tag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:/blogs/dave-s-rants?p=2Dave Blair's Insights/Rants Blog2020-04-11T00:54:35-04:00Rock, Funk Guitar, Music and lifeRock, Funk Guitar, Music and lifeDae BlairfalseDae Blairdave@daveblairmusic.comtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62792862020-04-11T00:54:35-04:002021-08-03T23:50:53-04:00THE KING OF TEARS - How a journalist renewed my respect for traditional country<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/7520f2e63ae6d150b03f1657e913dabcca8ed2b3/original/vince-cry-2.jpg/!!/undefined/b:W1sic2l6ZSIsIm1lZGl1bSJdXQ==.jpg" class="size_m justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>The author Malcolm Gladwell gave me a renewed respect for traditional Country songwriting. </p>
<p>You may have heard of the popular author Malcolm Gladwell. He’s written 5 NY Times Best Sellers including Outliers, The Tipping Point and Blink, all of which I have read and enjoyed. </p>
<p>Well, I recently found myself re-listening to a fascinating podcast he did back in 2017 called the “King of Tears”. He starts by posing the question, “what is the saddest genre of music?” </p>
<p> He goes down the list of top rock songs and the subject matter is about the obligatory sex, drugs, rock and roll, lost love, etc. Then he goes through the top country songs, which are about hardship, hard living, poverty, divorce, death. </p>
<p>As a point of comparison, he points out “Wild Horses” from the Stones. A potential tear jerker for sure. But then he compares it to what he calls, “maybe the greatest country song of all time. Certainly, the saddest country song of all time.” George Jones’ “He Stopped Loving Her Today” was Malcolm’s inspiration to take a plane to Nashville to interview the songwriter, the “King of Tears”, Bobby Braddock. </p>
<p>The song about lost love begins with, “He said I’ll love you till I die.” It goes on with how the years passed by and he kept her picture on his wall hoping she’d come back. The verses go on with “Kept some letters by his bed dated nineteen sixty-two. He had underlined in red every single I love you.” Wow. From that line alone you get a real visceral image in your mind of how this guy pines for his lost love. You are drawn in and invested in his pain. Then a later verse goes on to talk about how his friend came to see him. He’s all dressed up “I didn’t see no tears”, “first time I’d seen him smile in years”. Maybe some hope for a happy ending? Well, then the Chorus comes in with, “He stopped loving her today…”. And now you're thinking what’s going on in this story? Why did he stop loving her?? Then it becomes all too clear when the chorus goes on with “And soon they'll carry him away, He stopped loving her today.” Damn, that hits hard. You realize this is his funeral, and he really did love her till his dying day. Wow. I know I’m a sensitive artist but I have trouble listening to this song without getting a little teary. This is how you write a sad song. It’s a song about lost love and death and he pulls no punches so you feel it. </p>
<p>Malcolm points out the difference. It is “specificity”. There is no ambiguity like there is in Wild Horses or most rock ballads. It’s a real story about a real situation about a real person. </p>
<p>Malcolm concludes, “We cry when melancholy collides with specificity. And specificity is not something every genre does well.“ He again references “Wild Horses”, certainly a sad tune but somewhat ambiguous. Whereas most country songs have specific images and real world situations of real people. They are rarely ambiguous, metaphorical or conceptual like rock often is. Not that one is better than the other. There is an artistic creativity in conceptual and metaphorical that you don’t get in country. But, if you want to make a song that makes people cry, specificity does it better. It makes you connect with a real person in a real situation in a way that doesn’t protect one’s vulnerability with ambiguities. </p>
<p>Malcolm then points out some very interesting facts about the culture and sociology of these different genres that may explain these differences. The demographics that the top country songs come out of is very short and homogeneous. You could go over the top 100 country tunes and find the vast majority come from the same few states. Texas, Kentucky, Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas.. come up over and over. He finds that it’s “White, Southern Protestants all the way down.” </p>
<p>By comparison the demographics of rock and pop artists is all over the map with all cultures, backgrounds and origins. He notes that rock and pop tunes are more repetitive as well. He makes the conclusion that since the genre is so diverse, “Nobody speaks the same language so you have to use cliché… because if you go deeper or try to get more specific, you start to lose people.” </p>
<p>He notes that “Hip Hop and Country are both tightly knit musical communities and when you’re speaking to people who understand your world and your culture and your language, you can tell much more complicated stories, you can use much more precise imagery, you can lay yourself bare because you’re among your own.” </p>
<p>I know I’ve never thought about it like that but it’s a pretty astute and deep sociological and musical observation. Something to think about. </p>
<p>Now Braddock’s favorite song is Vince Gill’s Go Rest High on That Mountain, which Gill wrote in memory both of his brother, who died young of a heart attack, and fellow country star Keith Whitley, who drank himself to death. Braddock says, “it’s about death and Vince wrote it about Keith Whitley and then about his own brother and just the emotion that’s in that song, it’s just, it’s just powerful.” </p>
<p>Gladwell points out that Braddock is from “the side of the United States, where emotion is not something to be endured; it’s something to be embraced.” Gladwell feels that “we cry, because the song manages to find beauty and even a little bit of grandeur in someone’s frailty.” </p>
<p>Now when George Jones died in 2013 his memorial “service” was basically an almost 3 hour musical tribute at the Grand Ole Opry with the who’s who of country legends. One performance that really gets to your heart is when Vince Gill and Patty Loveless sing Go Rest High on That Mountain and Vince breaks down half way through with Jones’ wife and children bawling away in the front row. If watching this doesn’t get to you, you are made of stone my friend. </p>
<p> And remember, we started talking about Jones’ song “He Stopped Loving Her Today”. Well Alan Jackson sang the song at his Funeral Opry which obviously hit very close to home on that day. But that gets to the point. In country they embrace their frailty, vulnerability and hardship. To understand where that comes from culturally is a whole other sociological study for another day. But it is definitely something to think about musically and culturally. </p>
<p>This perspective is definitely going to change how I approach songwriting. It makes me think of a line in one of my songs “In Love With You”. I always liked the way it starts with “The first time I saw that ring on your finger, did you know I broke down and I cried” Pretty specific image. Now I have a better understanding of why that line always felt more personal and vulnerable than more ambiguous verses I’ve written and I think just a little more emotionally powerful as a result. Malcolm’s insight really made me think about these things in listening to and writing songs. And as far as I know he’s not even a musician. </p>
<p>So that’s how a sociology author made me realize I have a lot more to learn than I ever realized from these old school traditional country songwriters. Now I highly recommend you go and listen to Malcolm’s podcast and even more importantly the Vince Gill and Alan Jackson performances linked below. I was never a “country guy” but it’s not about that. Music is about connecting to our universal humanity and there’s no doubt these songs do just that as well as any I’ve heard. What do you think? </p>
<p><a contents="Vince Gill and Patty Loveless sing&nbsp;Go Rest High on That Mountain&nbsp;" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/l11oCvBxnQ0" target="_blank">Vince Gill and Patty Loveless sing Go Rest High on That Mountain </a> </p>
<p><a contents="Alan Jackson sings the “He Stopped Loving Her Today” at George Jones’ Funeral Opry&nbsp;" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSuq-ZUJinA" target="_blank">Alan Jackson sings the “He Stopped Loving Her Today” at George Jones’ Funeral Opry </a></p>
<p><a contents="Malcolm Gladwell’s “King of Tears” Podcast" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/16-the-king-of-tears" target="_blank">Malcolm Gladwell’s “King of Tears” Podcast</a></p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62780042020-04-09T23:01:28-04:002021-08-03T04:47:58-04:00I CHOPPED OFF PAUL STANLEY’S HEAD!<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/cf1dee7bfaec0aa3ee00d81c730664f6c74588fa/original/kiss.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>I remember it clearly. Back in 3rd grade I had to create a shoebox project of “what do you want to be when you grow up”. Now most of the normal kids had things like Fireman, Policeman, Teacher, etc. but being kind of the weird kid in class what I did instead is I cut out from one of my music magazines the pictures of the members of KISS, arguably the biggest rock band in the world at the time, and created a little makeshift mini shoebox stage with each of the members standing up. But with one small customization. I chopped off Paul Stanley’s head and replaced it with my picture. </p>
<p>Now you might think this seems out of character for the most introverted kid in the class, but for some strange reason, put a guitar in my hand and put me on a stage and that becomes a whole different situation. I’m infinitely more comfortable on a stage in front of hundreds of people than talking to a stranger at a party. So instead of going to parties through most of my youth I often stayed home and practiced guitar. </p>
<p>At the age of 7 a guitar was on the top of my Christmas list and that year I got a beginner acoustic guitar on the condition from my dad that I take lessons. Because of my young age we started out with beginner favorites like ‘Twinkle Twinkle Little Star’. As you can understand this choice of material was uninspiring. Then one day my teacher changed things up a bit. He showed me the intro riff to Led Zeppelin’s ‘Heartbreaker’. As you can also understand this was much cooler and quite inspiring! Led Zeppelin II was one of the first cassettes I ever owned and I wore it out playing it daily. So when I was able to actually play a real bona fide rock guitar riff from my one of my heroes, I was officially hooked. The teacher noticed the next week that I had the riff down and was like, “ahh, I can tell you’ve been practicing”. </p>
<p>Well, that was the start of it. I spent my formative years wearing out my cassette tapes learning the licks of Jimi Page, Hendrix, Clapton, Billy Gibbons, Van Halen, Black Sabbath, etc. And of coursed jammed in the obligatory high school garage bands. I think there is even video evidence of some these musical misadventures somewhere. Taking many many guitar and voice lessons and studying classical and jazz in college all gave me tools I needed to create and perform. Back when hair metal was still the thing yes I did have the huge hair and while still in my teens I was in a band that opened for Paul Di’anno of Iron Maiden. </p>
<p>I was lucky to have the opportunity to have learned so much by playing with top NY area musicians. I’ve played with musicians that have recorded and/or toured with acts such as P-Funk Allstars, Pink, Dion, Paul Simon, Johnny Winter, Little Anthony, Al Di Meola, Mike Stern, Scissor Sisters, Gary US Bonds, and many others. By gigging with these seasoned touring pros I learned what it takes to perform at that pro level. Over the years I played on various recordings with bands, worked as a “hired gun” as a guitarist and vocalist for every type of band you can imagine from Rock and Metal, to Jazz, to Country, to Rap, to Irish, to Funk and Dance and played 100+ gigs a year for the last 15 years. </p>
<p>But after All of this, I had yet to have Any recording that truly represented my style and musical vision. This was quite frustrating and to be perfectly honest a cause of some depression for me. So finally after much soul searching I did the only thing that was left to do and put together a compilation of some my favorite songs I had written over the years. For over a year I would work a full time job during the day, do band gigs and night and in my “spare” time I would chip away at this labor of love by recording a little at a time in my home studio. Finally in 2010 I completed my first self titled album ‘Dave Blair’. It was a long time coming and at the risk of sounding melodramatic one thing I knew I needed to accomplish before I died. It was an amazing learning experience, the skills of which I took into my second album Not Afraid to Bleed. When mixing I got to work with Ronan Chris Murphy who worked with hero’s of mine King Crimson and Steve Morse. He became a mentor of mine, taught me so much and gave me confidence that I did have what it takes to pursue this dream. You’ll also notice from the lyrics, I used the songwriting as a form of therapy to deal with some painful experiences that we all go through sometimes. But what is music for if not to help get through a broken heart? </p>
