when you begin recording a song, do you have any idea as to what it'll be like?

[Hook]

For years I wrote the same way as Greeny and others, writing to perform & then to record. All my recordings were based upon a live track of my playing & singing and then I would track around that model It wasn't until I started writing to RTT's drum tracks (man, I miss RTT!!) that I started writing the music 1st. Now I seldom write a tune to perform and most of my originals were written music first & lyrics last which was a huge change for me. Personally I think the change up has not only increased my inspiration but has taken my songwriting in all sorts of directions I might have never chosen. I guess now I'm a bit more like ORH in that I just get started with a uke progression and just see where it goes, sometimes I have some ideas in my head, more often than not I don't!
I'm not a fan of restricting myself to some formula, personally I dig the change up!

As for your talent level ORH, I think you seriously sell yourself short. I suggest spending some time figuring out some covers on guitar & uke. Challenge yourself to learn the correct chords & in doing so the changes & progressions you learn will really influence the music you create. You are a rocking talented guy!
Rock On!

[AndyR]

Yep, I'd advocate not restricting yourself to any formula... yep, you need to use "formulas" that work for you, but every now and then you have to sit back and wonder whether the ones you're using are actually holding you back. You established them when they were helpful in getting you to a "finished" state. But you might have learnt a lot since then, it might be you could find some different formulas that will inject a bit of "new" into how you feel about it - and often that bit of "new" in how you feel is what makes something amazing come out.

Never rule anything out. New formulas, old formulas, no formulas at all. Do whatever it takes to create and then capture the song. And if you like, or in my case feel jealous of, how someone else describes their working methods - give that way a go! You never know...

The way I look at it, the approach you take also depends on what you're trying to achieve with recordings.

All in all I'm a little bit like Greeny, 64G, and bits of some others... but a little bit not like either

I personally find it VERY hard to publish my "sketch" versions of songs ("publish", to me, means stick it permanently somewhere where anyone can have it). I've got it ingrained into me that the recording you present to someone else is what they're going to hear, NOT what's in your head when you listen to it. Other musicians/songwriters who think the same as you do, and who know it's a very rough demo, are capable of hearing the potential maybe, but others (including musicians/songwriters who don't think like you) won't. They'll hear something, but they won't hear the song in the very best light that you can possibly give it (and "best" = what you want, not what anyone else wants, it's your song/vision, whatever you present as "finished" is "right". If it's not "right" in my mind, then I kinda of regret posting it - I always face that decision before finishing, and any "wrong" bits have to be accepted as "right" - if that makes sense!!).

So, if I know I'm going to work on a song further, I can't post the sketch because I don't want the general audience to hear the sketch, and certainly not before the final version. If I'm not going to work on the thing any further, then the sketch is a finished recording... if it's cute enough as is, I'll post it (nearly everything I post is actually a finished sketch to the best of my abilities - all my recordings are demos, not finished products in my mind... in each case, I'd got it as far as I could take it. I knew I could do "better" by starting again, but it would be "different" as well, and, well, life's too short )

I've got a really good example up my sleeve. I recorded a multi-track (MULTI-track!) sketch of a new song just before I wrote Surrender. I recorded an acoustic (one track mono) demo of Surrender. I sent them both to a friend who wanted to know what I was doing at the time. Her reaction was "they sound ready to me, why don't you post them?". The answer was "cos they're not ready, and I'm working on something else" (that was I See Through You).

The multi-track sketch is OK. The problem is that the song itself is one of those "OK" songs that have a lot of potential but needs some work from the performer. Make an OK recording and it'll be "oh that's nice Andrew". Make the right recording of the right arrangement and a good vocal - and then it'll be "Oh WOW Andrew". I want the "oh WOW" (I want to feel it myself, as well as getting it from others). The sketch gives me an "oh wow" for potential, but it doesn't give me one as a listening experience - so I can't post it yet. (If it did have the Oh WOW, then it would have been a finished recording and I would have posted it).

