The Bad Songs

[roymond]

No, but you just wasted his time. I think it's important to remember, particularly for an artform like music, that the audience is doing me a favor by listening to my music. I am asking for a few minutes of their time and attention and in return I promise to try to make it worth their while. If I put something I'm pretty sure they won't get, then I'm asking for something for nothing. "You pay attention to me for three minutes, but I'm not giving you anything back."

I think that applies more for things like Broadway musicals, not art in the true form (please don't spawn another discussion about "art in the true form"). But this does have to do with expectations. If I am looking to satisfy a large audience's tastes then I should be targeting their tastes. I am not very experienced in this, and generally not attracted to artists that are pumping it out for the masses. Of course there are many artists whose natural work is aligned with mass appeal, and I don't have a problem with that. I love it when it really seems like the artist is simply doing what they believe in, whether or not I like it...or "get" it...or whether or not it's obscure or tremendously popular. I won't risk citing examples.

[Jim of Seattle]

I think that applies more for things like Broadway musicals, not art in the true form

OWW!!

OK, I think I didn't make myself clear. If someone subjects me to 8 minutes of clipping fuzz guitar and screaming, I will probably see, "Geez, that's so unpleasant", but it doesn't mean it's an unsuccessful piece.

If however someone submits 8 minutes of synth noodling and I say "Geez, that was boring" and he says, "You see, that E flat at 2:37 was meant to convey the elliptical orbit of Pluto" then I'd say it was not successful because even after he explained it to me I still didn't perceive it.

[bz£]

which fight is this thread about again?

Fight Discussions and Reviews
Discuss upcoming, current, and previous song fights.

In other words, "all of them."

[roymond]

I think that applies more for things like Broadway musicals, not art in the true form

OWW!!

That wasn't a personal attack, Jim. I was referencing the intended commercial audience of B'way.

[Jim of Seattle]

Oh, I just have a sore spot around B'way musicals, since I was so much a part of it for so long and now violently want nothing whatsoever to do with it, despite what some of my songs might make people think.

[frankie big face]

... that the audience is doing me a favor by listening to my music.

Do you seriously think this way? Because it's pretty bizarre thinking, imo.

[Spud]

I must say that I am reluctant to join the conversation, for perhaps obvious reasons, but I tend to agree with Jim on this one point - if only this one point.

I think the artist is well advised to respect the fact that the listener is bothering to listen and treat him or her accordingly, as one would in any dialogue - of which both music and art are examples.

[Jim of Seattle]

I do indeedthink that way, Frankie. I guess I don't see it as bizarre at all. I'm sort of surprised that someone would, in fact.

For example, I might think, "Wouldn't it be interesting to write a song that was 10 minutes of nonsense words on a single note with an out-of-tune harp accompaniment?" and while it might be interesting for me to do, my very next thought would be "People wouldn't like it", so the idea is tossed.

[j$]

Your problem is you're applying the quality filter too early. In your example, you don't bother trying because 'people wouldn't like it'. If you like the idea enough to try it, then you should, and once it is finished, you can hear whether you think it is good enough for other people to hear. As it is you're really using other people, and attributing them with a lack of imagination that you have no valid evidence to support, as an excuse for not bothering.

If your answer is 'I don't have enough time to record all my ideas', the answer is 'you make the time to record the ideas that are good.'

There is a quotation by Auden, which I can only paraphrase, 'the good artist gives people what they want. The great artist gives people what they hadn't realised they wanted.'

[Jim of Seattle]

Yeah, I agree with Auden there. But giving them what they didn't realize they wanted requires being pretty attuned to your audience in the first place.

You know, though, I really don't think my attitude on this is all that different from yours or anyone else's here. Certainly, I do what I want first, not what I think others will want. But I take both opinions into account. If I want it, but I think no one else will want it, I definitely think twice about it.

But let's get off talking about me specifically.

[anti-m]

There is a quotation by Auden, which I can only paraphrase, 'the good artist gives people what they want. The great artist gives people what they hadn't realised they wanted.'

Awesome quote!

[Jim of Seattle]

Mozart said something similar:

There are two rules in music. 1) Do not give the audience what they expect. 2) What you give them instead has to be better than what they expected.

[Dan-O from Five-O]

I've listened (to the best of my knowledge) to John Lennon's entire catalog including demo recordings and "messin' around recordings" (defined as a recording made just as a record of an idea but not even demo quality; like 1/2 of my submissions). So i've listened to his lowest quality recordings which still seem like strong tunes, and that proves that Lennon was talented enough that he didn't need great production.

No. I think that proves that you were interested enough in John Lennon to listen to his entire catalog.

You have to remember that there's a difference between someone who is a fan of someone else's music being interested enough to find the gem's among the rough diamonds and someone sending in what they consider to be rough diamond into a place like SF.