<p>So you spend your whole life getting to the point and releasing your music. A life’s dream. Now What? Well it’s like, “if a tree falls in the forest…”, well if an album is released without listeners, does it make a sound? Now I’m not much of a self promoter, I kind of do it out of necessity because the days of million dollar record companies doing it for you while you just create are long gone. Today is the day of the entrepreneur musician where you don’t only write, record, mix, lead a band, perform live, etc etc. Unless you are a millionaire you are also your own marketing, pr, promoter, financier, web designer, etc. etc. All that is more than we envisioned when we had our high school rockstar dreams and a bit daunting and scary to be honest. But all in all I think this is a much better musical world for everyone. We don’t have to wait for some bean counter gatekeeper record exec to decide if what you are doing is what they feel is the next big trend or that you need to change your image to sell more units. You just have to make the music that you love, and then connect with the people out there who love the same stuff you love. What is cooler than that? Isn’t that what music is all about anyway? Sharing an experience with others who are into the same things you love? I remember one fan who was struggling with cancer tell me, she would listen to my album when going to chemo and it would help take her to another place. Now if that’s not what this music is for I don’t know what is. </p>
<p>I look forward to many more sometimes-hard, sometimes-painful, sometimes inspiring experiences along this musical journey. Here’s to hoping that you are part of that journey.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779992020-04-09T23:00:16-04:002021-07-08T07:11:47-04:00WHY SHOULD WE BE, ‘NOT AFRAID TO BLEED’?<p><span class="font_regular"><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/9a3bca605e9c347c632cdfab5e1cb774e0d784ce/original/boxing.jpg/!!/undefined/b:W1sic2l6ZSIsIm1lZGl1bSJdXQ==.jpg" class="size_m justify_center border_" /></span>I’ve found that in life, the anticipation of getting hit is usually worse than the actually bruises themselves. <br>Especially in the long run if it prevents you from living your life fully. </p>
<p>That realization has been quite liberating, so I try to capture that sentiment when writing about life. About how life can give you challenges but getting through them, although painful, makes you stronger and wiser! </p>
<p>For example the song “Nothin” was a way of constantly reminding myself about getting knocked down then getting up with even more determination and perseverance. Once you’ve been knocked down and bled and come through it, you realize it’s nothing to be afraid of. You realize that getting scrapes and bruises just comes with the territory of pursuing your dreams and you just gotta take the hits and keep moving forward. Hence the name of the album ‘Not Afraid to Bleed’. </p>
<p>“In Love With You” was another very personal tune. You can probably hear the tears on the page, but in the end we all have to pick up and move on, which it what “Blameless” is about. You could say that writing that album was a form of therapy. Some have therapy, others write songs. Others connect to a personal story in a song because they relate to the same loves lost, life struggles, losses, inspirations and perseverance. In relating to this we often get some of that same therapeutic value all while singing along at the same time. Thats a win win! I remember one time when I was just so down and heartbroken because some woman had essentially played me for a fool. It made me feel like I was the only one that this had ever happened to. Until the classic song “Everybody Plays the Fool” came on the radio and I though, Yea, I guess Everyone plays the fool sometime! It actually did make me feel better and put things into perspective while also providing something I could sing along to in the car. Kind of a magical way of changing your mood and perspective on life all at once. This outlook is what I try to ultimately portray in the hopes that my stories leave the listener at least with a fresh perspective in their own life stories. </p>
<p>I’ve seen listeners post quotes from my tunes on my Facebook feed and also tell me the lines in a certain song summed up something they went through. Of course, from my experience, the more personal, the more universal. One common comment I’ve gotten often has been the fact that the lyrics are personal and real. We need more Real in todays world. In our music, in our relationships and society as a whole. </p>
<p>Now you may love my tunes or hate them but they do come from a real and personal place and a love of music, and that’s about all anyone can do.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779982020-04-09T22:57:23-04:002021-08-03T18:06:39-04:00STEVE JOBS, THE BEATLES AND SONGWRITING<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/29194bdab4739396528a7b76bfaf148fff2bbc43/original/strawberry-fields.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>In the Steve Jobs biography by Walter Isaacson, Steve discusses how a bootleg recording of the Beatles' "Strawberry Fields Forever" sessions helped him shape his business philosophy. </p>
<p>Steve notes how the song became more complex and more perfect with each rewrite. He attributes this as an influence on the way in which Apple products are designed. They would have many iterations of a new computer or iPod, each with more improvements and refinements. This would be an exceptional amount of work but the best design strategy for creating a truly exceptional product even they would be impressed with. </p>
<p>For all songwriters, it's key to realize that great songs are not just written, but more often than not, to become great they are re-written and re-written. Just like any great Apple product, they would start with a special concept but then they would keep fine-tuning and chipping away the unnecessary and adjusting anything that wasn't quite elegant in the design. It is the same in song writing. I've written whole songs in 15 minutes 95% complete, but that last 5%, a melody tweak here, a change of phrasing, or cutting out a superfluous verse often are the difference between a good song and a great song. And we all know merely good songs are a dime a dozen, forgettable, and leave little impact on the listener. Great songs are truly magical and special. If you are not writing great songs what reason do people have to listen to you? The fact that the song meant a lot to you doesn't do anything for the listener. You need to write it in a way that makes the listener feel why those words mean so much to you. And that is the most elusive but also most essential as well as magical aspect of the craft. That is the whole point. </p>
<p>The goal is not to "over analyze" but to listen and find anything that takes away from the flow of the mood and story and either get rid of it or fix it. Often taking a weak part out can do wonders to strengthen the entire song. I've had times when I felt something was really good but somehow something lost the flow towards the end of the chorus. After trying multiple versions I would then just cut out the whole section and viola, everything would come together, and the chorus would have more impact. Even if you absolutely love a part, if it doesn't serve the song, kill it. Hey you can always use it in another tune. There are examples of just this scenario in Beatles demos where they would have a melody section that sounded not quite right in an early demo and consequently was cut from the final version, but then would be heard as a perfect signature melody in a Lennon tune years later. The Beatles, Beethoven, Jobs, and most great artists are known for doing many re-writes and much fine tuning before their "masterpieces" actually were worthy of that description. So not every song you write is a great song, but any song can be a great re-write in the right hands. As Job's noticed in the Strawberry Fields demos they just would keep making it better and better. Where most bands would have stopped and said hey, cool tune, they kept making it better to the point where the version we all know and love has become an indelible part of our culture and sounds so perfect, we can't imagine it any other way. But it took many re-writes to actually get to that level of perfection. </p>
<p>Listen to the demo that Jobs refers to for a great example of an evolution of a song. Where most bands would have stopped, they kept working at it to make it better and better. This one technique was essential to the stratospheric success of the Beatles. Do you think it would help your musical success to avail yourself of the same strategy?</p>
<p>Check out the Beatles demos of Strawberry fields here... </p>
<p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zwe1C1G2ak&list=RD9Zwe1C1G2ak&start_radio=1</p>
<p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5g_DiZF5NI</p>
<p>https://youtu.be/BlVrnZFi5ZM </p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779972020-04-09T22:55:58-04:002020-04-09T23:12:30-04:00ARE YOU JUST BORN WITH NATURAL TALENT OR CAN ANYONE BE A GREAT SINGER BALL PLAYER OR CHESS MASTER?<p>My voice teacher always spoke about how anyone can become a great singer with good training, practice and passion. This was particularly inspiring to me since when I started I had what many would consider no natural talent for singing. I was a songwriter and really just wanted to be able to sing my songs well and didn't even know if that was a possibility. Many years and thousands of hours of obsessive practice later I sing at a professional level, get paid to sing every week, and have a back catalog of original music that has gotten very good reviews by publications as well as international fans thanks to the technology of internet radio. After struggling for years slowly and arduously going from bad, to less bad, to passable, to actually pretty darn good, one comment I now hear regularly is, "you're so lucky, you obviously were born with talent and a voice". And I kind of laugh because, little do they know. When I started I was told by detractors, you are born with "it" or you aren't and you just weren't. You can imagine how deflating this can be. I had to go on nothing but pure faith that maybe they are wrong but having no way of proving it, at least not for a few years of giving 100%. But when I did practice and give 100% I did notice that I saw improvement. Miniscule very gradual improvement. But I did the math. If I keep doing this and it keeps getting a little better, well eventually it has to get good. Eventually may be a frustratingly long time but I was truly determined and passionate so that didn't matter. All that mattered was that it was possible to achieve and if it was I would do whatever it took. And I'm still always trying to get just a little better. It's a wonderful feeling to know you can perform something today they you couldn't last month, or perform something better now than you did a year ago. It's an exciting journey. I don't see anyone getting very good without this perspective of constantly wanting to improve. </p>
<p>The good news is anyone can be great. The bad news, if you want to call it, that is most people that say they would do anything to be able to play for the Yankees, or sing like their favorite singer really wouldn't do what it really takes when the chips are down. But for those who truly mean it, there is hope, and hard evidence. </p>
<p>My voice teacher's point was not just some anecdotal comment to inspire confidence. In Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers" he looks at several studies as well as well known masters in a wide variety of fields to determine what really makes the difference for one person to be truly exceptional and stand out from the merely very good. </p>
<p>He references one scientific study that looked for these factors in excellence in all areas including academics, sports, music, etc. (The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance - K. Anders Ericsson American Psychological Association 1993) Contrary to much traditional wisdom the results of the study found virtually no correlation between achieving excellence and innate talent, heredity, etc. None. </p>
<p>The single significant and consistent factor that resulted in mastery in a field was consistent, deliberate practice. The correlation had no exceptions. None. Even more specifically it found that all those at master level had consistently about 10,000+ hours of practice. In a study of musicians, those that were merely good but had careers as performers had about 8,000 hours of practice, and those that were mediocre and didn't perform for a living had about 4,000 hours. They then expanded the study to other areas and found the correlation again and again. </p>
