Hello there folks!
I've been working on this one for quite a while and it turned out to be the best I've made so far, and - for I have still issues with it, I would be very grateful for any help.
Anyway, the trouble is as always with my songs - it's too long. I just can't seem to find the line when it's enough to stop adding solos.
I have been trying to cut it for a few hours now, with no satisfactory result so far.
I have three versions, the 'full' is what I came up with initially.
The 'mild cut' has the second repetition of the 'chorus' cut out, along with one part in the end.
The 'solo cut' has the choruses left as in 'full', but I cut out some solo parts in the end.
Anyway, it's still pretty long. I would like any suggestions you could give about what sections to cut out from the 'full' version.
I'm clueless. You see, I really LOVE the sound of all the instruments, so I like them to have their solos. Then I want the chorus to repeat at least twice in the song - and bang!, it's 6,5 minutes, and then I just can't cut the parts out 'cause I feel the song lacks them.
Please, don't mind the distortion and unfinished transitions, as well as panning/mixing or too weak BDrum, that's all left for later, now I have to concentrate on structure.
You can get all of the three versions here:
http://www16.zippyshare.com/v/137964/file.html
http://www16.zippyshare.com/v/32513664/file.html
http://www16.zippyshare.com/v/9806819/file.html
or
http://oliwerko.ic.cz/Fjord_full.mp3
http://oliwerko.ic.cz/Fjord_mild_cut.mp3
http://oliwerko.ic.cz/Fjord_solo_cut.mp3
(sorry for crappy mirrors, I don't have anything better at hand )
Some people told me that it's long, but dynamic enough and there's no need to cut. If that would be the case, I would be glad, but I doubt that's true But maybe it would suffice to add some more variety (more tom drums?) to some sections and it would be ok with this duration? I don't know.
Thanks very very much for any help you can provide :)
There is of course no definition for how long or short your piece can be. There are standards depending on how formulaic you wanted to be but I would never ever recommend another person to simply follow these formulas just because they are predefined. They exist more as a way to explain to people who are learning, how to put music together in a way that is accessible and a way for record companies to tap into predetermined formulas that they know work (and will therefore sell.)
A common structure for a pop/rock song might be: [Intro - Verse - Chorus - Verse - Bridge - Chorus - Coda]
Or a slight change: [Intro - Verse - Verse - Chorus - Bridge - Chorus - Chorus - Coda]
This is to say that your song is specifically defined by these aspects of itself. And kind of disappointingly that it is constrained by what is expected of it. (And this is a modern development.) If you listen to a lot of soundtrack or classical music it doesn't adhere so strictly to these structures and for the most part is considered far far superior compositionally. Different genres can become ensnared by these formulas too, for instance Jazz would perhaps be more free of structure (not to say that it doesn't have any) than Techno which is very rhythmic and that word again... formulaic.
Of course I am really going off on one here and as someone who is clearly a competent musician, I wouldn't assume that you didn't know this already. So I guess I'll get straight to the point and talk about your song itself.
For the introduction of your tune, it is fairly progressive in that it starts with one layer and builds upon itself up until what I would consider to be the first "verse." It then breaks briefly before repeating and you continue to add instrument layers on top of this. Any of these could really be defined as a "chorus" and that's not really clear, however the underlying structure of all this never really changes at all. It is minimalist in that it adds layers and takes layers away but it is the "same" (and I use that word only because I can't think of a better one) all the way through, despite there being a lot of variation.
HOWEVER don't take that as a criticism because it suits the style of the song perfectly fine and I myself am a main offender of this. Me personally, I am a sucker for repetition and music progression, but I seem to be a minority and that's one of my biggest difficulties in making the music that I make. (I'm the only one who likes it.)