Incidentally, the way I work, the project that the sketch is in WILL contain the finished one. I'll program the proper drums in it, I'll delete all the guitars etc and replace them. The very most I'll do is copy the project before I do it, but that's unlikely - I don't need the original multi-tracks, I've got the stereo mix to hear what I was aiming at.

I also want to say stuff about how I feel about first takes and spontaneity... but some bugger needs my attention here... so I'll be back later!

EDIT: Ooh yeah, and practicing/rehearsing...

[thetworegs]

my question is when does a sketch become a painting if your using paint to make the sketch .......Some people's sketches are others paintings and some people's paintings are others sketches.....like beauty music is in the eye or rather ear of the beholder......so even when it sounds great to me it can also sound bad to you......mmmmmmmm.....more pondering needed I think!!

[Oldrottenhead]

i am reminded of frank black. he spent a year recording his fabulous album teenager of the year.  and he hates it, he prefers his early sketches. he felt he tinkered and produced the songs so much that they lost the vitality they had originally.

he now records everything with his band live straight to two tracks on tape, so that he can't tinker with a song once it is recorded. i believe he gives his band a few hours to learn his new song before the recording session. his band are  all great musicians but the music has a raw vitality to it which i absolutely adore. in comparison i find bands like dire straits who are also great musicians, that their music leaves me cold. i loved their first album but albums like brothers in arms to me have all traces of humanity removed from them the production and performance are so pristine. but that is my opinion, dire straits sell a shitload more than frank black and the catholics. but  i wonder if their impact on the mind body and soul  of the listener is as powerful and permanent a connection.

i was raised on prog rock, but was set on a different path when punk exploded around us.so for me personally as a listener and i suppose as a "writer" (ha ha) feel comes before everything else. i love the energy of early dylan and the likes of daniel johnson. some  would say the best dylan songs are the ones  recorded by other artists. anyway we are all different beasts but the same. one of these days i am gonna go back to one of my stream of thought songs, and see if i can give it a big production. that might be fun.

[henwrench]

Interesting thread going on here...

     I don't have a clue what I'm going to do, or more to the point, have any idea as to how the song will end up manifesting itself. Generally, I'll have two sets of chord patterns. At this point, neither is considered a 'verse' or a 'chorus'. Then I'll play the two chord patterns on a guitar to a drum beat. Even as I press record, I don't know how many times I'll play each pattern. I'll just see what my hands decide to do. The I'll rewind, and do a second guitar, that will be 'following' the first. This second guitar will naturally lag behind the other, 'cos I won't remember when the changes are. As most of my recordings are under 3 minutes, I'll be about 6 minutes into the 'birthing'.
    Now, the same as Greeny, my favourite bit. The bass. For me, this is when shit starts to come together. It's also the point when I begin to have an idea of which of the two chord patterns want to be the verse or chorus, and lyrical and melody ideas begin to reveal themselves.
    Then I begin my tried and trusted 'shoehorn' method. That is, I'll just keep hammering away at the noises for about half an hour or so, until the 'song' has finally showed itself. Whatever springs to mind is whatever springs to mind.
     Last up, a few minutes constructing the drum patterns and mastering.

     Frustratingly, because I 'write' as I record, by the time I've finished I can never remember any of the chords I've played, and 'cos I can't play by ear or work stuff out, the songs remain locked into themselves. Occasionally I remember what I played, but as I never play them again, the shit is quickly forgotten.

                                                         henwrench

[AndyR]

my question is when does a sketch become a painting if your using paint to make the sketch .......Some people's sketches are others paintings and some people's paintings are others sketches.....like beauty music is in the eye or rather ear of the beholder......so even when it sounds great to me it can also sound bad to you......mmmmmmmm.....more pondering needed I think!!

I was thinking exactly the same thing on sketch/painting when I was typing

And orh, funnily enough, with the music I like creating at the moment, if I was in a band that played live, I would like to go for the same approach as this Frank Black guy - here's the chords boys, couple of run throughs and then record. If I had the right musicians, that approach would fit the songs I want to create absolutely PERFECTLY (and I'd deliver much better vocals) - but I'm one man on his own trying to create that vibe.