<p>The study could not find Any "naturals", musicians who floated to the top effortlessly while practicing a fraction of the time of their peers did. Nor could they find Any "grinds" people who worked harder than everyone else, yet just didn't have what it takes to break the top ranks. The findings were very consistent and incontrovertible. </p>
<p>The only major factor that separated those at various levels of ability was amount of deliberate quality practice, without exception. </p>
<p>One neurologist, Daniel Levitin, wrote "... Ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert-in anything" "In study after study, of composers, basketball players, fiction writers, ice skaters, concert pianists, chess players, master criminals, and what have you, this number comes up again and again.. but no one has yet found a case in which true world-class expertise was accomplished in less time. It seems that it takes the brain this long to assimilate all that it needs to know to achieve true mastery". </p>
<p>But certainly there are some exceptions such as child genius prodigies like Mozart or Bobby Fisher, right? Wrong. In "Outliers" Gladwell notes that even Mozart who is often cited as a legendary musical "genius" and "child prodigy" was no exception to this rule. He states that Mozart's early works were essentially arrangements of works from other composers and his earliest work to actually be considered a masterwork was composed at the age of 21, only after he had been composing concertos for 10 years and well past the 10,000 hour mark. Mozart didn't produce his greatest works until after he had been composing for 20 years! Technically this might even qualify him as a late bloomer. </p>
<p>Bobby Fisher another "child prodigy", remarkably, a chess grand-master at 15, might sound like an exception, a "prodigy", or a "natural". But he started very early at age 6 so by the time he achieved grand master level he had been playing obsessively for 9 years. One could estimate this would add up to the golden number of 10,000 hours of practice time. </p>
<p>Here's another even more musically appropriate example as referenced in the Gladwell book. The Beatles, as teenagers between 1960-1962 played in Hamburg regularly. To clarify "regularly", they would play 7 nights a week 5-8 hours a night for a total of 270 performances in a year and a half. By early in their success 1964 they had already been together for about 7 years, and had performed about 1200 times. By the time they had created Sgt. Pepper, arguably their greatest work, they had been together for 10 years. One biographer noted, "They had to learn an enormous amount of numbers-cover versions of everything you can think of, not just rock and roll, a bit of jazz too. They weren't disciplined onstage at all before that, But when they came back, they sounded like no one else. It was the making of them." This is a far cry from your typical local artist performing 45 minute original set a few times a year and expecting to make it big somehow. </p>
<p>So next time you are whining about why have I not been discovered yet or think that waiting on line for hours for some audition qualifies you for stardom do the math. How much time have you spent not singing into the mirror with a hairbrush, or jamming to the radio. But real practice. I met one renowned classical pianist and when I mentioned practicing 8 hours a day, she laughed and said "8, try 12." Playing was her life, not just what she did. That dedication only comes from true burning love and passion for your craft, no other motivation comes close. So, "Either you have the passion or you don't" is really what the conventional wisdom should espouse. If you don't then find the field that you do have it for. It is the only way you will find greatness, because it's the only way you will have the motivation to do what is necessary to become great. Do you want it this bad? Few are willing to put in all the real hours, but for those that do, be sure, they earned it. If you truly do have that burning desire then what are you doing here? Start adding up your hours!</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779952020-04-09T22:55:00-04:002021-06-03T07:35:03-04:00BEST LIVE VOCAL MICS REVIEWED BY A WORKING VOCALIST<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/f9d2298ec878610fb328307ef027cab8c2833e0b/original/mics.jpg/!!/undefined/b:W1sic2l6ZSIsIm1lZGl1bSJdXQ==.jpg" class="size_m justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>Singers are always asking me, "what's the best live mic?" Well there really is no single "best microphone". A mic is like a pair of shoes, what fits one person perfectly might not fit another very well at all. That being said here is a rundown of some popular live mics and my review of these mics. </p>
<p>Shure SM57 $85 </p>
<p>I remember back in the early 80s seeing a Shure ad with Billy Squire singing into a 57, which was one of a handful of industry standard, live vocal options. These days a plethora of mics has flooded the market to the point that it's become much harder to choose. These days the SM57 is more thought of as the go to mic for electric guitar cabinets but it's actually still considered a desert island best bang for your buck all around workhorse mic. I've heard well-known producers say that in a pinch they could record a whole album with just a few SM57s and make it work. Since this mic has no big pop screen it will pick up your plosives more significantly. So make sure not to pop your Ps when singing, "Papa don't Preach" or "Party People" with this mic. </p>
<p>Shure Beta57 $139 </p>
<p>For the $90 range on eBay this might be a less common contender for a live vocal mic, but I was surprised how usable this was in a live situation. I think it works better than the SM57 as a vocal mic. Worth considering if you can pick one up cheap on eBay. </p>
<p>Shure SM58 $99 </p>
<p>Many still consider this as the "industry standard". When working with sound engineers this is still the most commonly seen mic as the default setup choice. It is great workhorse mic, because it just works. It is so common that every engineer knows it and knows how to mix it. You can hammer nails with it then sing a song and it will still work. Not to knock it but McDonalds and Microsoft are also industry standards in their respective industries, but industry standard does not necessarily mean something is by any means the best, but often just what people are accustomed to or somewhere you can go to always consistently know what you are getting. On the other hand sometimes the cooler hyped mic may cause more problems then it's worth than a less fancy but solid workhorse. This is a factor in the crazy fast paced world of live sound mixing. Nobody needs more unpredictable factors to have to work around. That being said, it is a very usable mic, with some eq through a decent system I've had fine results with this mic. But again with the plethora of great mic choices I would by no means consider this the go to default mic anymore. I think at the same price point there are better options especially if you are buying one for your personal use and not a sound company that needs a catch all mic that will work on any possible singer in a different setting every night with few surprises. Shure mics in general are great workhorse mics. Shure sometimes gets overlooked as not as glamorous as some of the boutique mic companies but in the right situation a Shure can more often then you might think be the ideal mic to get what you need. </p>
<p>Shure Beta 58 $159 </p>
<p>I would probably consider this the heir as the industry standard workhorse live vocal mic. It has hotter output, better feedback rejection and more clarity than the SM58. I think you could throw one of these up with any system and singer and get a decent result without much tweaking. It cuts through a mix well, with very manageable proximity effect so it maintains clarity even when right up on the mic. </p>
<p>EV N/D767a $99 </p>
<p>Someone recently asked me what's a good professional live mic if I only have $100 to spend. My first thought was EV 767. To this day I use this mic on certain gigs. At the same price point as an SM58 I think it beats it hands down. When making comparisons I would consider it more on the level of the much more expensive Beta 58. So, comparing it to the Beta 58 it has much more proximity effect If you want to add fullness to your rapping, or add some Barry White baritone quality and warmth this is probably the fullest dynamic live mic that still maintains decent top end and mid bite with clarity. </p>
<p>I think it is warmer sounding than the beta 58. With a more baritone singer you may need to cut some of the lows but cutting almost always garners more natural sounding results than boosting. I've gone back and forth on which I would prefer but they definitely have different sounds but can be used for the same types of situations. They are both workhorse vocal mics that can cut through over a loud band with great feedback rejection. When using the Beta 58 with flat sounding in ear monitors it worked nicely cutting through. The Beta 58 has a certain clarity without sounding mid-rangy or nasal, with a decent top end, and easy to fit into a mix. But EV has more body and still maintains clarity and top end. It comes down to a matter of taste. But since one is 60% more expensive that also needs to be factored in. So that's why I recommended the EV on the $100 budget. It gives you a pro sounding live mic at a great bang for the buck and definitely does not sound like a budget cheapie mic. </p>
<p>EV N/D967 $199 </p>
<p>I got it because since I dug the 767 so much I figured it would be a better 767, kind of like how the beta 58 is a "better" 58. Personally I preferred the 767. The 967 is said to be especially good for feedback rejection in loud live situations of which I have used them both in. But I noticed that the 967 had less mid bite and clarity. So yea if the mic has less mids and highs it's going to feedback less but then as a result also be harder to cut through that loud band anyway. This is only based on a few days of rehearsals but is my first impression with this mic. It is still a very good mic but I don't think it justifies the much higher cost over the 767. </p>
<p>Neumann KMS105 $699 </p>
<p>Ahh Neumann who are renowned for their legendary studio condenser mics came out with their first and only high end condenser live mic a few years ago. Since showing that there is a market in which singers will pay top dollar for a boutique mic outside of the recording studio Shure, Telefunken and others have come out with competing high end condenser mics. I have yet to try the Shure KSM9 and have a review of the M80 below. This mic definitely sounds more polished and has more of a smooth studio sound than the dynamics. It has nice clarity, smoothness, and fast transient response. It picks up those frequencies that the dynamics just don't pick up to give you nice air and pick up overtone nuances in the voice. Great if you are a singer that has nuances in color to your voice like Michael McDonald, Tony Bennett, Seal, etc. It has some proximity effect which gives it a warm sound but can get a tad muddy on a lower vocal but not as blatantly as the EV767. It has a warm blankety sound that smooths out vocals. The low end is less of a bump and more wide and flat. More than any other mic I'd say what comes out of my mouth is what comes out of the speakers. </p>
<p>Which if you sing well is a good thing. If you don't, than choosing a mic is the least of your problems. There is a wider polar pattern so it does pick up quite a bit more stage bleed than other mics but still has decent feedback rejection. One may need to cut around 10k if you get some really high feedback frequencies that the dynamics don't even reproduce. Compared to a beta 58 it is more flat and for cutting through in a loud situation it might need a little more of that 3-5k mid boost. I think it's ideal for a nuanced vocal over a tame live band, jazz band, or acoustic situation for example. It might not be as ideal if you're trying to cut through loud rock because of the stage bleed as well as the flatness. In a loud rock situation the audience may not be able to appreciate the nuances that this mic articulates anyway so a more in your face, focused or hyped mic mike be more appropriate. All in all this is one of the overall best quality live mics. It captures nuances that others can't but is not hyped. It has a more polished clear sound than most any other live mic. And for me I do want what comes out of my mouth to come out of the speakers. But is you are going to break the bank with this mic there are certainly more affordable options that will garner you excellent results as well. </p>
<p>Telefunken M80 $250 </p>
<p>Since Neumann got into the high end live mic market Telefunken, another Legendary studio mic company, figured they should throw their hat into the live mic ring with the M80 dynamic mic. I don't have a ton of experience with this mic but it definitely has a hi end full and crisp sound to it. It is more similar to the Blue Encore than the Neumann or Beta 87, to my ears. I think what they were going for was a dynamic mic with a condenser like articulation and condenser like transient response. I can definitely hear what they are shooting for when hearing this mic and it's definitely worth considering. It is less flat than the Neumann and a little hyped on certain vocal friendly frequencies, which could be a good thing on many singers but might not work in other situations as well as a more workhorse mic. </p>
