Anyone interested in hearing hit songs that never existed?

[Mr. Liszt]

Ok, here's the situation. I am a classical composer and jointly and more recently a songwriter and wannabe pop music producer.

To learn about songwriting, production, and I mean the very highest levels of songwriting and production, I have endevored to write and produce hit songs for various artists that are no longer in existence in most cases. Well, not all of them sound like hits but still if the song turns into something else I still try and make it the best I can - a song that lacks elements that would have sold to the larger population but is undeniable as a strong and exceptional piece of creative work.

Sometimes I try and emulate the artists and sometimes not so much so. So far I have been interested in mainly Phil Spektor works, The Beatles, The Zombies and the Kinks though not all of those artists are represented in the recordings.

I write several dozen in a week. I record my favorite two or so on the weekend. Initially I did all of the performances alone. Lately though, so I can become accustomed to guiding and coaching others than myself I have tried to incorporate other musicians in the project but only on a performance basis - the arrangement and composition is up to me solely. I coach on the execution of the proper nuances and decide which performance is the keeper.

What I am interested in asking myself are these questions: Is this piece a hit? If not then why not. Is it too close to the sonic essence, be it lyrically or melodically, to another hit? Is it unique enough? Are the lyics clever enough? If not a hit is it strong enough to be a classic song otherwise (Like, say, "Julia" by the Beatles.)

I would love to see what my new Gearslutz friends think of what I have done. I know that I still have a lot to learn. So, if anyone is genuinly interested I will start posting tracks. I have recorded 15 I think so far.

[peeder]

Quit being sheepish and just show us the best of what you've got.

A question you might ask instead is "Is it close enough to an existing hit?"

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by peeder

Quit being sheepish and just show us the best of what you've got.

A question you might ask instead is "Is it close enough to an existing hit?"

How do you know that I'm not a sheep? Well, just seeing if anyone is actually interested. I have tried to get some people going on this before but it seem no one wants to think of things this way where I've been. Just interested in some deep thought about the art and don't want to waste time. Comment on the mixing if you want but I don't do much mixing and no mastering to speak of. I don't know if these are the best but I'll start here.

Here are a few:

The first one in the project.

"They Say That Love Is A Wonderful Thing" 2:36

Lyrics:

They say that love is a wonderful thing.
All that you’ve lost with love you will regain.
If it feels like pain has made death of you.
Then love can ressurect you.
They say to be in love is a wonderful thing.

Then why do I feel so sad?
And why does love hurt so bad?

They say that love is a beautiful thing.
All that you’ve lost with love you will regain.
If it feels like pain has made death of you.
Then love can ressurect you.
They say to be in love is a wonderful thing.

Then why do I feel so sad?
And why does love hurt so bad?

mp3: http://www.jeromeperry.com/They%20Sa...ul%20Thing.mp3

Recorded with a Shure smM58 plugged straight into a laptop. Garageband software. Tons of hiss. Don't know who I was going for here in terms of vocal performance. Think it could've been great for Elvis though.

Tracking:

1- acoustic guitar
2 - generic string sound
3- lead vocal
4 - backing vocal I
5 - backing vocal II
6 - backing vocal III

My thoughts:

Pretty close. Going for a 50's ballad hit. No mixing was done. Could add some parallel movement or counterpoint to thicken up the strings. Second verse is same as the first almost which is wierd but I felt the words were novel enough for a repeat and somehow it feels right to me.

"Once I'd Love To Kiss You Twice" 2:41

lyrics:

Oh, girl!
I would give you all and more.
But, girl!
Well, my love stays at your door.

Oh, when I get you home I want some more.

Oh, once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.
Girl, you know that would be so nice.
Once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.

Oh, girl!
Just one kiss is all you’ll give.
But, girl!.
Well, I think that that’s a sin.

‘Cause when I take you home I want some more.

Oh, once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.
Girl, you know that would be so nice.
Once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.

If I have,
To wait much,
Longer then I’ll go mad.
My mind can’t stand this wait.
And my body can’t stand this pain.

Next time I get you home I want some more.

