When is a song "great"?

[ggalen]

Horacejesse,I totally agree with you. I think you nailed it, actually: a person believes a song is great if it strongly moves THEM.The problems start when they try to enforce their belief as the True Standard, upon others. And the food analogy is great. Matto,I think that the more narrowly defined a subgenre is, the more people will agree how superbly a song obeys the rules for excellence within that subgenre. That's why I stressed a random set of music lovers trying to agree on a "great" individual song in my leading post.

[squidlips]

Quote:Horacejesse,I totally agree with you. I think you nailed it, actually: a person believes a song is great if it strongly moves THEM.The problems start when they try to enforce their belief as the True Standard, upon others. Exactly. There is no One Way to write, One Way to hear, One Truth in music (or much else). Greatness will always be debatable, no matter the subject.

[matto]

Quote:Horacejesse,I totally agree with you. I think you nailed it, actually: a person believes a song is great if it strongly moves THEM.The problems start when they try to enforce their belief as the True Standard, upon others. You mean when they say things like...uhm..."Today's melodies are flat and boring" ?

[ggalen]

Matto,Ahhh! Ya got me! I did say that, didn't I?Hmmm. <thinking>. I seem to have arrived at a fork in the road, and will have to decide which way to go. Thanks for the appropriate reminder.

[mazz]

Quote:When the buyer feels that it's "great", they write a check, and then we feel pretty great as well. BUT...we would be wise to remember that the opinion of the guy writing the checks is not particularly special in the overall scheme of things. In fact, it may be so skewed that he/she pays well for things that will be considered crap 20 years from now...and rejects things that would have become classics! It feels "great" to get those checks and I'm not too proud to admit that I'm working on learning how to write so I get more of those.I think the problem with your whole premise is in that last paragraph. I don't care if my music is considered crap or classic in 20 years because I have no control over that. No one does and if I'm trying to write what I think will be classics, I might not ever finish anything (and won't get too many checks, either). Why would "they" reject a song that was perfect for what they were looking for now on the basis that it "might" not be a classic 20 years from now? That's not how the game works. History, not the check writers, decide what's a classic. That's the overall scheme of things. Unless you can foretell the future, you can't know what's a "great" classic today any more than the check writers can. The definition of "great" as it refers to "classic" is so opinion-based that it's almost not worth arguing about. Have fun!Mazz

[ggalen]

Mazz,My whole premise collapsed because I said commercial appeal may not equal great art?Don't get me wrong. I wasn't saying people shouldn't write for money, or that stuff written for money is crap.People write wonderful, creative stuff for money all the time!I was trying to get across the idea that an opinion seems to carry more weight with us, on an artistic scale, if there is a wad of cash attached to it. I wanted to gently suggest that we all should still judge our creations on their artistic merits separate from their "commercial appeal", or fitness for any specific media project.Of course if you are doing work for hire you need to please the buyer or you simply won't make any money any longer.But I repeat for emphasis, people write wonderful, creative stuff for money all the time!

[arkjack]

I also think that vegetables and fruit are poor standards of analogy,..... I prefer to use distilled spirits and liqueurs .....like comparing rum to whiskey to cognac ....... or jaquins to henessey to courvoisier..... now we are talking about the range of quality within the same category,,....... So..... Layla.... Derek & the Dominoes.... great! a one time studio performance with the cream of the crop.... and the best engineers of the time.... yet any other band does it.... its a cover.... a knock-off... a Hiram Walker..... and I think that somewhat relates to the standard of comparisons or the height of the bar at taxi..... after sampling 500 submissions to a listing, you start to know the difference and are able to say.... yeah this is tasty and full-bodied.... but its not the top shelf..... its a blend or brand that we are already familiar with that though very good and commercially salable.... its still not new or unique.... so taxi is there to filter out the RonRico songs and forward the Appletons.... or even if the listing calls for "any Canadian whiskey".... they are forwarding the Crown Royal.... not the Canadian Club.... unless they know the Canadian Club is specifically what the listing party is looking for...... I am willing to bet there are clients out there that just want bottles and bottles of MadDog.... but I don't do MadDog.... and can't produce it in a whiskey barrel.... You can go through your ipod, or your own catalog.... and by your own standards classify the top shelf from the fuel alternatives.... and by genre..... and compare that to the opinions of ten , or 100 other people... and sooner or later, the best stuff, the great stuff starts showing up on everyones list.... as well as the junk..... I remember a critique..... said Yesterday.... by itself.... guitar and vocal, is automatically recognizable as a great song...... what elements of melody, harmonics, lyrics, and arrangement are there that make that so?just some ideas to throw in ......ArkJack

[matto]

Quote:I was trying to get across the idea that an opinion seems to carry more weight with us, on an artistic scale, if there is a wad of cash attached to it. That's a great point actually. I think it's a way of thinking that people who are on the verge of making money or just starting out making money might possibly fall victim to. I think after you've been at it for a while, you realize there isn't necessarily a correlation between a songs artistic merits and it's commercial success.Quote:I wanted to gently suggest that we all should still judge our creations on their artistic merits separate from their "commercial appeal", or fitness for any specific media project.I think this could be difficult. Because what I personally "like" in my music, what serves a particular commercial purpose, and what has "artistic merit" (as determined by history, I suppose) could prove to be *three* different things.I also think mazz has a good point when he says setting out to "create art" is frought with problems. IMHO that would be equal parts pompous and creatively debilitating.I think the best we can do is follow our creative impulses, and then crafting the most compelling "work" we're capable of. It's up to somerone else to judge if it turned out to be a "work of art".

[squidlips]

Quote:It's up to somerone else to judge if it turned out to be a "work of art".This is true. And annoying. Ah, the thrill of irony and holding diametrically opposed ideas in my head. Thanks Matt. You so sweet.

[ggalen]

Quote:I think the best we can do is follow our creative impulses, and then crafting the most compelling "work" we're capable of. It's up to somerone else to judge if it turned out to be a "work of art".Matt,Yes, that's good.