<p>Shure Beta 87 $249 </p>
<p>Before the Neumann came out with their live condenser this was my favorite live mic for a lot of the same reasons that I like the Neumann. It has clarity, transient response, and an even sound. It is a great sounding mic that captures what is coming out of your mouth. And from $80-120 on eBay it might be a great deal for a live mic that really captures vocal nuances without breaking the bank. It is awesome for piano or acoustic guitar vocals where you really want the vocal to have nuance and clarity. I always liked working with this mic. </p>
<p>Blue encore 300 $129-199 </p>
<p>OK, a few years ago I was at a convention in LA and Blue, which is known for their wide array of nice sounding and cool unconventional looking studio mics was there with their brand new line of encore live mics. The 100 and 200 are dynamics (although the dynamic 200 still requires phantom power) and sound decent but I haven't tested enough to make an in depth assessment. But from what I have heard they are definitely worth considering as options in their price point. I asked the rep, "how does their condenser live mic stack up to something like a beta 87 or KMS105?" and he said, "it makes the Neumann sound like a toy". Hmm, a bold statement especially for a mic that lists at about a third the cost. So what does it sound like? The first thing I noticed when bringing up the 300 is that it is LOUD, way hotter than any other mic here. I backed off the pre -15 db just to not overload the input. At first I thought something was wrong with the mic because I was getting distortion. Once I put the pad on the pre and evened out the gain I got to hear what the mic really sounded like. hmm. Interesting. It is a very different animal than the Neumann. It has a low end but a tighter low end curve so it has less of an even smooth blanket sound but a narrower low end bump that gives the voice some fullness without sacrificing any clarity. </p>
<p>There is definitely more mid and high hype than the Neumann or Beta 87. It is less flat. It has lots of clarity. I still think the Neumann has a tad more air on the very top that would be nice in a lower volume setting. Live the mic stands up nicely. I find myself reaching for the 300 more often then the Neumann recently especially when singing with a loud rock or dance band. It just cuts through a loud band with little bleed or feedback for how hot and articulate it is. The tighter low end and mid bite work at cutting through a loud mix better than the flatter more even Neumann but it still but gives you that condenser nuance and air. They are two very different mics. Of course then I realize I am making a comparison between the $600 Neumann and the $199 Blue. And the Blue is holding it's own and may even be better in many situations. The Neumann seems to have a wider warmer low end. It can be great for getting a full warm Johnny Cash, Sinatra sound so I still do use it on a regular basis. I've also heard it on a brighter female voice in which case the warm flatness compliments the already bright voice nicely. But if I'm concerned about my male voice cutting through a band the blue is a great tool. It does have a unique space age kind of look and the Blue logo actually lights up, which looks pretty cool on stage. When I got this it was only out for a few weeks and people were like, "what is that mic?" But now I see tons of 4 and 5 star reviews reiterating much of the same observations I've mentioned here. It is close to the same price as a Beta 58, only about $60 more than a SM58 and at least comparable to some of the best live mics at triple the price. Keep in mind any mics that are this distinctive in their sound personality may work exceptionally well in some situations and may accentuate the negative aspects of another's voice or system. This is often the reason why many just stick with a standard like Beta 58 which is not extreme in any way and can just work in any situation. But if you are a vocalist and want something suited to your particular voice one of these mics might be just what you are looking for. Blue may be giving these other mics a run for their money. This mic is another recommended bang for the buck mic in the under 200 category. </p>
<p>So there you have it. I know there are plenty of mics that I have failed to mention mainly because I haven't used them enough to have a valid opinion. There are a few Sennheiser mics that are certainly popular. Just in my personal experience I know a few singers that absolutely love Sennheiser mics for their voice. Personally when doing sound and when talking to some other sound engineers they do have some unique characteristics that sometimes require a little more tweaking than your more common Shure type workhorse mics. They definitely do have their own sound and have found a solid place in the live mic market. Audix and Audio Technica also has some fine live mics as well that I have mixed but haven't personally used. </p>
<p>My advice when purchasing a mic for your voice is if at all possible try them first. Like I said, it is like a pair of shoes, it may sound amazing on your friend but may not compliment your voice. Try a friend's, or some stores may let you try out a floor model. </p>
<p>You may be thinking, "why not just buy a few and just return the ones I don't like?" Well actually you cannot. New personal use items used by your mouth or ears such as mics or earplugs cannot be returned due to health laws. But you can buy a used one on Craigslist or eBay and if you don't like it, you can resell it. In this case you may break even or only loose a few bucks so this might be a good strategy to try out a few and compare. </p>
<p>Hope this helped and happy singing!</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779932020-04-09T22:53:23-04:002021-08-02T11:43:44-04:00HOW MAROON 5 COMPLETELY CHANGED THEIR SOUND TO BECOME WHAT THEY ARE TODAY<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/deb7d8fe65b8a8671e4f98804e7a1fe2fd2ecf5c/original/karass.jpg/!!/undefined/b:W1sic2l6ZSIsIm1lZGl1bSJdXQ==.jpg" class="size_m justify_center border_" /></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The original incarnation of the band we know today as Maroon 5 was originally a band with a very different sound and name. Kara's Flowers was formed by 4 of the 5 original members of Maroon 5 in LA in 1995 while the members were high school classmates. Although they were a good band with some catchy songs and potential, at this point they had yet to define the signature funky pop sound Maroon 5 became famous for. </p>
<p>These original members were Adam Levine (vocals, guitar), Jesse Carmichael (guitar), Mickey Madden (bass), and Ryan Dusick (drums). In 1995 they had a similar sound to other 90s alternative punk pop bands of the 90s such as Weezer, Greenday or The Foo Fighters. </p>
<p>In 1995 they recorded and self released a low budget record "We Like Digging?" About 500 CDs were sold around Brentwood School and Hollywood clubs. In 1997 they were signed to Reprise Records and released one album called "The Forth World" with Greenday producer Rob Cavallo. </p>
<p>One common stylistic theme of many Kara's Flowers songs was a mellower picked or strummed verse that comes into the chorus with crashing drums and big distorted guitars then back again. This is a common stylistic choice for many 90s bands including Weezer, Radio Head, and Smashing Pumpkins. The band also incorporated other musical elements you would not expect on a Maroon 5 record. On "My Ocean Blue" you can even hear a Brian Setzer style guitar solo. After this album failed to have popular success Reprise Records cut them loose from the label. </p>
<p>After getting released from the label Levine and Carmichael attended State University of New York. During this period they became much more influenced by soul and R&B artists. This new influence was a major turning point that led to the infectious Maroon 5 pop hit sound they became famous for. </p>
<p>When they returned in 2001 home Carmichael focused more on keyboard as his main instrument and the group added James Valentine as a second guitarist. </p>
<p>Maroon 5 have specifically cited Michael Jackson, The Police, Talking Heads, Aaliyah, Shabba Ranks, and Prince as some of their influences. The fact that the majority of these artists all have a strong funk R&B and rhythmic based style played an obvious role in the new band's sound. You can hear a significant change in Adam's vocal style from the 90s alternative style to a more R&B pop style the likes of Stevie Wonder or Michael Jackson. </p>
<p>On the first Maroon 5 record "Son's About Jane", the drums and bass have a much more funk rock groove. The rhythm guitars are often clean and not as often picked or strummed openly but instead have more of a Niles Rogers funk disco style from the 70s. Even the distorted rock style guitar parts such as the ones on "Harder To Breath" have a funky vibe you could likely hear in a Lenny Kravitz tune. This is a significant musical departure from Kara's Flowers' punkish alternative pop rock sound. </p>
<p>An ideal match for this funkier new sound, Adams vocals have become much more rhythmic and almost rap like in their cadence. You can hear an obvious influence of artists like Stevie Wonder in songs such as the piano centric "Sunday Morning". On songs like "Shiver" he begins using a Justin Timberlake style falsetto for the first time. He utilizes his falsetto voice in many other songs on the record most notably on the catchy hit chorus of "She Will Be Loved". </p>
<p>As a singer songwriter myself I can very much relate to the reinvention of one's sound. I can especially relate to Maroon 5's artistic journey. When I was a young player I was a hard rocker and my musical influences were bands like Zeppelin, Van Halen, and Pink Floyd. Later I began appreciating the power of a great funk groove and a more soulful rhythmic vocal. I began being more influenced by artists such as the Temptations, George Clinton, James Brown, Tower of Power, Rick James, and Donny Hathaway. I also began playing with some "old school" funk and R&B players that brought out a new funky sensibility in my playing, singing, and writing. This enabled me to add new elements to my hard rocking side that I think made both more effective and distinctively original. People can bop their head to a great groove but can also feel the aggressiveness and attitude of rock and once in a while a killer screaming guitar solo. </p>
<p>At some point maybe some rock journalist will be making the comparison from Dave's earlier classic rock styled CD to his later Red Hot Chili Peppers more eclectic funk and soul influenced tunes. Or maybe my artistic changes will just continue to who knows where? For all artists it's a journey and very exciting to constantly incorporate new aspects to expand and redefine our musical identity. <br>Maroon 5 is a great example of this. 10 years (to the day) after the formation of Kara's Flowers, Maroon 5's "Song's About Jane" went Platinum.</p>
<p>Kara's Flowers video</p>
<p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DefUa6gd5Qg</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779922020-04-09T22:52:44-04:002020-04-16T23:47:57-04:00HOW TO BE A BETTER SONGWRITER AND STAND OUT AS AN INDIE<p>Being a professional musician I get a chance to hear tons of original music by Indie songwriters. I play with plenty of bands, see other bands on the same bill, go to see all my friends shows, hear fellow indie artists at conferences, etc. They are all trying to take it from being just another local band to something that stands out in the massive crowd of aspiring artists. I see loads of impressive talent, special elements, and potential in many acts. At the same time what I see most often that is holding an artist or group back is great songs. I may hear an amazing voice, super tight band, energy, originality, a great look, etc. but if the songs aren't amazing you are building a massive castle on sand. Make no mistake; it's all about the song. You can get everything else wrong but if the songs are great you will be better off than if you did everything else right but are an amazing act performing weak material. </p>
<p>One thing I hear missing is not just lack of focus on the obvious attention to melody but also to song structure. It's quite common to hear original songs that start off real cool then somehow loose the listener. And this is the kiss of death when trying to win over an audience of distracted listeners who have never heard you before. Too many songs tend to run on or go nowhere. </p>