Oh, once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.
Girl, you know that would be so nice.
Once I’d love to kiss you, kiss you twice.

mp3: http://www.jeromeperry.com/Once%20I&...ou%20Twice.mp3

Tracking:

1 - generic midi drums I created
2 - generic midi bass I created
3 - generic panflute (really should've been harmonica but I think the panflute is unique.)
4 - Electric guitar
5 - Lead vocal
6- Lead vocal a third above or backing vocal
7 - backing vocal

My thoughts:

Other than the occasionally lousy vocal performace I think this is pretty close too. Was going for a song That would've been a Beatles hit. Think that the title/chorus words are very clever - the play on "once" and "twice." The panflute is ridiulously awesome to me, lol.

[peeder]

These are actually good. Now I see what you're trying to do.

You need a George Martin to firm stuff up in the performances and arrangements. But the poor quality and the unbalanced mix kinda work in a retro setting. The hiss is just a bit too bright for the first one, but hiss and distant sound is right for that era.

I dunno, this is more impressive concept than I first thought with just the 80's pop thing. What is it that you're looking for here? I mean, your gear all sucks and so do your engineering skills. Was that news?

Does it matter?

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by peeder

These are actually good. Now I see what you're trying to do.

You need a George Martin to firm stuff up in the performances and arrangements. But the poor quality and the unbalanced mix kinda work in a retro setting. The hiss is just a bit too bright for the first one, but hiss and distant sound is right for that era.

I dunno, this is more impressive concept than I first thought with just the 80's pop thing. What is it that you're looking for here? I mean, your gear all sucks and so do your engineering skills. Was that news?

Does it matter?

Thanks for the continued replies, peeder.

Maybe this is the wrong place. Is everyone here already a master of composition and is way ahead of me on to mastering the recording arts?

What am I looking for?

First, I am trying to be the George Martin. I know that I haven't accomplished that but that is my goal.

Second, my premise is that a great sound recording STARTS with a great composition!!!!!!!! Why move on until I am a master of exceptional composition? I don't want $50,000 of recording gear with $2 skills as a musician/producer.

I am trying to build a foundation of solid steel.

Is this the wrong place or what?

[PistolP]

hey!
your stuff sounds good. my recent discovery about hit songs is ´the general impression´ is the most important (rahter than specific details).

I just made a song that puts smile on peoples faces on the very first second they hear it. and they say they like it even BEFORE the chorus comes.
i know its odd but ´normal´ people are usually incapable of tearing a music appart into instruments and vocales and stuff. they just listen to it as one complete peace.

melody, lyrics, harmony, rhythm, arrangements... too many details that count but if they are not working together...


PS! where are these strings coming in the first song?

[peeder]

I think you're doing great and are probably in the top 2% of composers and players here and probably, sadly, in the top 50% gear and engineering-wise. Maybe you can get help on composition and playing although that's probably better done person to person with someone local and wise. You can get help here on gear and engineering certainly but it sounds to me like what you're trying to do and what you're best at is the composition/arranging and playing and I'll have to say that that is a more long-term rewarding area.

Gear is mostly about procrastinating composing and playing and thinking that you can buy yourself progress. Well the easiest thing to do is spend money (I just bought an 1176 today ferchrissakes) but the hardest thing to do is make progress. Gear has almost nothing to do with progress. You can always find someone like me to do your engineering for you who will buy gear and master it and make themselves happy that way instead of being creative with the fundamental aspects of music. The challenge is coming up with something that people will want to listen to twice.

So get to that point where I (or whoever) say it's just the gear or technical skill holding you back. You have a chain, suck though it may, it's enough to evaluate your work on. That's all you need right now. Carry on.

[Silas Holmes]

Fantastic Music!

[Todd]

There's a big difference between "Emmulation" and "Blatant copying"

What you're doing are blatant copies.
These are very superficial copies of 60's era songs.
You're taking the most obvious, superficial aspects of tunes like
"i wanna hold your hand" and simply rearranging it, and adding new
lyrics, that are also just insipid copies of something else.

Not sure what you expect to gain by blatantly stealing a Beatles groove, and singing, "kiss me twice, that would be nice" over top of it.

Its mildly amusing for a few seconds, but i cant take it seriously,
sorry.
Let's hear you come up with an actual original idea, that would
have fit in that era, rather than blatant copying.
Of course "Soundalikes" have their place. You could certainly get TV work
with stuff like this, but you'd certainly have to improve the recording sound
a TON.

