. If a song is supposed to make me wanna rock out, songs from AC/DC and The Rolling Stones, Audioslave, a few Greenday songs, they always work. I don't worry how easy or difficult the song is.

Do you think an AC/DC song would improve if it were played by Dream Theater? I thought so/didn't think so.

There you go.

you're right there man!!

[iskoLares]

sak 1 sak 2 sak 3 si CARLO!..

[DuBciTY]

Carlo i think you nailed it right!!! whoo silence all the critics..way to go man!!

[furecordx]

ngek