Actual criticisms though. The song progresses, but it doesn't ever reach a point where I would consider it to be at a peak. I couldn't differentiate between verse/chorus, only the repetition of layers, when you add new ones and take ones away, which leads it to come across as a kind of progressive drone. A matter of personal taste on my part maybe but you mentioned you were concerned about the structure so I thought it would bring it up. The length is perfectly fine, I wouldn't worry about cutting anything unless you feel it's really necessary
6:19 is by no means at all "too long" or even long at all so do not worry about that. However in your variation, when the verse/choruses are repeating after the break and whichever instrument is taking it's solo. I would suggest upping the scale at that point rather than having a straight repetition of the verse and chorus that played at the beginning. If you start the song at the 36 second mark, listen to that segment, then skip forward to the 5:03 mark and listen to that segment they are exactly the same, and this same structural segment repeats continuously throughout the song, minus the interchanging melody. So at that point, later in the song, a variation or an addition to the underlying structural layers would in my opinion do the song a lot of good.
I will say, I enjoyed the song a lot and I feel I am being overly blunt in saying these things but please only take from it what you agree with. I'm not trying to be a critic as it would be nice to just say "Hey this is a good tune!" but you said you were clueless and I wanted to give my own opinion. I hope I have at least said something interesting or that will help you in your decision about the structure of your song, or it least gave enough of a response to strike up an interesting discussion on it.
What I'd like to finish this post on, is to also say that while these formulas and structures sell records and are easy to digest. They are also complete crap and I personally would say a blight on compositional music. People shouldn't feel inclined to follow them simply because they are what people would expect, and I think musicians should make an active effort to try and break from them, to get rid of that habit in listeners. If someone listens to your music and says "Hmm, a melody would fit well there." They are not the right people to make that decision, that falls with you. It is a fault on them as a listener that these formulas are so ingrained in them that anything else other than what they would expect, feels abnormal.
Perhaps some people will disagree with me, but there you go. Great work on the tune, I really dig the melody.
:thumbsup:
I second "i stole his car" ;D
i stole your car:
Thanks very very much for the valuable feedback!
I know the structure you mention, and by no means I try to stick to it. However, I like some repetition and thus tend to adhere to it just a bit. I like 'regularity'. I don't need to follow it blindly, that's plain boring. But I don't like constant changes either. I'm usually looking for a middle way.
To the duration - I'm not really bothered that it's too 'long' as in terms of duration, but as in terms of musical material/duration ratio. I mean, there's enough material in there for a 4 or 4,5 minute track, but for 6:19, it seems that there's too little.
Now there are two ways of dealing with this: either change the existing material by means of alternating or adding new material into it, or simply cut out the repeating parts.
Either way, I'm stuck.
When trying to add new things, I usually invent alternate melodies not fitting into the whole mix, simply something I cannot add 'on top' of this.
To make terms clear (in the 'full' mix):
melody at 0:35-0:50 I call the verse
melody at 1:24-1:40 I call the chorus
I'm going to mention the parts of the song separately:
1. I think regarding the buildup, until 2:46 it's ok.
2. Then there's the verse once in the 'old' form, then twice with the accompanying melody added. I wanted to add the 'old' verse first in order emphasize the adding of the accompanying melody. After that, it's natural to repeat the verse 2x.
3. Then there's the 'chorus' I wanted to have in the song at at least two places, so it repeats itself here again.
4. Then we are on 4:07, that's a solo of the high-pitched melody. This strikes me as maybe unnecessary?
5. Then I add the verse melody into the solo, again, same technique/reasons as in 2. Moreover, the high-pitched melody can end nicely, while letting the 'verse' melody continue, which I like.
6. Then there is the 'verse' melody solo.
7. Again I add the secondary verse melody to do a nice buildup (but maybe it's already too repetitive to buildup the tension)
8. A short section with percussions added (unnecessary maybe)
9. Solo of the secondary verse melody to the end
I can't seem to be able to 'change' the song, nor to 'cut' it. :(
What would you do if you were me? Could you comment the individual parts? If you think they're necessary or not, or which would you cut/change?
Just to make this straight - I am by no means 'copying' any rules, or adhering to any piece of advice more than I think is necessary. Actually, I am a man who takes a lot of advice, and often doesn't make anything about it because I like it as it is. But I'm trying, and I don't want to make this song boring just because it's too long/repetitive and lacks dynamics.
EDIT:
I've done another cut version:
http://oliwerko.ic.cz/Fjord_cut.mp3
This one is only 4:16 long, I tried to cut some repeating parts/solos from it so it wouldn't be so "same". Did it help? Or is this not the right way?