I think you have your history a little mixed up too. George Martin
was not a composer. He was a producer. These are 2 very different
jobs.
Also, being a classical composer certainly does not prepare you to write
Pop music, nor vice versa.
Sorry to be so hyper critical, but hey, this is the music biz man.
Not a forgiving buisness in case you havent noticed.

Best of luck,
T

[sedohr]

Brutally honest! But there's a truth to it! Don't get discouraged Mr.Liszt.

Kalli

[Slim ManDjango]

From a completely gear-clueless perspective, I think the overall sound fits the era quite well and I don't think for such a retro sound you need to buy loads of expensive gear. I have a number of small suggestions sound-wise but I get the feeling that's not what you're looking for.

The second song does sound like it could've been a Beatles hit, but a bit obviousky so. I wouldn't have singled out a particular Beatles song or groove like Todd did - it sounds to me like elements and modified melodies from a whole lot of Beatles songs. If that's what you wanted I think you did quite a good job. I like that panflute.

Composition wise I think you've definitely got talent and I think it'd be rude and unfair to judge your composing based on your classical background. Classical music is a good foundation for ANY style of music. To be honest the lyrics didn't stand out to me at all though, but then again pretty much 100% of the lyrics I hear on the radio don't stand out to me either, and in the 60's they'd probably have been fine.

What are you planning to do with the music? I think this sort of thing is a great project for seeing what went into sounds of the past to use it to help understand how modern music developed. It could also be useful, as mentioned, for getting TV work and the like.

Good luck! Don't be discouraged by the harshness of Gearslutz - many of these people work in big studios and are making money, so although their opinions should be respected... just don't make any rash decisions .

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by Todd

There's a big difference between "Emmulation" and "Blatant copying"

What you're doing are blatant copies.
These are very superficial copies of 60's era songs.
You're taking the most obvious, superficial aspects of tunes like
"i wanna hold your hand" and simply rearranging it, and adding new
lyrics, that are also just insipid copies of something else.

Not sure what you expect to gain by blatantly stealing a Beatles groove, and singing, "kiss me twice, that would be nice" over top of it.

Its mildly amusing for a few seconds, but i cant take it seriously,
sorry.
Let's hear you come up with an actual original idea, that would
have fit in that era, rather than blatant copying.
Of course "Soundalikes" have their place. You could certainly get TV work
with stuff like this, but you'd certainly have to improve the recording sound
a TON.

I think you have your history a little mixed up too. George Martin
was not a composer. He was a producer. These are 2 very different
jobs.
Also, being a classical composer certainly does not prepare you to write
Pop music, nor vice versa.
Sorry to be so hyper critical, but hey, this is the music biz man.
Not a forgiving buisness in case you havent noticed.

Best of luck,
T

What Beatles song is this exactly like? I would have never stolen a "groove" intentionally? I only did that once for Kinks tune that I did, lol. Tell me how compositionally it is that close to "I wanna Hold Your Hand." I don't see that at all. Don't bullshit me either - if your going to say something like that I want some analysis - something more than your 2 cent word "groove." Too bad for you that I haven't written great genius hits right off the bat - I DID say I was trying to learn here.

I know that George Martin was a producer. And I know what a friggin' producer is.

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by Todd

There's a big difference between "Emmulation" and "Blatant copying"

What you're doing are blatant copies.
These are very superficial copies of 60's era songs.
You're taking the most obvious, superficial aspects of tunes like
"i wanna hold your hand" and simply rearranging it, and adding new
lyrics, that are also just insipid copies of something else.

Not sure what you expect to gain by blatantly stealing a Beatles groove, and singing, "kiss me twice, that would be nice" over top of it.

Its mildly amusing for a few seconds, but i cant take it seriously,
sorry.
Let's hear you come up with an actual original idea, that would
have fit in that era, rather than blatant copying.
Of course "Soundalikes" have their place. You could certainly get TV work
with stuff like this, but you'd certainly have to improve the recording sound
a TON.

I think you have your history a little mixed up too. George Martin
was not a composer. He was a producer. These are 2 very different
jobs.
Also, being a classical composer certainly does not prepare you to write
Pop music, nor vice versa.
Sorry to be so hyper critical, but hey, this is the music biz man.
Not a forgiving buisness in case you havent noticed.

