Revision - The Power of Conciseness

When arranging your songs, always aim for conciseness of delivery. Think about talking. You can beat about the bush or you can get straight to the point. Sure, there are times where getting straight to the point may not be the best way. But most other times it really is the only way.

And this definitely applies to much of popular music.

In order to be musically concise, you need to revise. We all know that a fresh idea that we wish to share with friends will take us longer to talk about and "flesh out" than an idea we're already very familiar with, one we have talked through many times and can now present it in a brief, punchy, powerful way. In this case the process of "revision" was "natural" and unforced. You just kept talking about a certain thing and with each retelling you got tighter and tighter.

In music, the process is the same, but often requires a more concentrated and deliberate effort. And it applies to melodies as much as lyrics. In fact, it applies to everything from arrangement to vocal and instrumental parts to the final production.

One of the biggest hurdles to achieving concise results tends to be our attitude towards our ART. For some inexplicable reason, many of us feel that writing requires genius and that genius is spntaneous - and we're the spontaneous genius...

But if you think about it, this attitude reeks of arrogance. It implies that we feel that whatever we do on the spur of the moment is perfect! Upon reflection, most of us will agree that it isn't really so and it's not what we meant when we said "spontaneous is best." OK. But hold on. Before we start splitting hairs, we can easily agree that perhaps a second take or another look at those lyrics or melody is "acceptable." And if you push us, perhaps three times...

All right. So we're just looking at a question of degree - not the principle.

So here's the deal. The secret lies in the DEGREE to which you're willing to subject your creations to revision. But beware: some of us are very compulsive. I've known many talented writers who just didn't know when to stop and consequently virtually castrated their inpired ART down to something lifeless and sterile.

As with everything in life, common sense is your ally. Work that lyric or tweak that melody for as long as your energy level is high. Stop when you're feeling that it begins to wane. Go out and clear your ears. But make sure to come back to it. Allocate a finite amount of time to each tweak. At one point you'll just have to move on, and resolve to "get it right" next time. But never give in without at least trying to maximize your effort.

So, how long should it take to revise each component of a "typical" song? If you can answer the question "how long is a piece of string?" then you know the answer. It all depends. But I can give you a couple of typical examples.

In a typical writing session in my experience, the barebones of the song (basic melodic and chordal idea, at least partial lyrics) can take anything from a few minutes to maybe an hour. That's assuming that you're an experienced writer. A basic arrangement of this, meaning assigning parts to instruments and getting a "first listen" can take another hour to two hours if you're dealing with experienced musicians, or if you're good with your sequencer. A listen-through will confirm whether you're on the right track and whether the raw song evokes the kind of feelings you had when you wrote it.

And now revision must start in earnest. A typical lyric may endure 30 or 40 rewrites. Naturally, now and then you'll hit on the "right" idea much sooner, but be prepared to do 50 re-writes! And be happy if you arrive at the "optimal" version in less than that. A melody line may take multiple rewrites too. Often the core melody is just right, but "flipping out" a note here or there or coming up with an alternative line in a part of the song will take you a good couple of hours as well. The same will apply to all instrumental performances. Unless you want your rhythm guitar to just strum a boring 1-2 pattern you'll have to arrange its part so that it flows. Perhaps each chord should have a couple of steps built in to take it to the next chord, etc. All that needs planning - and revising.

All told, a "typical" song can take a good 3 days to "get right" on the arrangement and writing side. You can then take another day for recording it (with multiple re-takes until it totally shines!), and finally give yourself a couple of days to get the mix down. So... a week. That's about right.
No. This does NOT make you sound lame. A week dedicated to a song is, in fact, quite skimpy. DON'T FALL for those stories of "we got this down in 15 minutes in a live session." This CAN happen once in a blue moon, but don't program yourself for that. And it's not evidence of anything other than a bit of good fortune. Genius is measured by RESULTS - not by the time it took to get there!

The famed band "Boston" used to take up to 4 years per album...! Excessive? Perhaps, lol. But each one of their albums enjoyed multiple platinum sales and each one was hailed a "classic." And nobody even cares that their last album took not 4 but 6 years to complete!

No, I'm not advocating this kind of extremely obsessive production cycle. I too think it's nuts! But if you can help it, NEVER predetermine how long a song will take you to produce. It will be done when it's done. This power tip is actually a SHORT-CUT. If you spend MORE time on doing GREAT music, your chances of "making it" will grow expenentially. If you spend less time on producing a lot of half-baked music, you are GUARANTEED to get nowhere.. very slowly.

Oh, and I KNOW I could have been much more concise in this post! ;)

LISTEN TO: 228-Q/Tuesday Jun 23, 2009