There's a problem, though. I've wanted to try that method in the past, and the rest of the band usually hates it and feels that they are being restricted or suppressed artistically. As the songwriting artiste, you need a special (or paid!) kind of musician to be able buy into that way of doing it.

It could also be argued that it's a"formula" that restricts what is actually possible with the material....

The thing is, "restriction" is a very good thing during creativity... something which isn't entirely obvious when you first set out. You're naturally restricted because you've just picked up a guitar or whatever and can only just play it. As you get better, it starts getting harder to create because there are so many options opening up for you.

As you get more proficient/experienced, somehow you kind of need to be able to strike a nice balanced set of imposed "restrictions" that promote and do not stifle creativity. It sounds like this Frank Black bloke has figured out a way that works for him at the moment.

It's still a formula, though. Just a different one from the "nutty professor in the studio" approach. Both can be valid, both can create "moving" music, and both can result in some forgettable "filler".

EDIT: Henwrench just posted - I love the "Henny Formula". Not sure I could do it, though... well, I could, but I'm not sure I'd want to post the results when I did it.... mebbe I'll try it one day

[AndyR]

HANG ON! While having a fag-break, I realised I've lied!!

I have used the Henny Formula. Cobwebs was done like that. I recorded a riff and a chord sequence, complete with meadering improv. Then I recorded another guitar. But I'd forgotten the riff by then (from ten minutes earlier!), so I played another to go with it. During the improv, I just bounced off the original part. When I was done, I had two guitar parts that almost worked. I put some rough bass on and improvised some vocals over it.

The only difference is that I then put a load more on it afterwards. But the original two guitars are still in the recording, unedited.

I also did it years ago on a four-track cassette machine when I was writing for my last band. I had a riff and chord sequence I couldn't play and sing at the same time - so I couldn't write a song my usual way. I recorded a song's worth of the riff and chords on one track. I put an acoustic strumming on another, and a bass part on another (didn't take too much care because I knew the bass player wouldn't play whatever I suggested). Then I wrote the song over it on the last track. I haven't got a copy of it anymore, but I do know that the band's live version (and my later DAW version - it's on alonetone, Dandelion Boy, don't bother - it's horrid ) didn't come close to touching that little cassette demo.

[henwrench]

But I'd forgotten the riff by then (from ten minutes earlier!), so I played another to go with it. During the improv, I just bounced off the original part. When I was done, I had two guitar parts that almost worked. I put some rough bass on and improvised some vocals over it.

    That's it, right there...how all my shit (apart from covers, obviously!) is done. You call it the 'Henny Formula'. I call it the 'Shoehorn Method'....

                                                               henwrench

[Greeny]

What's interesting about this is that everyone's methods form an integral part of their 'sound', and are usually what we grow to love about them.

henwrench songs have a special ramshackle charm about them that can surprise / scare the listener. They wouldn't have that charm if they'd been honed to death with all the edges smoothed off. It's the edges that make them. I think Sandy (Gritter) and Fuzzface also fall into this camp.

Having watched James work first hand, you really get a feel for how instinctive and spontaneous his songwriting is. That gives his songs an emotional purity and soulfulness that most people could never achieve. And he's just so inventive... you could give him a cardboard box to play and he'd make a convincing song out of it! There are certain oldrottenhead songs that could be given big productions, but again, they would lose the charm and direct impact in translation.

Then there are the master craftsmen (as I like to call them)... people like AndyR, 64, Hooper, Ferryman, Bosko, and Nelson, who go for quality over quantity, and the attention to detail is staggering.

There's also another camp with people like Geir, Blooby and Flash, who have unlimited musical talent and the ability to make everything they play sound incredible.

Then there's the rest of us who just graft and craft away to the best of our abilities, learning as we go!

I'm not trying to cover a full list of songcrafters, as there are so many wonderful musicians here. Please don't be offended if I haven't given you a call-out! I'm just trying to put down a few examples of people that I've learned from because they do such different things to me.

Ain't music great!

[Geir]

Ain't music great!

Indeed !!!!