Best of luck,
T

Ok, I have thought about the similarity to "I wanna Hold Your Hand" and I see it but I don't think it sounds like a blatant copy. Actually I think now that it sounds more unique than it did. The use of non-chords tones is interesting.

Transposed to D major the Beatles melodty in the chorus goes:
D - C# - B - A - G
A - G - F# - E- D.

My tune, only in the instrumental hook, goes in identical motion - down four from the tonic, up one, down to again to the lower tonic. How many songs do that though dude?

D - C# - B - A - Ab
A(natural) - G - F (natural) D. No E note.

The chord progression is entirely different and I think my use of soley dominant 7 chords IS an interesting idea. The melodic rhythm is also different. The beatles melody is diatonic whereas mine use chromatic tunes on strong beats which I think IS also interesting.

[Mr. Liszt]

Thanks for the sympathy regarding Todd's harsh post guys but to tell you the truth:

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I WANT.

I would love to spar with people on the relative merits of these "hits." That's what I presume is done in the highest echelon on pop creation.

I write a lot and I learn fast so the more criticism the better.

[butterfly]

ok mr liszt, my tuppence, we don't have cents in bonnie scotland, when I played the first track it put a real smile on my face....there is I suppose a naievety about that sound that is kind od heartwarming and joyous and I think u captured a nice performance from the singer, however the lyrics are somewhat unorigonal and derivative, the second song I'm sorry is just a blatant rip off of I want to hold ur hand.........I mean it's lovely and all that, particularly in the current climate of pop music, indeed in the current climate of pop music this kind of thing is quite hip, the retro thing, a la amy winehouse and duffy .....but what at least the amy winehouse has, not sure about the duffy, is a moder sensibility as regards lyrics and by that I mean a certain edginess or synicism, I think if u want to be naive as regards ur lyrics then that kind of retro thing is ironically not going to serve u well, cause then there is no twist. I think ur background in classical can only be an advantage, the greatest melodists were, mozart, puccini, strauss etc, the list goes on.....so use this ability or facility if u have it, at the moment i am hearing a lot of beatles etc. I think u should find an engineer to help u track, mix and get a sound and concentrate on being a producer/songwriter and explore some personal truths as a lyricist

[Mr. Liszt]

Thanks guys. As I said, I write tons of songs so the Beatles one is no big deal. And these are just studies people. I'm not going to try and market, perform and release these or anything. Not at all. They are just ideas and attempts all write old school stuff while I joinly pursue the production of modern trakcs. That's it. Nothing more. But about the Beatles song, I see it as distinct and don't see it as a blatant ripoff - there are merits to it other than the single panflute line which sounds like the Beatles song. Ripping off a song would be pointless for this kind of project.

Anyway, I'll post a few more tonight. As I said I have 15 of these so far.

[dreamless]

Originally Posted by Mr. Liszt

Is this the wrong place or what?

yes

all the guys here are jealous jaded assholes with impossible dreams they will never achieve

I just show up every once in a while to mess with them

*loud fart noise*

my butthole speaks

[slowjett]

First song: i think it sounds good. Aside from the obvious over-hiss, everything sitts well for the sound your going for.. and the verb blends well. What ar eyou useing for reverb.. nice voice too.. My dog got all crazy when the strings came in on the first song.. too much for him. I think the keys are way too loud. =]


How did plug an sm58 into a laptop without a pre?

as for the guy callign these copies.. well umm every chord pattern has probably existed in a song before, quit being a turd todd. =]

[supertooth]

These tracks are truly amazing, for a number of reasons.

1. "Accuracy" of the arrangements. The arrangements seem perfectly remeniscent of 50s and 60s pop, respectively.
2. The words to Wonderful Thing are very believable as 50s lyrics, specifically "pain has made death of you," the delivery of which (with fully pronounced "of") is quintissentially 1950s, even 1940s.
3. The pan flute is amazing.
4. I am amazed that you got an SM58 to sound so right for the first song. The only point at which you can tell something is awry is when you say "WHY do I feel so sad"—the "why" is loud and a bit short, perhaps revealing the weakness of the reverb.

