state of music

     Why does anyone write music? Is it because they have something to communicate? Or is it to become a star and make money?
Though some write to sell (corporate music, music designed to sell) by choosing themes, styles and performers to nab the market audiences, the nobler and true reason music exists is for people to communicate an emotion, an idea and/or a/an memory/impression.

    Communication:
        Music depends on clarity and relevance in communication and execution. If the message is muddled or unclear, the impression too vague and ill performed then the artist has failed. Many people communicate poorly. Take for example public speakers, some have a natural charisma and a lucid way of communicating what they think or feel, some are slow, labyrinthine, uninspiring, uncomfortable and have poor delivery.
Good communicators play the audience, the listeners. They take an apathetic crowd and have them laughing, crying, giving money and pledges, raising hands, jumping in the aisles, shouting hallelujah and repenting. The same is true about music/musicians, especially in a live setting but primarily I will focus on the writing and recording process.

    Technique:
            In writing a song it is irrelevant how you start, lyrics, melody, music, music idea or emotion; what does matter is that once the essence of the song becomes clear to the writer, direct the whole song to it. Whether poignant or playful, angry or sublimely tender, childish or brooding, the whole song and all its parts should reflect it.
          One sad fact to try and reverse is that modern culture as a whole is deadened to subtlety and sublimity. (If you do not know the meanings or differences of these words I suggest you look them up as they are missing from the modern culture)
        Every song has a tone as well as a voice (not vocals or singing, here the word is used abstractly.) Every single song has a different way to approach it; formulaic writing is not viable. Formulas only can get you in the ballpark but they can never deliver perfection.
       Some songs should be lush, some sparse, some raw, some polished, every note, every instrument should have its place and its voice or tone. (Tone being the sonic niche that it occupies, whether harsh, mellow, glassy, brittle, trebly, &etc.) If the instrumentalist knows the tone that the song requires he should not settle for less; though sometimes, accidental sounds or tones end up fitting a song perfectly.
        Tonic incongruity is the result of misplaced tones, notes, timing and styles. Other things that cause incongruity are, weak melodies (whether sung or instrumental), weak lyrics, bad production (though rarely the fault of the musicians) and bad performance.
       Another area, which needs dire attention after listening to several top 40 songs, is the art of writing lyrics. It is sad how little time is spent in crafting clear and aesthetically pleasing lyrics; especially considering that they are the most direct vehicles of communication of the intent and meaning of the song. Not everyone can aspire to Shakespeare but to not even get past jr. high is pathetic.
         Also, which I need to mention after hearing many young hopefuls on mp3.com and garageband.com, learn to play your instrument, learn to play your style and even learn several more styles just to not suck like you do right now. If you cannot pull music from thin air to match whatever is put in front of you it is time to lock yourself in the room with your guitar/instrument every day, eight hours a day, seven days a week until you can at least keep up. Try jazz, classical, blues, rock, funk, ambient noise, r&b, hip-hop, rap, country (though it is hardly music), pop (though it is hardly bearable), Latin, Tejano, Brazilian, Celtic, Hawaiian, Indian, Middle-eastern, and the thousands of other ethnic styles that you can get your hands on. Know all you can so you can improvise at will over a bed of music set before you.
       Which brings me to another point: Improvisation. It is an excellent way to keep music fresh and an interesting concept in communication. Think of writers who experiment with “stream-of-conscious” writing. To elaborate for non-writers, place your pen on the top of a blank page and begin writing whatever comes to your head, let the sentences flow without worry as to syntax or sense. When you reach the end of the page stop (unless you have more then keep going for God’s sake). You have just written improvisationally and for all it’s oddity it is communicating.
        One technique, which I use almost religiously, is to improvise a lead guitar track (or several separate ones) listen back to each solo dozens of times and construct a solo based directly on the scratch improvisation! Most of the time I keep the scratch track completely (apart from cleaning up a few glaring sour notes and sometimes not even that) or learn to play the same exact thing with the confidence that repetition and technique bring. So it is the same solo that I improvised but it is in the final “performance” form. About half of the solos I record are the first through third take of improvisation; the other 50% is divided up into prewritten solos or redone/touched up improv tracks.
      The last point I will make about technique is the differences between the format of recording and the platform of a live performance.
          When you are performing live you are limited to the number of instruments your group can play well and without hindrance. Example: there are three of you but you want to have (all at the same time) two guitars, a bass, drums, percussion, a sampler, a turntable and a Rhodes piano. Having the ability to play multiple instruments (at the same time or just being a multi-instrumentalist) is good, and having different instruments for different songs is good; but in a live setting it can be impossible to recreate the sound in your head on a limited budget, band size, stage size, van size and electrical outlet supply. That is the glory of the studio. I say: do not be afraid of creating something in the studio that is impossible to recreate live and instead of trying to recreate the song live as you recorded it make a separate live version, something that takes the song to a different place and gives it a different vibe. Make something that fits the live platform.
      A classic example of this is the Radiohead song “Like Spinning Plates” from the Amnesiac album. The song is built from the backwards guts of another song. But live they play it with real instruments going forward and it is a whole new creature.
On a record you can get away with more than you can live, on a record you can bring the meaning and communication, live you have more power to bring credibility and charisma.