<p>So here is my philosophical take on the "Chorus". As I see it, verses are like the setup of a good joke and the Chorus is the punch line. They both work together and each has little meaning or impact without the other. The punch line in a joke is usually a very simple to the point comment but it has a lot of impact because it's already been set up and brings the whole idea to some resolution. Any music listening, any sensory experience, any story being told, or life, for that matter, can be summed up as a transition between tension and resolution. One is a lead in that explains where you're coming from in the story you are telling and the chorus sums up your point or feeling in a memorable impactful way. The song can't just go, it's got to go, to some destination. The chorus is you're home and the verse is the road you travel to get there. The road can be winding and full of many different sights but home is comfortable and consistent. Like the verse could be all the crappy things someone did to you and the chorus would be a line or 2 saying 1 thing that really sums it all up. Like "I hate you" or "I still love you anyway" depending on how that story resolves. </p>
<p>When it comes to choruses think simple. There is a beauty and art to simplicity and that is the part of the song that it is most appropriate in. The verse is where you've done the more intricate "foreplay" and created some kind of tension and anticipation and the chorus is the real basic straightforward and raw climax of your idea, the summation of your emotion whether it be anger, happiness, etc. </p>
<p>This is why simplicity works best. Resolution of tension by definition is basic and to the point. It finally gets the to pure honest heart of the matter without any pretension of fluff. Although the situation leading to an emotion may be very complex the resulting emotion is usually not complicated but very honest and straightforward. There may be many shades but you are either sad or your not. At least for the moment in that slice of life you are portraying, and all a song is, is how you feel in a moment in time. You may feel completely different a moment later, but then that's another perspective and another song altogether now isn't it? Don't try to capture everything you've ever felt in one song. It is a snapshot of a sentiment, a momentary conclusion in some way. There are so many parallels to the tension resolution concept everywhere. That is because it is a paradigm that is everywhere in the universe. Sex is obviously a great analogy to illustrate tension and resolution. One without the other is anticlimactic in a manner of speaking and resolution is very base. An orgasm is a very straightforward, honest, simple thing. There is a reason most of the greatest artists and philosophers felt that simplicity is the way to true peace. </p>
<p>A note on knowing "the rules". Often indie songwriters that want to be "true artists" will scoff at learning songwriting "rules", as if it is beneath a true artist to somehow bastardize their one of a kind master work. They think if they felt it in the moment they wrote it that somehow warrants it as being great and special and how dare someone suggest they alter this masterpiece expression of their artistic soul. If other people don't get it, it's not because it's not good enough, its because you are some misunderstood musical genius ahead of your time. Paleeze, get over yourself Hayden. The Beatles rewrote and rewrote and so did Beethoven and pretty much every other great artist you've ever heard. If you are above them, well then you don't need my advice, just go collect your Grammy now. </p>
<p>Now are there exceptions to using rules? Of course. The point is not to always follow them no matter what. That would be boring. There are no true "rules" but really just "tools" that can take you in directions that can help you communicate better. But to be aware of these concepts is critical, especially if you are going to break them. Every great artist that broke the rules knew the rules before doing so. And the greats knew if they broke a rule they knew what that rule did, how and why. Once you understand that then you are free to bend and break them because you know the ramifications and how to balance that out in some other way so as to gain more than you lose in the process. That is true artistry. But not getting this concept is one of the biggest mistakes in songwriting. But fully understanding the rules then breaking rules in a way in which you truly understanding why you are doing so and how that can be used is often the element that can create true originality and power. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if you just break the rules because you are being too much of a artistic snob to learn them you will actually come off as an amateur that is over reaching their capabilities. The difference is night and day. John Coltrane, Stravinsky, Picasso knew all the rules but then broke them. If you think you have their talent by all means go for it, but if not, learn your craft and always be trying to add elements to your bag of knowledge that you can use to continually express and communicate you're true soul to others through music. In the end that is the most important pursuits to every great artist I've come across.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/62779902020-04-09T22:51:47-04:002020-04-09T23:14:22-04:00KNOW THE RULES SO YOU KNOW HOW TO BREAK THEM, SONGWRITING<p>When it comes to writing a song, or in any craft for that matter, some of the most interesting results come from when one breaks the rules. The one huge caveat that many songwriters forget when doing this is that you need to know and understand the rules before you can break them. You can break a specific rule to get some effect, but a great artist does for an artistic reason. They know the parts of a song's structure and the purpose of each. The chorus, verse, bridge, solo, intro, development, outro, etc. all play a certain role in telling the story and taking the listener on that musical journey. For example the verse may set up a general mood, the pre-chorus may escalate that smoothly into a more intense and direct chorus, the bridge gives you a break from the repetition so that when you come into the last chorus it feels fresh again. </p>
<p>To get a better handle on song structure take several favorite songs and listen only for structure. You can do this for any specific element like melody, dynamics, arrangement, production, etc. You will inevitably start to hear patterns. "Rules" for lack of a better term such as rhythm, melody, structure, tension and resolution serve to give a foundation to ground the song. You can break some rules and balance and ground that out by enforcing others. If you break all rules it sounds like anarchy or noise. If you break none of them, that can be very formulaic, predictable and boring. </p>
<p>Many indie artists often think of "hook" as a negative term. Like something only some pop tart top 40 formulaic songwriter for hire would use. In fact, Mozart, Beethoven, Dizzy, Miles, to Stevie Wonder, to Frank Zappa and the Beatles all use memorable melodic hooks. If they didn't you would never remember or want to remember their songs. The hook is the reason the vocal catches your ear in the first place. The part you wind up singing in the car on the way home from the concert. It is something the ear can grab on to, that moves song from one place to another, and tells the story. Not just notes in the key, or runs up and down scales. Even jazz improvisationalists such as John Coltrane start with a melodic motive then develop into a journey to very out territory from there then take it back home. This is why jazz and fusion always seem to remind me of a great roller coaster ride. </p>
<p>All music and life for that matter is made up of cycles that progress between various states of tension and resolution. Science, nature, breathing, and music are just an expression of already existing principles of life and the universe. The rules aren't made up by the musical status quo they were discovered based on how nature and human nature work. If you play a Beethoven string quartet for your pet it will calm them down, if you play Stravinsky or Bartok they will probably become rambunctious or uneasy. Everyone has seen those YouTube videos of someone's pet bird enjoying dancing to some bouncy tune. This shows how certain dissonances of rhythms and harmonies simply express tensions and resolutions in the world. You must keep this in mind and use that to express the story of the lyric. As well as use it to simply progress the flow from one part to the next, one note to the next, one beat to the next, one progression cycle to the next. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that you need to be relatable and repetitive enough to draw the listener in and not alienate them but have enough novelty thrown in before they get bored. Like anything, it's about playing with tension and resolution and balance.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3251432013-02-23T00:00:00-05:002021-06-18T01:02:16-04:00GREAT ALBUMS OF 67<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/3a3cc0733f7d444c3eea13f474287845dcbaa8ce/original/doors.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>Just watched <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Classic-Albums-Doors/dp/B0015UKX74" target="_blank" title="Classic Albums Making of The Doors">Classic Albums making of "The Doors"</a>. Amazing record. Some albums that topped the Charts in 67. Sgt. Pepper, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Doors/dp/B0018B1O7I/ref=reg_hu-rd_add_1_dp_T2">The Doors</a>, Axis Bold As Love, Disraeli Gears, Are You Experienced, Velvet Underground, Strange Days. All in 1967. Have we have a single album as good as any of these in the last 10 years? We have lot's of catchy hits you can dance to, but anything dangerous or fresh or ground breaking or something you would considered art? Dave's Rant of the day.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3251422013-02-23T00:00:00-05:002021-08-01T14:51:49-04:00TAXI ROAD RALLY 2011<p>Went to my second Taxi Road Rally about a week ago and although I'll post some more of what I learned as I get around to it here are some of my impressions. For those of you not familiar with Taxi in a nutshell, unlike most of us they have many established relationships with many major industry organizations such as publishers, television production companies, major and indie labels, etc. What these companies do is tell Taxi what they are looking for, for example a publishing company is looking for songs to pitch for a major artist's next release, a tv show is looking for a sad indie band song for a montage, etc. For specific examples just go the actual <a href="http://www.taxi.com/industry.php?icid=TXINCN00000003" title="Taxi industry listings">listings</a> on their site. You need to be a member to submit, and each song you submit is $5. It's understandable that they have a nominal fee to submit or else the inevitable result would be everyone submitting everything they have to every listing however inappropriate. Although I hear this is still quite common. For most listings you get a pretty well thought out critique for why or why not your song was forwarded including things like performance, production, song, appropriateness for listing, etc. As any artist knows criticism is always hard to not take personally so Taxi does get it's share of hate mail. Music is subjective and you should take these critiques as one persons opinion, albeit an educated one. But if you get several critiques saying the same thing you might want to put the ego aside and use this info to figure out what weak points, and we all have them, you need to focus on to get more of a chance at success in this business. As a colleague that does not work for Taxi but has been dealing with many of their members for years said, they are totally legit and one of the few companies of it's type that do exactly what they say they do. Now if you think your stuff is amazing but alas it doesn't get forwarded well either you send them some hate mail and bad mouth them on a forum, or you figure out why and take the appropriate measures from improving your songs to pitching your stuff to a more appropriate genre. It's a very competitive business and if it just took wanting it real badly, everyone would be a star. Most people don't have a clue what it really takes, years of practice, years or rejection and self reflection, years of falling down and picking yourself up, etc. If something truly is great, it will eventually get noticed. Great songs and performers are as rare and in high demand as diamonds. But when most people say they would do anything to make it, they really have no clue what that involves. To do music for a living you'd really have to be crazy unless you can't really see yourself doing anything else in life and being happy. Than no amount of tenacity and hard work and sacrifice or rejection would deter you. Anything short of that obsessiveness is probably not enough to get you to be competitive in the big leagues. OK now with that Taxi overview out of the way, the convention.</p>
<div>One thing I did notice is that although due to the economy there have been less attendees over the last few years, the quality of the attendees has gone up. 1. I think the people are going learning, applying what they learn and coming back more competitive than before. Which is kind of the point off all of the educational session at the rally. 2. The people that are truly dedicated are the ones that regardless of economy or circumstances still do what they have to do to make it, and those are the types or people who always get better. So there is an obvious direct correlation between those who go despite circumstances and how far along they are in their quest. In other words the chaff has fallen to the wayside in tough times leaving the wheat.</div>