I personally could listen to a lot of well established artists early crappy sounding recordings just as someone else could look at an early Monet with the same reverence, because we know how the story ends. We know that point A got to point B eventually. Here at SF you can't expect that someone is ever going to get to point B.

I wish them luck, I want them to improve, I try my best to be a contributer to that end for the most part (Despite telling them "this sucks", that really is my end to a means) but damned if I can tell from 1 minute of farting into a computer mic if they're ever going to get there.

So what should compell me or JOS or Spud or anyone from hitting the next song button? I just think you should at least consider the receiving end of the equation, and measure that into your effort a little bit. Should I submit this or leave it in my collection for development? It's not a bad question for an artist to ask themselves sometimes.

[erik]

If I tell a joke to someone in Spanish, and they only speak German and don't laugh, that doesn't mean the joke wasn't funny. It doesn't mean I told it wrong, and it doesn't mean that I'm bad at telling jokes. It means that it was impossible for that dude to get that joke told in Spanish. And that's nobody's fault.

No, but you just wasted his time. I think it's important to remember, particularly for an artform like music, that the audience is doing me a favor by listening to my music. I am asking for a few minutes of their time and attention and in return I promise to try to make it worth their while. If I put something I'm pretty sure they won't get, then I'm asking for something for nothing. "You pay attention to me for three minutes, but I'm not giving you anything back."

I didn't waste anyone's time. Germans got legs just like anyone else. If he didn't want to listen to my joke, he didn't have to.

People who listen to my music aren't doing me a favor. They are listening to it because they like it. I'm doing them a favor by making music that they enjoy. If they don't like it, they can turn it off. I can't make the promise (nor can anyone else) to try and make it worth anyone's while, because peoples tastes are wildly divergent. You can't make a song that appeals to 13-year-old Puerto Rican girls in the Bronx that also appeals to 55-year-old Canadian ex-punks living in Japan. It's impossible to please everyone, so why get bent out of shape over the inevitability that some people will not like it?

[Dan-O from Five-O]

I don't want to get into the middle of this, but I guess I will. I think you're both basically saying the same thing.

Jim's original question was sort of "What's keeping him from using his German legs?". And you're saying "nothing is".

If it's not interesting or translating into someone else's language, what's to keep them from finding something else that does? E.G the "next song" button.

Jim's point, as I understand it mind you, is the music should.

EDIT: The "favor" point you guys can semantically argue all night long.

[stueym]

Blithering idiot alert: i.e another stueym ramble

I find this such an interesting thread because as several people have said "bad" is subjective and also contextual to the other songs/music in a fight. Of course there are many of the songs I hear on SF that I just don't appreciate because of the style (almost all rap and the stream of consciousness noises songs). The categories of 'Bad' that Jim originally listed are interesting too as again if you look them in the isolation of a single entry in a single fight you could apply to the same people at different times over the year.

One of the things I have found being here for just over a year is watching the development of some people. Also finding the things that people persistently pursue due to their own interests and biases.

I won't pick on anyone else (there are such fragile flowers here on songfight after all!!!) but take Bjam and myself. I honestly love that her songwriting/musical craft and musical ability has developed over the past 15 months but clearly she is not as interested in the technical aspects of recording and production as I am. She is blessed with a lyrical ability for prose and storytelling that suits her voice and music in a way that I sadly am lacking.

That said my musical skills and attention to detail in recording and producing a final product reflects age and my interests and I have improved greatly too in the last 12 monthds. Now does that make my songs better than hers......NO WAY! I would contend....that plus I suspect her style is better approved of by the majority of regular and occasional SF'rs than my "Middle of the Road" efforts another effect on the allocation of good/bad labelling perhaps:-)

Postulation:

1. Pure lyrical creativity with poor music and production.....is poetry with bad music-recorded badly. Some SF'r's consitently produce excellent lyrical content others only occasional gems.

2. Poorly recorded music can hide the inherant goodness in the song/music. But improving technical production skills I would say are one of the major learning opportunities for those a) with access to the tools and willing to learn b) capable of applying time and effort c) put up with the bullshit/biases from certain parties while you learn

3. Poor musicianship no matter how purely recorded will still grate on the nerves. Thankfully many SF'rs are blessed with consitent abundant musical talent but still can't construct a lyric that appeals to me

Without creating a matrix scoring system for all fights it would be difficult to isolate all these things.

I like to think of Songfight being like a pub. There are the regulars some of whom are friendly and welcoming and some of whom are crusty as hell (and age is no barrier to this category!!). There is the saturday night crowd that the regulars object to because they disturb the confluence of the force when the occasionally burst in laughing and creating havoc. Then there are the occasional visitors; some who offend by loud mouthing and sitting in the regulars favourite table and playing rap music on the jukebox (damn their eyes!); others who blend in quietly and become grudgingly respected; still others who watch the bizzare behaviour and run for the hills after a few weeks. It takes a village people.....and the occasional village idiot with a DAW and Squier stratocaster/plus POD. Let the diversity continue I say.