A note regarding the Beatles connection. It seems completely obvious to me that this would be a Zombies song, not a Beatles song. The sustained "girl" line, complete with third and accentuation of the last note (oh gi-i-i-i-i-IRL), is very Zombies.* But the key is the call-and-response pre-chorus with the chromatic step halfway through. To me this sounds undeniably Zombiesesque.

Please, POST MORE!


*As distinct from the Beatles' style of sustaining the word "girl," which is (gi-I-i-irl).

[willythekid]

you are a cool dude keep up the good work and why not market it.

[Mr. Liszt]

Well here's two more:

This one is for Todd espesially

It's called "I'd Say Yeah!"

The kinks had a hit with "You Really Got Me" in '64. Later that year they scored another hit with "All Day And All Of The Night." Pretty close to being the same damn songs. Now what you don't know is they had a third hit in early '65 with "I'd Say Yeah!" And guess what, same damn song as the other hits, lol. So Todd, you've got me here. I intentionally wrote this tune to be like the first two Kinks songs I mentioned. The form is identical. The chords, words and melody are all different of course but the ESSENCE is the same. But since the Kinks copied themsleves I justify that I can too .

Lyrics:

I’d Say Yeah!

Oh, I loved her more than I can describe.
But I made her leave ‘cause she made me cry.
If she asked would I take, take her back I’d say no.
I’d say no!

Well wait a minute now.
I wouldn’t say no.
I woulddn’t say couldn’t say no ‘cause I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!
Sheep say, "Baa!"
But I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!

Well, she broke my heart so I let her go.
Now I sit and whine ‘cause I made it so.
If she asked would I take, take her back I’d say no.
I’d say no!

Well wait a minute now.
I wouldn’t say no.
I wouldn’t say couldn’t say no ‘cause I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!
Sheep say, "Baa!"
But I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!

Oh, I loved her more than I can describe.
But I made her leave ‘cause she made me cry.
If she asked would I take, take her back I’d say no.
I’d say no!

Well wait a minute now.
I wouldn’t say no.
I woulddn’t say couldn’t say no ‘cause I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!
Sheep say baa!
But I’d say yeah!
I’d say yeah!

Listen:

http://www.jeromeperry.com/I'd%20Say%20Yeah!.mp3


This one I wrote for my friends 27th birthday. He loves the Zombies so I very loosely went for thier sound. It's a novelty song. Probably wouldn't have been a hit. I tried to be clever with the lyrics in this one more than the others.

Lyrics:

Evan’s Twenty-Seven!

Evan, did you ever wonder why it’s like that?
That seven or eleven are such a good age to be at.
They’ll take you under their arms.
You just use your youthful charm.

Evan’s twenty-seven.
Everybody Evan’s twenty-seven today.

Evan, is it compli-cated to be older?
So many memories and journal entries, do you keep them in a folder?
So, do you feel an old man?
Do you do all the things that you can?

Evan’s twenty-seven.
Everybody Evan’s twenty-seven today.

Don’t you go thinking the good days are gone forevermore.
Because twenty-seven’s only half of fifty-four.

Evan’s twenty-seven.
Everybody Evan’s twenty-seven today.

Evan’s twenty-seven.
Everybody Evan’s twenty-seven today.

Listen:

http://www.jeromeperry.com/Evan's%20Twenth-Seven.mp3

[Mr. Liszt]

To answer a few question:

"What are you planning to do with the music?"

They are just studies. I am just trying to learn how to write a good song. I repeat my earlier sentiment that, "a great sound recording STARTS with a great composition!"

"I think if u want to be naive as regards ur lyrics then that kind of retro thing is ironically not going to serve u well, cause then there is no twist."

As I said, these are not my real matirel. They won't be released unless someone buys the copyrighted matrieal from me or one of them tunrs out to be so good that I can make it a modern hit.

"What ar eyou useing for reverb?"

I have a rule with these songs that I am not going to do any complicated mixing or effects. It is the simple Garageband reverb - not the more complicated one.

"How did plug an sm58 into a laptop without a pre?"

I used a a few adapters to get the mic into my laptop. I guess I am using my laptops preamp?

"why not market it?"