<div>These people are serious about what they are doing so are all types of like minded and supportive people to associate and network with.</div>
<div>The talent at the open mics as well as the listening panels still ran the gamut from why are you here, to damn why isn't that guy signed. But overall the talent pool was has improved. I was dying to do the open mic but I didn't sing only cuz I was still pretty sick.</div>
<div>I think everyone I know benefit from some of the songwriting sessions and there are tons of books out there from 10-30 bucks that have tons of valuable info on how to make your songs the best they can be. Its a skill no different than playing guitar, or singing and one needs to learn so they have all the tools at their disposal and not just throwing whatever comes into their head down. Just because the writer really felt it when they wrote it doesn't mean that the listeners feel it. That's where the craft comes in, to impart your sentiment in a way that others can connect easily with it. If people can't spend $15 to read a book on songwriting, well I always say you can lead a horse to water. So many people want to make some career but few do the learning to figure out what the best next steps should be, make a plan, follow through, and keep doing that consistently to keep taking it to the next level. I mentioned to Steven Memel who is friend and a performance coach who presented at Taxi that I knew so many talented people that had they come could have really made an impression at the open mic, and he said, something along the lines of, well Dave you know there is a lot of factors that affect success besides just talent. So True.</div>
<p>Even if people aren't members their website <a href="http://www.taxi.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.taxi.com/</a> and forum have tons of info on the business, and Taxi TV <a href="http://www.ustream.tv/user/TAXI_Music/videos" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.ustream.tv/user/TAXI_Music/videos</a> has tons of 1 hour interviews with major producers, songwriters, etc. that helps clear up a lot of open questions people have about the business, the process, next steps, where your material stands in the context of the competition, etc. So overall if you are interested in making a career in music you it would behoove you to attend a Taxi Road Rally. If you have skills the sessions will help you hone them as well as figure out next steps in packaging and promoting them in the best manner possible, and give you much clearer perspective in what to expect and where you fit in in the industry. It's really shooting yourself in the foot to base your career planning in a vacuum base on how you think the industry works. Also great to network and meets tons of other like minded and talented artists to compare notes on everything from recording software, favorite songwriting books, how to use Facebook fan pages, and anything else you can think of.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3251052013-02-23T00:00:00-05:002020-04-10T00:06:34-04:00GROOVE<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/b6821559c54726e3709950e0ddab2f2216dcd0de/original/bootsie-james-rick.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" />Musical/recording/groove tip of the day. If you hit the one in the pocket you can be really play loose on all the other beats and give it a cool push pull vibe. Listen to the Stones. Also dynamics, and note values, all play a critical part in the groove. Stacatto, legatto, louds and softs to all create movement to the One. Listen to Michael Jackson or James Brown. When you cut the note off makes as big difference to the groove as when you come in. Most lessons don't teach this stuff but it's the difference between the men and the boys. Once you learn your scales and chords and can play, this is the real stuff, how to make the music come alive, how to really sing and express with your chosen instrument. But you can only get it by playing your 10,000 hours live. Cuz it's a human thing. You learn to be human by living, you learn to play human by playing live. I don't see too many people with maturity and nuance until they are playing for 20+ years seriously. Now Jeff Beck, Andy Timmons are a couple of great examples. All the greats on any instrument.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3189022013-02-19T19:50:00-05:002021-06-08T08:44:13-04:00TO DO NOTHING IS VERY DIFFICULT<p> The true goal of studying and practicing technique is to have it all become automatic…….At that point, you can just breath and sing.<br>Some feel that technique and singing with feeling are somehow at odds with eachother but when applied correctly nothing is farther from the truth.<br>Translated the German, “Nichts Zu Machen Ist So Schwer” means “TO DO NOTHING IS VERY DIFFICULT’<br><br>And this is not just a Singing or Bel Canto concept. This has been a tenet of every type of training for literally thousands of years. It’s a very Taoist/Zen concept. To do nothing and achieve everything. But also prominent in all sports training. This concept is described in sports books like the Inner Game of Tennis, as well as psychology books such as The Zone. Bruce Lee used to talk about getting into the right mental space before fighting. Where he wasn’t thinking but could just be free to react. He wasn’t thinking technique, he would just flow “like water”, he would say that if his opponent expanded he would contract and vice-versa.<br><br>Even studies of the brain show how instantaneous reaction is way faster an more effective in any physical task than intellectually thinking about it to make sure you do it right. You first do need to use the teacher/learner intellectual part of the brain, think about it, practice and internalize it in order to develop the right habits. But then you need to let go and let the Doer part of the brain take over and not let the learner part interfere. Because after it’s job its done it will just get in the way. It’s like as if the coach of the Wizards tried to jump on the court and grab the ball from Michal Jordan in the middle of a pass. The coach is essential to his success but that would not be the time and place to get involved and he would just get in the way. Now after the game and between plays he can go over plays with the team but during the game the coach has to stay off the court.<br>The Inner Game of Tennis talks to this point. So what seems like a paradox actually makes perfect sense.<br><br>Even in music school they will teach classical violinists, the better your technique the more free you will be to express your music. By developing great technique you are removing the blockages between what you feel and your heart and hear in your head, and what you can physically realize untill in a true great, they are one in the same.<br>Bruce Lee would say “The best technique, is no technique” And by that he meant have the right way of doing things so internalized that it is no longer something you are actually doing. It is just there. One of the most important concepts in Life as well as in singing.<br>To my above point.<br><br>Here are some quotes from from “Zen in the Art of Archery” by Herrigel who writes about the years he spent in Japan studying to master the art of archery.<br>In his training he struggles with the dilemma of letting loose the arrow without deciding or intending to let it go. It must simply happen of its own accord, the master tells him. He learns that ambition, conscious intention, even thinking itself is what gets in the way. This IS exactly what is meant by “Nichts Zu Machen Ist so schwer!” And is in no way specific only to singing but essential to mastering any and all arts and skills. You can not be a master of anything without mastering this.<br>“Man is a thinking reed but his great works are done when he is not calculating and thinking. “Childlikeness” has to be restored with long years of training in the art of self-forgetfulness. When this is attained, man thinks yet he does not think. He thinks like the showers coming down from the sky; he thinks like the waves rolling on the ocean; he thinks like the stars iluminating the nightly heavens; he thinks like the green foliage shooting forth in the relaxing spring breeze. Indeed he is the showers, the ocean, the stars, the foliage.”<br>Or put more succinctly in a much more pedestrian yet meaningful quote from Chevy Chase in Caddyshack “Be the ball” : )<br><br>“Perfection in the art of swordsmanship is reached, according to Takuan, when the heart is troubled by no more thought of I and You, of the opponent and his sword, of one’s own sword and how to wield it-no more thought even of life and death. “All is emptiness: your own self, the flashing sword, and the arms that wield it. Even the thought of emptiness is no longer there.”<br>What is true of archery and swordsmanship also applies to all the other arts. Thus, master in ink-painting is only attained when the hand, exercising perfect control over technique, executes what hovers before the mind’s eye at the same moment when the mind begins to form it, without there being a hair’s breadth between. Painting then becomes spontaneous calligraphy, Here again the painter’s instruction might be: spend ten years observing bamboos, become a bamboo yourself, then forget everything and – paint.<br><br>The swordmaster is as unself-conscuious as the beginner. The nonchalance which he forfeited at the beginning of his instruction he wins back again at the end as an indestructible characteristic. …”<br><br>Zen in the Art of Archery – Eugen Herrigel<br>Read this as many times as you need to until it sinks in, until you really get it. There is No paradox or conflict between learning and handling technique and singing freely. One is a merely a path to the other.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/754362013-02-19T19:40:00-05:002021-07-27T00:55:58-04:00OUTLIERS<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/01ca9f742643ee8b60946e6e2182d700db77d9fd/original/outliers.jpeg/!!/undefined/b:W1sic2l6ZSIsIm1lZGl1bSJdXQ==.jpeg" class="size_m justify_center border_" />Here is copy of an email I sent to a voice teacher of mine after reading a few things that really pertained to what we have spoken about in class regarding the importance of consistent quality practice. Goes way beyond the old saying of “practice makes perfect” into some actual statistical proof of how significant this actually is.Judy,You’ve always spoken about how anyone can become great with good training and practice. Here is a famous scientific study that looked for what factors were the main contributors to excellence in all areas including academics, sports, music, etc. (The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance – K. Anders Ericsson American Psychological Association 1993)The results of the statistical study as to the correlation found virtually no correlation between achieving excellence and innate talent, heredity, etc.The single significant and consistent factor that resulted in mastery in a field was consistent deliberate practice. The correlation had No exceptions.They found that all those at master level had consistently about 10,000+ hours of practice. In a study of musicians, those that were merely good but had careers as performers had about 8000 hours of practice, and those that were mediocre and didn’t perform for a living had about 4,000 hours. They then expanded the study to other areas and found the correlation again and again.The study could not find Any “naturals”, musicians who floated to the top effortlessly while practicing a fraction of the time of their peers did. Nor could they find Any “grinds” people who worked harder than everyone else, yet just didn’t have what it takes to break the top ranks. The findings were very consistent and incontrovertible. The Only major factor that separated those at various levels of ability was amount of deliberate quality practice, without exception.One neurologist Daniel Levitin wrote “… Ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert-in anything” “In study after study, of composers, basketball players, fiction writers, ice skaters, concert pianists, chess players, master criminals, and what have you , this number comes up again and again.. but no one has yet found a case in which true world-class expertise was accomplished in less time. It seems that it takes the brain this long to assimilate all that it needs to know to achieve true mastery”.Another book “Outliers” by Malcolm Gladwell refers to these studies and notes that even Mozart who is often cited as a legendary musical “genius” and “child prodigy” was no exception to this rule. He notes that Mozart’s early works were essentially arrangements of works from other composers and his earliest work to actually be considered a masterwork was composed at the age of 21, only after he had been composing concertos for 10 years and well past the 10,000 hour mark, and he didn’t produce his greatest works until after he had been composing for 20 years, technically making him a late bloomer.Bobby Fisher another “child prodigy” a chess grand-master at 15 might sound like an exception, a “prodigy”, or a “natural”. But he started very early at age 6 so by the time he got to grand master level at age 15 he had been playing obsessively for 9 years which one could easily estimate would be about 10,000 hours of practice time.Here’s another even more appropriate example as referenced in the Malcolm Gladwell book “Outliers”.The Beatles.As teenagers between 1960-1962 they played in Hamburg regularly. To clarify they would play 7 nights a week 5-8 hours a night for a total of 270 performances in a year and a half.By early in their success 1964 they had already been together for about 7 years, and had performed about 1200 times. By the time they had created Sgt. Pepper, arguably their greatest work, they had been together for 10 years.One biographer noted, “They had to learn an enormous amount of numbers-cover versions of everything you can think of, not just rock and roll, a bit of jazz too. They weren’t disciplined onstage at all before that But when they came back, they sounded like no one else. It was the making of them.”Pretty telling. Big difference from those doing a 45 minute original set a few times a year and expecting to make it big somehow.Here is video of a speaker on the above subject. </p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3188952013-02-19T19:35:00-05:002020-04-09T23:51:47-04:00HOW NOT TO BE A SUCCESSFUL PRO MUSICIAN<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/33c0747e5612fb97086b0147e44607948b44d5e8/original/spinal.