   The Business:
         Once you create your music, communicating exactly what you desire to and sonically recreating your muse, you have to go to battle with the many-headed hydra of the music industry in order to have others share your creation.
        The music industry is a business; it is based on capital gainideas and not on artistic aesthetics. Therefore, it makes music to sell and not to contribute to the elevating of the human experience. Prepackaged, corporate groups, designed to sell, designed to float on the propaganda will never satisfy those that love music as an art. Where is the passion? Where is the fire? “Pop” will always be meaningless because it is formulaic and detached from reality. It is predictable and financially risk-less, they demand that a group will be on TRL and top 40 hit radio and it is. If the general public does not buy the quota of x million albums the group is dissolved (how cannibalistic to eat your wounded) and the next project is tried with a slightly different slant or vibe, trying to find that perfect blend that hooks million mall-rats.
        This just means that if you are not playing their game you will not be chosen to be their slave. If your music is not viable for the formula that makes money it is not going to be interesting to the business of record companies. They want money and ways to make money, not art, and certainly not anything too far removed from the charts.
        I wish this could be changed but it would only change if the music corporations ceased being exactly what they are: businesses, operating for profit. Since this will not happen in our lifetime (nor will it likely ever happen) we have our only recourse in the independent music movement. The owners and propagators of independent music, while being sometimes elitist, bigoted (just try to sell a million records and then be friends with them) and critical to a fault, are still trying to reveal music that deserves to be heard by its sonic merit. Mp3’s have given a global revamping of independent music, a new listening room for new artists and a pollination of thousands of worthy groups in far-flung places of the world. Now little Jimmy Podunk can discover great artists like Kent or Dj Shadow all from his bedroom in Wyoming. Soulwax is being listened to in Hawaii and Pedro the Lion is the rave in Denmark.

       Conclusion:
       Music is a powerful art form, we should be bending space and time with music, changing perceptions, shattering the mall mentality and communicating ideas freely.
   We are not children any longer yet many still live like children, being told what to wear, what to listen to and what is good music. Can we awaken a dead “pop” generation? Either they can grow up or die on the branches, immature and “pop” forever. Who wants to continually pander to a finicky market? Who wants to live the pop dream when it spits you out after sucking up your beauty and charm just to market it? After a few years you are too old, too ugly, a “has-been”. Your fresh young face haggard and torn. Their claws in you, their words in you, their vultures on you, sucking, draining, using.
But we are not theirs to have. We are not fodder for their vapid marketing schemes. Let all those that disagree go and be swallowed by “pop” music. And I will go home and put on Björk, soaking up real musical worth all the while.