Thinking outside the box.

[RPaul]

I was'nt in particular referring to the taxi business when I made this thread. If taxi tells you they want it a particular way then do it that way.

I'm just questioning why things got so anal. Like if someone says that drum fill or keyboard is dated I'm kind of saying..."who gives a flying f...? Isnt it about the song? What the song makes us feel?
I'm sad that the music is kind of taking a back seat in this business.

Are you marketing a raw song (i.e. that someone else will record in their own style) or trying to place your own recording? Even in the former case, you've still got to do something in the ballpark of what the artist you want to cut your song would do.

If you're trying to market your recording, though, that has to stand on its own. I think it really just depends what you're doing it for. If you just want to put music out on your own, have it fit wherever it fits, reach whoever it reaches, touch whoever it touches, etc., go for it. That's what I'd consider artist songs and artist recordings.

However, if your goal is some sort of commercial success, be it on mainstream pop radio, sync placements, mainstream country radio, music for massage parlors, or whatever, then it's got to at least come somewhere in the ballpark of what is being used in that context. This is more the craft side of things, where something is more functional than art for art's sake. Even if it is the song you're marketing for others to record, you have to at least give them some impression it could fit them (or at least not distract from getting that impression in cases where the listener can actually hear through a stripped-down demo).

Of course, the ideal might be doing art for art's sake and having it fit somewhere that also provided enough business potential to make a living. But there's nothing to say you can't try both. (I do, independent of any success or lack thereof.)

Rick

[DesireInspires]

Thanks DI

Well I'd be no good a counsellor that's for sure ! I'd probably quite like to be the Screener

If you saw the Taxi Tv I put the link to you'll see how much stuff is dated, it's like 75-80% of it. I think what happens is Taxi attracts a lot of older musicians who maybe want to get back into it in later life, but who haven't listened to new music for a long time and they don't realise what people are listening to now.

Then it's a shock because all their friends and family say that their music is great when actually it's just dated and below the bar. So they either have to accept that and start listening and learning the current stuff ( like I did ) or they get all defensive , stay in denial and eventually quit because nobody ' gets ' their musical genius and everyone who ever did any good is a sell out.


Mark

Yeah, I understand. That’s why people who are skilled musicians who are not having a lot of success on their own should be teaming up with others who are successful. It would help to get more placements and make more money.

If anyone wants to collaborate with me, holler at me. I am getting stuff signed and placed, but I would love to collaborate with musicians for styles I can’t do that well or for remixing others works.

[charlie2]

I think we",re missing the point.

When the stones recorded play w fire 60 yrs ago they weren't worried about putting a harpischord to it. Talk about dated! Lol ... Neither did john lennon worry about cellos on his songs. No one lost any sleep worrying if they were dated. It didnt matter. Only the song mattered.

Only thing that mattered to them back then was their cool hairdos.

But the music mindset back then was...it was ok to think outside the box and create the best sounding music. As long as they sold their music...the industry supported them.

What we have today is really the opposite. Theres no longer a music industry that allows the freedom of songwriters. Completely different ballgame here. And I dont think it's a better ballgame. But anyway..play ball!!

[TerrellBurt]

Contemporary songs with vintage melodies can work, it just depends on the execution and on the genre. In R&B/Soul, it can definitely work. Just take a listen to "Love on the Brain" by Rihanna.

Also, although it's considered Country but really it's Soul if you ask me, is "Tennessee Whiskey" by Chris Stapleton. Another contemporary song that is heavily influenced by Etta james' "I'd Rather Go Blind."

So there are examples out there, it's just about the execution.

[SubRivers]

Also, although it's considered Country but really it's Soul if you ask me, is "Tennessee Whiskey" by Chris Stapleton. Another contemporary song that is heavily influenced by Etta james' "I'd Rather Go Blind."

Wow that's that really is close - though there are a lot of soul songs that share that progression and vibe and it has deep roots - but... even so, that is borderline close !

Also get a Ray LaMontagne "Saved by a Woman" feel from it - sorta eta james and meets Ray LM.

[RPaul]

I think we",re missing the point.

When the stones recorded play w fire 60 yrs ago they weren't worried about putting a harpischord to it. Talk about dated! Lol ... Neither did john lennon worry about cellos on his songs. No one lost any sleep worrying if they were dated. It didnt matter. Only the song mattered.

Only thing that mattered to them back then was their cool hairdos.

But the music mindset back then was...it was ok to think outside the box and create the best sounding music. As long as they sold their music...the industry supported them.

What we have today is really the opposite. Theres no longer a music industry that allows the freedom of songwriters. Completely different ballgame here. And I dont think it's a better ballgame. But anyway..play ball!!