Like I said, just trying to learn how to write a decent song. If anything else happens that's cool for right now it's just for fun and study. Do you think that it could go somewhere?

[supertooth]

For the Evan song, how did you do vocals? Was that the SM58 as well?

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by supertooth

For the Evan song, how did you do vocals? Was that the SM58 as well?

After the first 3 songs that I produced I decided, because of the hiss caused by using the computer preamp I guess, upgrade.

Here is my complete gear set up for this project:

- 2.16 intel core2duo GHz macbook pro with 2GB ram
Tascam US-122 interface, it's cheap and has two input with phantom power

- Grageband 3 software.

- I dropped the Shure sm58 and now use one mic only for all the "real" instruments including vocals, a single samson co2 condenser.

- guitar amp is a les paul jr, it is a 5watt class a amp with one only one friggin' knob! It sounds like gold to me. It was a pretty penny. It makes me very happy.

- guitar is a danelectro dc-3 or a 2206 gibson sg '61 reissue or a beatup yamaha acoutic concert style.

- drums and pan flute are obviously midi things that I created in GB. but i want to get a chromatic pan flute and bring that thing back cause I love it!!!!! I'm working on that.

- mic stand an pop filter.



Also, if anbody is interested,

I am trying to keep this project simple. My philosophy is that the song should sound like a hit after the tracking is done. If it doesn't then the performance was off or the arrangement needs to be adjusted. So I do ar have takes done until it's right and sounds accurate, though there's plenty of spots where if I were going to release this I would tighten up the performances.

I try complete each in song in under three hours. That's writing from COMPLETE SCRATCH - no chords, no lyrics, no concept, no nothing - to completed and produced recording. This way I can do more and never dwell on a song. If I learn how to get it right from the early stages then why should it take more than a few hours? That's my goal anyway. A few I worked on the comception and arrangement mentally for a day or two before recording it. Like "Once I'd Love To Kiss You Twice" I spent some extra time working on in the car in line at the bank etc before producing that.

Also, I try my best to write the songs in my head. I sit in a chair or have a smoke outdoors and stare off into space. I am trying to train myslef to do that so I can do it anywhere. Sometimes I will check the counterpoint of an arrangement for vocals on the piano. Sometimes the key I came up with in my head isn't going to work and so I try and find a doable key reangewise and the best sounding key for the guitar riff if it's very prominent. Ideally, I don't want to depend on the guitar or piano for arrangements though. I want to eventually be able to do that on the spot mentally. I figure top producers probably have that ability.

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by supertooth

These tracks are truly amazing, for a number of reasons.

1. "Accuracy" of the arrangements. The arrangements seem perfectly remeniscent of 50s and 60s pop, respectively.
2. The words to Wonderful Thing are very believable as 50s lyrics, specifically "pain has made death of you," the delivery of which (with fully pronounced "of") is quintissentially 1950s, even 1940s.
3. The pan flute is amazing.
4. I am amazed that you got an SM58 to sound so right for the first song. The only point at which you can tell something is awry is when you say "WHY do I feel so sad"—the "why" is loud and a bit short, perhaps revealing the weakness of the reverb.

A note regarding the Beatles connection. It seems completely obvious to me that this would be a Zombies song, not a Beatles song. The sustained "girl" line, complete with third and accentuation of the last note (oh gi-i-i-i-i-IRL), is very Zombies.* But the key is the call-and-response pre-chorus with the chromatic step halfway through. To me this sounds undeniably Zombiesesque.

Please, POST MORE!


*As distinct from the Beatles' style of sustaining the word "girl," which is (gi-I-i-irl).

Hey supertooth, that's awesome that you noticed those things about the pieces such as the execution of the word "girl" by both The Beatles and The Zombies and the pronunciation of the word "of." And you noticed the chromatic step in the one song. Good ear!!! With those kind of remarks I bet you could pull this type of thing off well. Why not whip something up and run it by us in this thread! It would be fun.

[Joe Porto]

I like your stuff. I actually thought the first songs had a better vibe with the lower quality and hiss. I think the later songs are a little clean. I'm sure you could find a plugin to dirty them up.