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>I’ve worked with probably hundreds of professional and amateur musicians of every level. And it never ceases to amaze me the vast variation of personalities, professionalism, perspectives on what is and is not acceptable, professional, etc. So at least anyone who has any ambitions whatsoever of having a professional reputation where people are consistently happy to recommend you, pay you to work with them etc. Well here are some things you should do to make that Not happen. I just have a natural penchant for sarcasm, especially on contentious subjects such as this.Show up late. Club owners for the most part not busy at all attending to their patrons, staff, kitchen, inventory, payroll, rowdy clientele, juggling band schedules, etc. etc. The prefer that you keep them guessing when you will show up if at all to keep things interesting. They love having additional stress in their uneventful occupation. If they tell you load in is at 8 and the band hits at 10 that is a mere suggestion. He doesn’t mind if he looses a few hundred bucks on patrons that leave because they finished dinner and don’t want to wait another hour for the band to set up. I mean he does this for fun of getting to eventually hear you “jam out” and doesn’t care at all about he money.don’t do your homework. The bandleader is paying hourly for rehearsal space and 5 other band members have driven 40 minutes each, taken time away from their loved ones, are not getting paid a gig rate if anything at all, and all do this because they really want to watch you learn a song you’ve had the mp3 for weeks on their time. They really don’t have anything better to do and although they may have sat down and charted out all the changes, put the new tunes in their daily practice regimen and worked out all but the most minor nuances before they walked in the door, they are flattered that you follow their chart or watch them for the changes. It’s especially fun when before you do the song you go, what key is this in again? This reinforces the fact that you are so much more talented you have no need to “learn” a song like those other schmucks. They will be excited to work with such a virtuoso. And make sure you throw off the other players by going back into the chorus when the bridge is supposed to come in, then stop the song, and ask, wait where is the bridge again.Have a poor work ethic. When other band members are running ragged setting up the pa, loading in heavy equipment, show up when everything is pretty much done with mic in hand and say, hey where do I plug this in? Or if you are there on time, make sure you put your focus into what your drink or food order is, what the waitress is wearing, whether the club drinks are on the house, before worrying about incidentals like, sound check, set lists, etc.Overplay overplay overplay. Yes you spend many years stealing riffs off the likes of Steve Vai and Malmsteen, we are in awe of your chops. So much so that the bride of the wedding can’t wait to hear your 32nd note harmonic minor arpeggio solo in Brown Eyed Girl. Because if it is hard to play it must sound good. Musicianship isn’t about good taste, conveying emotion, and making music, it’s about showing off how many finger exercises you’ve practiced so all the other musicians can be in awe of your talent. Yes, play with Triple rectifier distortion on everything even if no record in that genre ever used distortion. Crank up that Marshall on Beatles, James Brown, Stray Cats, etc. Because why hear the actual notes being played, just fuzz everything out so that no playing nuances or dynamics can be heard. Who needs those.Be penny wise and pound foolish. The band leader asks you to do a favor and fill in at the last minute. He offers you the same pay as all the regulars are getting. But well he is obviously in a bad position and really needs you so why not take advantage. Tell him you want 15% more or you won’t do it. Even though you are available and it is well within your normal gig rate. Why do this, well because he’s gonna have to give it to you or will be stuck without a player. Band leaders love this and this will put you right to the top of his list of favorite players and people to recommend. I mean who doesn’t love to be taken advantage of by a colleague when in a stressful situation. If you used to get 30 gigs a year from this person and now get a call every 18 months or so. Don’t worry, you did make an extra 100 bucks and the $6000 you lost on those other gigs that mysteriously dried up, had absolutely nothing to do with your shortsighted opportunism. Do not be a team player and give those who get you long term consistent work the benefit of the doubt. Rake them over the coals. If a club cancels on them just say, hey not my problem, you booked me, pay me. they won’t mind, they already lost all the money they would have gotten from the gig, they love to double that hit by takin money out of their pockets to help ya out. I mean they only gave to 30 other gigs that year, make sure you squeeze that extra hundred outa them “on principle”. Who needs a team player, we’re all in it for ourselves and of course they won’t take it personally or book you less in fear of getting caught in that same situation again.Cancel your commitment at the last minute because you got a call for a better gig. I mean commitment schkamittment. I mean we’re only trying to run a business and we’re only dealing with crazy musicians so of course when I book a player and lock them in to a date I can’t expect them to hold to that. I mean if I dropped them at the last minute because I got a better player that wouldn’t be the same thing at all. I mean just book everything ya get and just show up to the gig ya feel like goin to. I mean after a while it will get much easier to coordinate cuz after a while of this you will only get a gig or 2 a year anyway so it all works out in the long run. I mean if someone leaves me in a position of not having a keyboard player day before the gig, why not hire them again, we could all use more stress in our lives wondering whether or not we can honor our professional commitment to our agent and club that we rely on for a living. If band members don’t show up leaving us a member short or with a last minute sub who isn’t familiar with the material, we don’t mind at all you messing with our decades earned professional reputation. And I’m sure the extra $200 you made on that higher payin $350 gig will make up for the 30 “low paying” $150 gigs=($4,500) we’ll give to the slightly less talented guy that we know we can count on. Math anyone?All sarcasm aside. A real life example. I had a friend who was a professional session player with a sterling reputation who got most of his work from his reputation of being always early, always prepared, easy to work with (you don’t want it that way, no problem what about this way?), and reliable. If you booked him in Jan for a gig in November and didn’t call to confirm, he would call you to reconfirm, time place, setup, setlist, dress code, etc. Anyway on the way back from a gig we were talkin about all this stuff and he told me a cool story. He said, yea one time I was booked with this original band in some hole in the wall for $75 bucks. which was low but they have given them tons of work overall and it was a week night and he already knew the material and it was a fun gig so why not. So he has them on the books for that night. He gets a call about a month before the gig from a national signed act he has toured with. They have a TV show appearance in LA and will fly him to LA, put him up in a nice hotel, pay all his expenses, and pay him close to a grand to play about 2 songs on national TV. But he was already committed to the other band. So he does Not cancel on the other band. He makes them an offer. He says, hey I will find a sub for myself, chart out all the tunes for them, sit with them and make sure they will nail the material as well if not better then myself and if their rate is higher than mine I will pay them out of my pocket. But if you still are not comfortable with that I made a commitment to you and will honor it no questions asked, no hard feelings, I will be there for you. Long story short he did the $75 gig. Afterwards the band leader came up to him and was like, I gotta hand it to ya, you honored your commitment and came here did a great performance, smiled, had a blast with us on stage and didn’t make a single mention of the other gig you had to give up and had no attitude or negativity whatsoever. Some musicians I know what think he was crazy for not taking the cool opportunity. But Hmmm, question. Based on that story alone how much credibility, word of mouth, references and work do you think might have resulted. Even the national act that he had to turn down was impressed with his professionalism when told why he couldn’t do the gig. Do ya think they valued him that much more after that? In the grand scheme of things, your reputation is what people are hiring, not a player for a gig.Anyway, hey if it’s your hobby that’s one thing, but if you want to be considered a professional, meaning you want people to pay your for your services, as a performer, then you must have the same perspective as any other professional. Would you have your taxes done with someone who showed up drunk to a meeting, if a contractor canceled your appointment cuz he got a bigger job would you recommend him when you brother needs to put an addition on his house? If you want people to pay you for your services than you must provide a service, just like any service if they are unreliable, inconsistent, misrepresent what they offer, give you something different than what you ask for, would you rehire them or go elsewhere. No where is this more true than in one of the most competitive industries there is. You need to not just be more talented but provide a better overall service to your customer, be it a club owner, fan, agent, band leader, etc. And word of mouth and reputation is the #1 way to get work. If every gig you show up to you are early, set up, prepared, cordial, open to direction, I guarantee you will get more work. What happens is a year later the drummer is in some other project and their bassist broke his hand the day of the gig and the 2 backups were not ava. Then he remembers you did a good job so you get the call, can you learn 30 tunes by tonight, well I’ll do my best. You spend 6 hours working on it and the gig with drive time is about 6 hours for $100, which works out to less than minimum wage. But you nail it better than the guy in the band. Guess who they call to replace the regular when he moves or is just being difficult. Who do you think they recommend when another band on their agency needs someone. Gettin the picture. Always leave Everyone you ever work with more than satisfied professionally and you can make a living doing what you love. But those who think that by being a professional musician they get to be less professional than a doctor, or accountant, are the ones who don’t get it and don’t make it. </p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3188632013-02-19T19:25:00-05:002020-09-12T07:26:13-04:00SONGWRITING CONCEPTS<p>Rules can be broken. But need to know rules before you can.Can break to get some effect, do for a reason.Know the parts of a songs structure and the purpose of each.CH, Verse, Bridge, Solo, intro, development, intro, outro, etc.Take several favorite songs and listen only for structure. Will start to see patterns.Rules such as rhythm melody, structure, tension and resolution serve to give a foundation to ground the song. Can break some rules