When we talk about the Stones and the Beatles, we're talking, first, about a long time ago, when there were a relatively small number of gatekeepers in the music industry that let through a relatively small number of acts to a relatively small number of outlets for musical promotion (mostly radio and TV). What got put forward went out broadly , unlike today where anyone can put out whatever they want (me included -- I've got 4 albums out there and a whole bunch of singles, most of which relatively few people even get to hear). Also, the only way to get to hear a record when you wanted to hear it was to purchase a 45 or album, so you could play it over and over again in your home. Beyond that, you could take your chances at hearing it on radio. Today, anyone can stream your recording, whenever they want, if they've even heard of it. Thus, there's a lot more noise to rise above.

Second, with both of those acts, we are talking about artists, putting their music out for the sake of that music, not trying to fit their music into ads, TV shows, and films. Some might get used that way, of course, but there also weren't the number and variety of outlets for that as there are nowadays with a gazillion cable/satellite channels, Internet stuff, and so on. There's a big difference, though, between putting out your stuff for whatever you want it to be, and fitting someone else's idea of what will fit to promote their product or sit behind a scene in their reality TV show.

I've got stuff that uses unusual/dated instruments, too -- Uilleann pipes (Irish bagpipes) and cello on one song, Mellotron in a few others, etc. Those recordings are what they are, but I have no delusions that they're going to fit in a reality TV show set in a modern time frame, or some specific period piece, when I'm combining bits and pieces that don't fit any specific mold. On the other hand, if I'm trying to put together something that specifically targets some era, modern or otherwise, I'm going to do my best to only use bits and pieces that fit that era. There's a difference between what we do as artists and what we do as craftspeople. Craft gets used in the art, of course, but we sometimes have to check our instincts to use too much art in the craft.

I've had a bad hair life, so never had the advantage of a cool hairdo. Thankfully, I don't have much hair left these days, so I don't have to be as concerned about hairdos.

I think there is still a mindset of thinking outside the box in modern music. It's not everywhere, but the biggest act of the past year was Billie Eilish. Her stuff, which is basically her and her brother Finneas making music in a claustrophobic bedroom studio, definitely colors way outside the lines. One of her biggest recent hits didn't even have a hook in the chorus (or, depending on your perspective, maybe the chorus was an instrumental section)! (Check out the story behind the song at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpx2-EMfdbg.)

But now it can be less about the music industry supporting you since there is the potential to put your stuff out there and get traction on your own. In that sense, there isn't any restriction of what some music industry will or won't allow. Of course, if you want money from "them" (i.e. some nebulous music industry), you might have to play by "their" rules. But, if you just want to get your stuff out there, there are no gatekeepers -- just put it out there, and do whatever you can to try and gain some traction. Of course, you may not get any, but there's also been a fair amount of creative stuff that has gotten some.

Rick

[cosmicdolphin]

Lol ... Neither did john lennon worry about cellos on his songs. No one lost any sleep worrying if they were dated. It didnt matter. Only the song mattered

6 of the songs on the Beatles debut album are covers that they used to play live, it wasn't until they became hugely successful that they started to experiment more. All their early stuff is very much informed by the contemporary music of the time.

[Zaychi]

* Erik Satie was pretty popular and famous around Paris. But today, beyond classical musicians not many people would recognize the name like they would Beethoven or Wagner.

At the risk of derailing this thread:

People may not know his name, but millions will recognize the first Gymnopedie at a "hey I know that song" level. Your comparison is a bit like saying Elton John is forgotten because the Beatles and U2 were bigger.

[cosmicdolphin]

People may not know his name, but millions will recognize the first Gymnopedie at a "hey I know that song" level. Your comparison is a bit like saying Elton John is forgotten because the Beatles and U2 were bigger.

Have to raise my hand here: I know the piece, but must have forgotten his name if I even knew it. I suspect it was used in advertising?

Hamlet cigars famously used it here

[charlie2]

Im about to take this thread into another direction.

Cosmicdolfin said of the beatles... All their early stuff is very much informed by the contemporary music of the time.
Which means they based their music on earlier music. That's were they got their templates from. Their ideas..etc.
They respected the past even though they were also rebels.

Today...Rap and hip hop played a big role in shaping today's music. Both of these genres were built without basing themselves on earlier music. Rap I think more than hip hop. They reinvented the wheel and LOST all the great ideas that they should have been builting on.

That is the reason I think they sound so awful.

They have a lack of accomplished melodies and harmonies. Bringing music down to the level of laughable chants with drums.

Dont mean to offend but its soooooo obvious