This reminds me of growing up with a 4-track and a mic. I listen to some of the AWFUL productions I made back in the 80's, but the creative aspect punched right through. I think these days many people get too caught up in the production, with so many choices of plugins and outboard gear. It's nice to see someone keeping it simple and concentrating on the songs and the performance.

I subscribe to your philosophy of writing and recording quickly. Get good MAKING songs, not FIXING songs. Keep it up. You'll be cranking out hits in no time.

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by Joe Porto

I like your stuff. I actually thought the first songs had a better vibe with the lower quality and hiss. I think the later songs are a little clean. I'm sure you could find a plugin to dirty them up.

This reminds me of growing up with a 4-track and a mic. I listen to some of the AWFUL productions I made back in the 80's, but the creative aspect punched right through. I think these days many people get too caught up in the production, with so many choices of plugins and outboard gear. It's nice to see someone keeping it simple and concentrating on the songs and the performance.

I subscribe to your philosophy of writing and recording quickly. Get good MAKING songs, not FIXING songs. Keep it up. You'll be cranking out hits in no time.

Say, thanks Joe. I really appreaciate the thoughts and the kind words.

[Mr. Liszt]

Here's another:

Called "Why Do I Love You." This one sounds pretty good I think. I coached a friend on the backing vocals for this one and learned a lot. I think the words for this are great actually. There is one moment that I must say I really am pleased with. In the verses there is this descending bass melody in the guitars. It goes, F - E - D. But on the D note I added also an A note below it on the E string making it a chord of the interval of the fourth which is not all that common. I love the sound of it and it even though it is a small thing it is one of the best musical things I've done.

Lyrics:

Why Do I Love You

Why do I love you?
And why do I care?
And why do I want you?
Because you’re the most wonderful girl in the world.

You should know that I’m a sentimental.
(You should know by now)
I’m a sentimental kind of man.
(Sentimental kind of man)
And I don’t feel, feel it detrimental.
(Never a detriment)
That you should be the only one that holds my hand.

Why do I love you?
And why do I care?
And why do I want you?
Because you’re the most wonderful girl in the world.

Everything I do seems consequential.
(All the things I do)
A false move could throw this train right off the tracks.
(Throw this train right off the tracks)
And what we have it seems so monumental.
(But stone could not be formed)
But statues could never capture the love we have.

Why do I love you?
And why do I care?
And why do I want you?
Because you’re the most wonderful girl in the world.

Listen:

http://www.jeromeperry.com/Why%20Do%...Love%20You.mp3

[JSpark]

Nice stuff,

I get what you are trying to do. If you can successfully reproduce songwriting styles from particular eras, analyze the details and reproduce them with imagination and feeling, then you can do so for various styles in our times as well.

Music is from the heart, but more than we care to acknowledge is technical. I am very impressed by this aspect of your writing- of course, this exercise says nothing about how innovative you are.

Most people lack the flexibility and distance to write songs other than what they love.
I'd love to hear you tackle a Motown, disco, or 80's song. This actually helps me in my own process.

I appreciate your discipline in learning this way.

[Mr. Liszt]

Originally Posted by JSpark

Nice stuff,

I get what you are trying to do. If you can successfully reproduce songwriting styles from particular eras, analyze the details and reproduce them with imagination and feeling, then you can do so for various styles in our times as well.

Music is from the heart, but more than we care to acknowledge is technical. I am very impressed by this aspect of your writing- of course, this exercise says nothing about how innovative you are.

Most people lack the flexibility and distance to write songs other than what they love.
I'd love to hear you tackle a Motown, disco, or 80's song. This actually helps me in my own process.

I appreciate your discipline in learning this way.

Thanks J for tuning in!

You understand my premise exactly. I felt in my gut that I should try my hand at writing oldies hits before really trying modern hits. I want to understand as much as I can the way that pop music has developed. I am not worried about innovation at this point so much. I am just concentrating on writing strong songs in various old school styles. Plus I enjoy it too which is a bonus. When I do my more modern stuff I am constantly trying to find mew ways of doing things though and making sure that anything I do is not derivative of any other artist unless I am pretending that I was hired to write for a specific artist. One day a few weeks ago I tried to pick an artist I would never listen to to write a song for for practice. So I came up with a song for Justin Timberlake. I am really excited about producing this but I haven't had the time yet. I've done a few more like this.