and balance and ground by enforcing others.If go off in one area need to balance in others. If break all rules becomes anarchy, if break none than can be predictable or boring.HOOK – Mozart, Beethoven, Jackson, Ozzy etc. all use memorable melodic hook. Something the ear can grab on to, that moves song from one place to another, and tells the story. Not just notes in the key, or runs up and down scales. Even jazz improv starts with a melodic motive then develops from there.All music and life are cycles that progress between various states of Tension and resolution. Science, nature, breathing, music is just an expression of already existing principles of life and the universe.If you play Mozart for an animal it will calm them down, if you play Stravinsky or Bartok they will probably become rambunctious or uneasy. The shows how certain dissonance of rhythms and frequencies simply express tensions and resolutions in the world. You must keep this in mind and use that to express the story of the lyric. As well as use to simply progress the flow from one part to the next, one note to the next, one beat to the next, one progression cycle to the next. Ex V-I progression. The principles hold for everything at the micro as well as macrocosmic level just like atoms and galaxies have the same types of cycles and properties. Some would call science and physics, the religious would call God, and others may call it being in sync with Zen and chi.You want to draw the listener in but change before they get bored but not be so erratic that you loose them. Balance.4 track to put ideas down before pay money going into studio. Don’t go into studio without having a well-formed idea of what you plan on doing on how you plan on getting it done.Need to play instrument and know theory, including progression and use of tension and resolution, and how melodies relate to the harmonic structure and movement. If you know that, you will always to be able to write melodies that “work” instead of just being at the mercy of potential inspiration.When in doubt, cut it out. Used in film editing as well as literature and songwriting. Do what’s best for the song as a whole. Even if a part is really cool and you love it. For every part and think you add, ask yourself, “does this add anything to make the song better”.</p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3188672013-02-19T00:00:00-05:002021-06-19T02:05:55-04:00DAVE'S 5 MINUTE SUMMARY OF ALL "CLASSICAL" MUSIC HISTORY<p><img src="//d10j3mvrs1suex.cloudfront.net/u/87999/a890dd0f7177f1d2c27e9872b34679a0c744111a/original/amadeus.jpeg/!!/b:W10=.jpg" class="size_l justify_center border_" /></p>
<p>So you want to know the entire history of classical music but don't have time to do a 4 year music history program at Julliard? No problem here's my synopsis of all classical music over the last few hundred years in a nice short 5 minute read. You're welcome! </p>
<p>Most of the earliest documented music was religious hundreds of years ago. It gradually became more secular over the centuries. And to understand where newer music came from you have to go back to the earliest documented music, which goes back to Gregorian plainchant. Basically a bunch of guys singing a melody together. No instruments, and no harmony. </p>
<p>Then they went on the wild side and added a second note at the same time, but it had to be a Perfect division if the root note. That’s where the term “Perfect Fifth” comes from. It was a perfect division of the original note and therefore closer to God. Other harmonies were considered less perfect and therefore not fit for holy music. Eventually they started to live on the edge and use other notes. But everything was still pretty straight forward like Bach (Baroque period) that stuck to very even note values. Some of the best music ever written but a tad predictable compared to what was to come. </p>
<p>Then Hayden and Mozart came along in the Classical period and did some nutty things like using rests and dotted notes and ties. The rebels. Then that wacky Beethoven took things a step further. He started using some dissonant harmony, threw in more radical surprising twists and started using motives in one movement then using it again in others so there was some continuity for the whole piece. Think bum bum bum bum, bum bum bum bum bum... In the 5th symphony that pattern comes back in every movement in totally different ways. Genius. </p>
<p>OK then Wagner did some really over the top Opera with vikings and Lord of the Rings type shit. He used dissonance and leitmotiv in the Romantic period. Ya know when you watch a movie and every time a certain character comes into a scene the same music plays. Like the ominous horn section when Darth Vader comes on the ship. Or when ya hear, bum bum, bum bum, ya know to get outa the water or Jaws Will get you! Well you can thank Wagner for that (leitmotiv). </p>
<p>And Straus did some even more over the top style operas like Solome’ where she sings to the severed head of John the Baptist. It's based on a play by Oscar Wilde. So Solome' was about 15 and JTB rejected her advances. You can say she doesn't take rejection so well. She ahh, convinces her dad chop his head off. Then to add insult to injury she kisses and sings to his severed head about what a dumbass he was for rejecting her. She's like, oh you weren't down with all this? Well look at you now you Mr. head. And you though Alice Cooper, Ozzy, or Marilyn Manson were the first to do that crazy shit? Paleeze. Straus was on it like 50 years before those guys were born. And just like Ozzy and Marilyn Manson it was banned by some cities for the unsettling subject matter. </p>
<p>Then Stravinsky rocked everyone’s world with some really dissonant harmonies, and tribal poly rhythms in the 20′s. So polyrhythms any polytonal are like when you're playing like 2 completely different songs at the same time but its like in the same song. WTF right? It blew peoples minds and kind of freaked them out a little. But even Strav knew that the more out of the box you get, ya gotta somehow keep it grounded, or you just loose the people. So his stuff is shorter and kept tight song structures. For example in some of his really dissonant pieces he keeps them from sounding too out of control by balancing with very conservative Bach like rhythm patterns. Clever right! </p>
<p>Lesson to all us songwriters, you gotta know the rules if ya wanna break them. And he know exactly what rules he was breaking and what ones he had to keep to keep things in balance, to keep things still sounding like music and keep from just sounding like noise. If you’re a songwriter that doesn’t want to be commercial or formulaic take a page from Stravinsky who was nothing if not cutting edge for his time. And if you like non resolving harmony but Stravinsky is a little to scary sounding don’t forget his buddy with a softer side Debussy. His shit is all floaty like clouds and shit. </p>
<p>Then some really wacky guys like Cage, Shoenburg, Varez, and Berio were like what can we do to be even crazier so they started composing stuff with all 12 tones that sounded like a cat was just running across the piano, or just weird. freaky sound affects, That was called "Avante Guarde". </p>
<p>So I think that's about it. Well I may have glossed over a few things and composers (Montiverdi, Handel, Vivaldi, Chopin, Brahms, Verdi, Bartok, etc. etc.) but you get the gist of it. I focused on a few of my faves. That’s all of music history for the last thousand years or so. Got it? </p>
<p>But words of course don't do the music justice. Now you owe it to yourself to listen to all of these pieces. I guarantee some you will hate and other will rock your world. But I think they are all pieces everyone should at least experience and be aware of if they love music. Put on some good headphones sit back and really give these a chance. I bet you will find some new love for at least some of these composers. If there's anything in particular you really dig feel free to reach out if you want me to throw you some other recommendations of pieces and composers. </p>
<p><a contents="Some Gregorian chant," data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/kK5AohCMX0U" target="_blank">Some Gregorian chant</a><br><a contents="Great comparison of Mozart vs Beethoven" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/c6WN5Fjp0S8" target="_blank">Great comparison of Mozart vs Beethoven</a><br><a contents="Mozart Piano Concerto No.21, K.467&nbsp;" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/fNU-XAZjhzA" target="_blank">Mozart Piano Concerto No.21, K.467 </a><br><a contents="Beethoven 5th Symphony aka Bum bum bum bum...&nbsp;" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/jv2WJMVPQi8">Beethoven 5th Symphony aka Bum bum bum bum... </a> <br><a contents="Salome final scene singing to severed head," data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/Op1VoQXXARs" target="_blank">Salome final scene singing to severed head</a><br><a contents="Stravinski, Rite of Spring," data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/1qAfcnwVtcE" target="_blank">Stravinski, Rite of Spring</a><br><a contents="Schoenberg, Pierrot Lunaire," data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/eH7OnSOHBWg" target="_blank">Schoenberg, Pierrot Lunaire</a><br><a contents="Berio SEQUENZA III, yes this was all composed," data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/E0TTd2roL6s" target="_blank">Berio SEQUENZA III, yes this was all composed</a></p>
<p>Some other great stuff to check out. <br><a contents="Liszt" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/LdH1hSWGFGU" target="_blank">Liszt</a><br><a contents="Chopin scene from the film The Pianist&nbsp;" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://youtu.be/MPrQdlrCzPY" target="_blank">Chopin scene from the film The Pianist </a><br><a contents="Brahms" data-link-label="" data-link-type="url" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaItCES17AY" target="_blank">Brahms</a></p>Dae Blairtag:daveblairmusic.com,2005:Post/3188662013-02-19T00:00:00-05:002020-04-09T23:19:26-04:00GET TO THE CHORUS, DON'T BORE US!<p>Way too often I hear original songs that start off real cool then somehow loose the listener, they are kind of run on or go nowhere. So here is my take on the “Chorus”. As I see it, verses are like the setup of a good joke and the Chorus is the punch line. They both work together and each has little meaning or impact without the other. The punch line is usually a real simple comment but it has a lot of impact because it’s already been set up and brings the whole idea to some resolution. All music, and life for that matter, can be considered a transition between tension and resolution. One is a lead in that explains where you’re coming from in the story you are telling and the chorus kind of sums up your point or feeling in a memorable impacting way. The song can’t just go, it’s got to go to some destination. The chorus is you’re home and the verse is the road you travel to get there. The road can be winding and full of many different sights but home is comfortable and consistent. Like the verse would be all the crappy things someone did to you and the chorus would be a line or 2 saying 1 thing that really sums it all up. Like “I hate you”, “I love you” yea yea yea. Billy Joel is great at doing this melodically and lyrically. When it comes to choruses think simple. There is a beauty and art to simplicity and that is the part of the song that it is most appropriate in. The verse is where you’ve done the more intricate “foreplay” and created some kind of tension and anticipation and the Chorus is the real basic straightforward and raw climax of your idea,… your emotion whether it be anger, happiness, etc. That’s why simplicity works best. Resolution of tension by definition must be real basic. Although the situation leading to an emotion may be very complex the resulting emotion is usually not complicated but very honest and basic. There may be many shades but you are either sad or your not. At least for the moment. And all a song is, is how you feel in a moment in time. You may feel completely different a moment later, but then that’s another perspective and another song altogether now isn’t it. Don’t try to capture everything you’ve ever felt in one song. It is a snapshot of a sentiment, a conclusion in some way.There are so many parallels to the tension resolution concept everywhere. Because this is a paradigm that is everywhere in the universe. Sex is obviously a great analogy to illustrate tension and resolution. One without the other is anticlimactic in a manner of speaking and resolution is very base. An orgasm is a very straightforward, honest, simple thing. Most great philosophers feel simplicity is the way to true peace.Are there exceptions? Sure. There are no true “rules” just perspectives that can take you in directions that can help you communicate better. But to be aware of these concepts is critical, especially if you are going to break them. Ya gotta know the rules and what they do, so when ya bend and break them, you know the ramifications and how to balance that out in some other way so as to gain more than you lose in the process. One of the biggest mistakes in songwriting.</p>Dae Blair