The Silver Screen Oasis

But of course, I agree with Arkadin... it's got to be good.

There's a topic with some life in it and maybe a few disagreements.

I'll bite.

What makes a song good?

Notice I am asking the question, because I don't want to try and answer it!

JackFavell wrote:What makes a song good?

As Cecil Taylor would say: "Isn't it enough that it exists?"

Seriously, that question is best answered by the audience that enjoys it and their depth of knowledge. As I've often told others, if you aspire to be a sports figure, your chances of success are higher than in the music field because talent will win out in competition, but music is subjective and relative to those who hear it. If I and many others had definitive answers, there would be fewer poor and/or dead composers, or to quote another famous figure questioning an angel for funds: "It comes in pretty handy down here Bub."

Wendy:

Since I started it you have to answer. It is so subjective there can be no single answer. Often a good song for me has an interesting lyric and a unusual chord structure. The chord progressions in contemporary jazz and new age music have some really crazy chords but they make them work. There is an aesthetic quality to it that helps make it good for me. However, that fact that so many songs in the 50s consist of little more than than a basic structure doesn't make them bad.

A good recording can often enhance something. The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is only one chord but an interesting lyric and an unbelievable production make it an event for three minutes.

Like Mr. A if it were up to me most 20th century classical music would disappear but many people a lot smarter than me support it and encourage it and love it. That is why I'm not a music critic. I'd probably get laughed out of town for those reviews and likely for answers like this one.

What makes a song good?

Easy.

If it's sung by Sam Cooke, Jackie Wilson or Joey Ramone.

Or, for the real answer, go to 2:15 --
[youtube][/youtube]

movieman1957 wrote:The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is only one chord but an interesting lyric and an unbelievable production make it an event for three minutes.

That's funny. I've been noodling around with an arrangement of this song in Logic (trying to add the monks Lennon originally wanted), but I play it with a C to C11.

That's funny. I've been noodling around with an arrangement of this song in Logic (trying to add the monks Lennon originally wanted), but I play it with a C to C11.

I saw a piece of sheet music once and that was the only thing listed but I was singing it when I mentioned it and I wondered if the melody didn't wander off to some variation on a C. One can't always trust the publisher to get it right.

Now you've given me something to do before practice tonight.

How it's done:

[youtube][/youtube]

movieman1957 wrote:The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is only one chord but an interesting lyric and an unbelievable production make it an event for three minutes.

Think of the chord as simply a drone. The rhythm adds implied notes and the tape looping also adds counter-rhythms and melodic underpinning that is more perceived than heard. Then you have the vocal melody on top. Sounds simple, but it isn't.

Mr. Arkadin wrote:

movieman1957 wrote:The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is only one chord but an interesting lyric and an unbelievable production make it an event for three minutes.

Think of the chord as simply a drone. The rhythm adds implied notes and the tape looping also adds counter-rhythms and melodic underpinning that is more perceived than heard. Then you have the vocal melody on top. Sounds simple, but it isn't.

My intent was to have the monks act as the drone, but they insist on chanting. No wonder George Martin nixed the idea.

MichiganJ wrote:

Mr. Arkadin wrote:

movieman1957 wrote:The Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" is only one chord but an interesting lyric and an unbelievable production make it an event for three minutes.

Think of the chord as simply a drone. The rhythm adds implied notes and the tape looping also adds counter-rhythms and melodic underpinning that is more perceived than heard. Then you have the vocal melody on top. Sounds simple, but it isn't.

My intent was to have the monks act as the drone, but they insist on chanting. No wonder George Martin nixed the idea.

I would find a snippet of chanting and after the initial attack where the vocal begins, I would sample about 20 milliseconds (or more if you can) where they are holding a note. Chop the initial attack off the looped phrase so that it's seamless. So you have the intital attack, then the loop, which would play throughout the duration of the song. Finally, transpose everything to the key you plan on working in. Ah, digital technology.

Your inspiration for today:
[youtube][/youtube]

Probably should go in the Record Party thread, but if you play an instrument, how could you not be influenced by this?

[youtube][/youtube]

Ooooh this song is sooooooooooooooo mellow. I luv it.

A huge influence on classical music and a very popular musician Van Cliburn died at age 78.

He was, for his day, a rock star equivalent in the world of classical music. Winning the "Tchaikovsky Competition" at age 23 in 1958 he soon became world famous. His recording of the Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1 was the first classical album to go platinum.

He was much loved here and in Russia and had his own competition in Ft. Worth every year.

http://news.yahoo.com/van-cliburn-ameri ... 00300.html

After a rather famous radio show -

You get to pick a Mt. Rushmore of music. (Groups count as one choice.) Who are your four? (Setting aside classical music for another list...)