If you commit to reviews listen all the way through to everything your ears or conscience can stand. Everything else is totally optional...even the Eagles!

[erik]

It's not semantics.

If I say something to you and only use words you don't know, and you say to me "I don't get it", it is MY failure at communicating, not your failure for not getting it. It's a two-way street.

Perhaps the test is if the artist says "you don't get it, it's really like THIS..." and explains it, then if the listener says "Oh, NOW I see!" that's one thing, but if they say "Well, that doesn't come across to me", the artist should take the onus upon himself for it being a failure in that regard.

I think it's important to remember, particularly for an artform like music, that the audience is doing me a favor by listening to my music. I am asking for a few minutes of their time and attention and in return I promise to try to make it worth their while. If I put something I'm pretty sure they won't get, then I'm asking for something for nothing. "You pay attention to me for three minutes, but I'm not giving you anything back."

If however someone submits 8 minutes of synth noodling and I say "Geez, that was boring" and he says, "You see, that E flat at 2:37 was meant to convey the elliptical orbit of Pluto" then I'd say it was not successful because even after he explained it to me I still didn't perceive it.

I disagree with all of these points. I'm not saying the same thing as Jim.

[Dan-O from Five-O]

Sorry Erik. I didn't mean to misconstrue your opinion, or misunderstand it. But I'm not getting your point either. Could you please clarify what you mean beyond saying you disagree with Jim?

[erik]

I've left responses to Jim's posts in this thread, and he was able to understand them and respond to me in turn. I don't want to re-explain what I've already said in the same thread that I said it in, that's a bad use of a messageboard. If there's a specific post of mine that you don't understand, you can PM me a link to the specific post and I will explain what I meant.

[Jim of Seattle]

Well, not to get into that, but some of you should know by now that the 27th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that erikb will always take strong issue with anything JoS says.

And yeah, Dan, we aren't saying the same thing at all.

Erik, then by your standards, I could say that "Welcome to Windows" was actually a scathing satire of the corrupt telephone pole repairman training area groundskeeper industry, and if you didn't get it it's your problem.

Actually, I sort of agree with your side of things, but it's all too easy for a crappy artist to fall back on an excuse such as "You just don't get it". I had to endure an awful lot of awful 12-tone crap in college by people who covered up their lack of talent by writing utterly inaccessible music, then turning around and saying the problem was our lack of sophistication rather than his lack of talent.

Ultimately it comes down to the original intent of the artist. If the point of a work is merely for the artist to get paid attention to, then just about anything passes the test.

[Jim of Seattle]

I like to think of Songfight being like a pub. There are the regulars some of whom are friendly and welcoming and some of whom are crusty as hell (and age is no barrier to this category!!). There is the saturday night crowd that the regulars object to because they disturb the confluence of the force when the occasionally burst in laughing and creating havoc. Then there are the occasional visitors; some who offend by loud mouthing and sitting in the regulars favourite table and playing rap music on the jukebox (damn their eyes!); others who blend in quietly and become grudgingly respected; still others who watch the bizzare behaviour and run for the hills after a few weeks. It takes a village people.....and the occasional village idiot with a DAW and Squier stratocaster/plus POD. Let the diversity continue I say.

That's a great analogy! Oh, and, he he, you said "Village People".

Upno re-reading my initial post, I could see how it could be misconstrued. Let me clarify:

I'm not complaining about bad songs!!!

I can see that that initial post sounds kind of like "God, those bad songs annoy me, I wish they would go away" as if people can know whether a song they submit will be bad or not.

I like that there are bad songs on SF. Or rather, I should say, I like that there are songs on SF I don't like. I appreciate the people who are taking the time and effort and putting themselves out there and all that. And while I don't like the goof offs so much, they do add to the flavor of the community, and are sometimes really funny.

God knows, I've submitted my share of bad songs.

"Let It Be"
"The Truth About Aspartame"
"Hope You're Okay"
"Space Cadet"

I've done it before, I can do it again!

[Spud]

Honestly, until I joined this community (June, 2003) I didn't have a whole lot of experience listening to Bad Songs, other then a handful here or there in workshops and whatnot.

I had to endure an awful lot of awful 12-tone crap in college by people who covered up their lack of talent by writing utterly inaccessible music, then turning around and saying the problem was our lack of sophistication rather than his lack of talent.

Upon re-reading my initial post, I could see how it could be misconstrued.

Well, it appear that it wasn't completely true, for one thing. You implied that Song Fight introduced you to bad music. Sounds like you had some prior experience.