#1
theres a part in a song im writing and i dont know whats the best way to do it.. care to help?

First way has four more bars than second way.
Attachments:
care to help.gp5
#3
It depends on how you want to move into the next part.


:/
[img]http://i.imgur.com/LYZyCdp.gif[/img]


Quote by CrossBack7
Momie's like not even a real person, just an asian, lesbian spirit.
#4
Quote by Momentosis
It depends on how you want to move into the next part.


:/


that thing (the last bar of each way) would lead to the chours, but what do you mean?
#6
Quote by huevos
Chord progression, melody, and the overall theme of the song. If you write the chorus, it would give us a better idea of what you want.


ok here it is.
Attachments:
care to help.gp5
#10
I don't really understand what you're trying to ask, the correct way to do "what"?
There's no "correct" way to really write music, you write what you want.
Also I don't know what "way 1" and "way 2" are...they look and sound the same to me.
#11
Quote by .Joker.
I don't really understand what you're trying to ask, the correct way to do "what"?
There's no "correct" way to really write music, you write what you want.
Also I don't know what "way 1" and "way 2" are...they look and sound the same to me.


the differnece is the part repeats one mor time. i dont know how many times is it supposd to repeat. 4 and then other thing that lead to the chorus , or three and the other thing that leads to the chorus so that it makes a total of 4. ............
#12
As others have already pointed out, there is not really a "correct way" to do anything in music. It's all about what feels right, what sounds good. And you're the judge of that.

For example, repeat things as necessary. Usually in pop/rock a riff or a progression is repeated 2,4,8 etc times, depending on the length of the riff, the arrangement, and the intent of the composer. Riff-length should be a no brainer, and what arrangement means is that you can keep the same riff fresh for a longer time if you also gradually add or change the other instruments/vocals around them. And intent is what it really comes down to - if you want to create a moody drone-piece, by all means repeat the same stuff for 10 minutes, it's your decision. Same as with a progband whose intent it is to switch gears every 2 seconds.

Just as an exercise for my own sake, and because I was particularly inspired (or particularly bored, but oh well..), I took your little riff and basic chord progression for a spin and composed a somewhat pop/punkish rocksong from there. It doesn't mean to be a masterpiece musically but it can show you what happens in an actual song context.

Cheers!
Attachments:
Help is on the Way.gp5
#13
That was sweet.

...Though if you ever find a vocalist who can hit all those notes, you'd best steal him before someone else does, hahah.
#14
Quote by Ailes
As others have already pointed out, there is not really a "correct way" to do anything in music. It's all about what feels right, what sounds good. And you're the judge of that.

For example, repeat things as necessary. Usually in pop/rock a riff or a progression is repeated 2,4,8 etc times, depending on the length of the riff, the arrangement, and the intent of the composer. Riff-length should be a no brainer, and what arrangement means is that you can keep the same riff fresh for a longer time if you also gradually add or change the other instruments/vocals around them. And intent is what it really comes down to - if you want to create a moody drone-piece, by all means repeat the same stuff for 10 minutes, it's your decision. Same as with a progband whose intent it is to switch gears every 2 seconds.

Just as an exercise for my own sake, and because I was particularly inspired (or particularly bored, but oh well..), I took your little riff and basic chord progression for a spin and composed a somewhat pop/punkish rocksong from there. It doesn't mean to be a masterpiece musically but it can show you what happens in an actual song context.

Cheers!


Ok, thanks a lot man. I just want to know... is it ok to make a progression like the one in my song repeat 4 times and then another 4 bars chords that lead to a chorus?
it could also be 3 times the progression and then the chords that lead to the chorus so it makes 4 times in total instead of 5. but it doesnt matter right? its preference
#15
...Though if you ever find a vocalist who can hit all those notes, you'd best steal him before someone else does, hahah.


I usually notate the vocals ottava alta to better cut through the mix. So a hypothetical real end result wouldn't necessarily sound like powermetal

is it ok to make a progression like the one in my song repeat 4 times and then another 4 bars chords that lead to a chorus?
it could also be 3 times the progression and then the chords that lead to the chorus so it makes 4 times in total instead of 5. but it doesnt matter right? its preference


well, as I said, there isn't really a "music police" that comes banging down your door if you fail to adhere to any arbitrary standarts. Usually, when making a song, you already "kinda know" how often you want to repeat certain sections. It's one of those things that you have to feel for yourself and nobody else can really tell you, because then it wouldn't be quite your feeling anymore.
I guess the most direct demonstration of this is when you write a song that you also sing along to. You know how the lines of lyrics aren't usually one big chunk, but broken into several paragraphs (for example depending on cohesion of thought/image, rhyme-scheme or sheer brevity). And riffs/chordprogressions are repeated as often as they need to be in order to cover one paragraph of your lyrics.

-Of course- you can repeat a riff/progression 3 times, 5 times or nine-and-a-half times. Whatever sounds right to you, whatever gives you the feeling you want to achieve with the piece. The numbers I cited (even numbers and powers of 2) are just "standarts", not laws. But, they're standarts for a reason - they simply work well. Add to that the fact that in western music we have built certain 'expectations' over hundreds of years of listening to musical convention. It emerged, for example, that progression be repeated an even number of times because our inner rhythms simply work that way, we 'expect' a progression be repeated 4 times (for example) and would feel slightly thrown off balance if it suddenly segued into a new section by repeat number 3.
The flipside of that is, you can deliberately break conventions in order to do exactly that, keepin the audience on their toes, but it has to be done with care, otherwise it will be perceived as stepping on their toes instead ^^

if you are still unsure, why not simply try to compose both different solutions to your problem, then contrast and compare ? (If you have an already biased ear because it's you worked too long on the piece to judge objectively, get some feedback from your friends who'll decide with a clear head)
#16
Quote by Ailes
I usually notate the vocals ottava alta to better cut through the mix. So a hypothetical real end result wouldn't necessarily sound like powermetal


well, as I said, there isn't really a "music police" that comes banging down your door if you fail to adhere to any arbitrary standarts. Usually, when making a song, you already "kinda know" how often you want to repeat certain sections. It's one of those things that you have to feel for yourself and nobody else can really tell you, because then it wouldn't be quite your feeling anymore.
I guess the most direct demonstration of this is when you write a song that you also sing along to. You know how the lines of lyrics aren't usually one big chunk, but broken into several paragraphs (for example depending on cohesion of thought/image, rhyme-scheme or sheer brevity). And riffs/chordprogressions are repeated as often as they need to be in order to cover one paragraph of your lyrics.

-Of course- you can repeat a riff/progression 3 times, 5 times or nine-and-a-half times. Whatever sounds right to you, whatever gives you the feeling you want to achieve with the piece. The numbers I cited (even numbers and powers of 2) are just "standarts", not laws. But, they're standarts for a reason - they simply work well. Add to that the fact that in western music we have built certain 'expectations' over hundreds of years of listening to musical convention. It emerged, for example, that progression be repeated an even number of times because our inner rhythms simply work that way, we 'expect' a progression be repeated 4 times (for example) and would feel slightly thrown off balance if it suddenly segued into a new section by repeat number 3.
The flipside of that is, you can deliberately break conventions in order to do exactly that, keepin the audience on their toes, but it has to be done with care, otherwise it will be perceived as stepping on their toes instead ^^

if you are still unsure, why not simply try to compose both different solutions to your problem, then contrast and compare ? (If you have an already biased ear because it's you worked too long on the piece to judge objectively, get some feedback from your friends who'll decide with a clear head)


Ok, thanks alot again. you have helped me SO much.
and btw i really liked your composition, everything its good you are a good composer.