About 2 years ago I bought one of those little digital recorders about the size of a credit card just to record musical ideas as they popped into my head...so I wouldn't forget them.

Haven't used it yet.   LOL 

And every time I forget to have it with me, I get an idea. ...then promptly forget it.   

 *sigh*

Heh, I've got one of those little recorders too.  Ever hear of Sony Mini-discs?  Yet another technology that didn't catch on...  Oh well, I used mine for PhD work and it's still usable (plus I've got a few blank discs that I can use).  I'll have to get it out so I SEE it laying there, then maybe I'll remember to use it!

craigb


Heh, I've got one of those little recorders too.  Ever hear of Sony Mini-discs?  Yet another technology that didn't catch on...  Oh well, I used mine for PhD work and it's still usable (plus I've got a few blank discs that I can use).  I'll have to get it out so I SEE it laying there, then maybe I'll remember to use it!

I bought a MiniDisc back in 2003. iPods were around then, but hadn't really taken off. I used it for about 6 months, great little device really. But MP3 players were bound to obliterate it. 

Hi,
 
This will likely throw a wrench into these ideas here ... but mine is poetry, and not quite music, though I can do some really goof Fripp'isms with the instruments I have and create words off the visuals and feelings while doing it!
 
All in all, I NEVER, go into it, with any ideas ... because, I might have a different feeling while doing it, and that means that your attention is now divided. Generally I start writing the minute the movie starts, and this accounts for my being able to write at work, at home, and what not ... it's the same person!
 
That said, there are times when the "visual" is continuing on, and you have to stay on it as far as possible ... the kind of things, that has a way of making it sound like, these ideas can not be used in music ... because too much of it is "self-conscious", and thus, any experimental process that works on getting rid of that idealistic process, is not likely to get a good reception with folks that only know and understand popular music ... and its derivatives.
 
Honestly? ... there was a mystic, that suggested that the minute you "find it" ... trash it! And you will be rewarded ten fold! In general, this only makes sense if you accept the reality that ... you are here and now and at this moment ... and an idea or previous theme is not (necessarily) here and now. When it came up, was the time for you to be there, not later or after, so you could explore the "moment", which would have given you a better idea of how to go along with it ... but if all you can look for in these areas, is another note, another sound, another this or that ... I doubt that you will ever be happy with your own work, and always think that you can do better than the last time.
 
This is one of the reasons, why I enjoy Peter Hammill so much ... it's about "now" and "this moment" ... and then it's over and the next album is totally different!
 
To "find" more moments, that help you find new things and musics, you have to "undo" the boxes and any learning ... so you can feel it through and through ... the rest is easy ... you already have the mechanics for it, and if you record it, you can always come back to it and correct the smaller details ... but I seriously doubt that it will change things in a major way.
 
This has been my experience in writing, directing and with actors. Musicians, generally speaking, have been the tougher group to work with!

The moment of conception and the moment of completion are only tied together by a train of thought. No two trains of thought will ever be alike because they happen at different times. This means nothing as it is a part of reality that you will tune out while you're thinking about your composition. It can start with a spark, a note, a word, etc., but it will complete as a concept, an idea, a statement, an emanation of force and spirit-energy-sound-music. 

Crg


The moment of conception and the moment of completion are only tied together by a train of thought. No two trains of thought will ever be alike because they happen at different times. This means nothing as it is a part of reality that you will tune out while you're thinking about your composition. It can start with a spark, a note, a word, etc., but it will complete as a concept, an idea, a statement, an emanation of force and spirit-energy-sound-music. 

Perfect ... and a train of thought that YOU created!
 
One of my favorites was always Jean-Luc Godard ... everything has a beginning, middle and an end ... not necessarily in that order! Or ... I don't want to make a film about politics ... I want to make a political film!
 
All in all, his point really is ... you can't be on the outside looking in! ... you have to immerse yourself in that inside ... and the notes and the feeling and the perfection will be there!

Interesting how songs evolve, indeed.  +1 on the immersion, Moshkiae and Crg,

Sometimes (for me) it seems that the artist evolves from the song ... and/or vice-versa

She's quite a lover ... the muse and I.

There seem so many different forces evolving into songs ... its easy to ramble. :):):)  Even:

happy accidents
loving collabs
sketch development
song creation --> arrangement
genre inclinations
familiar artist emulation

performance vs. sample experimentation
re-writes: Lyrics + beatz + melodies
vocal and instrument deliver
music theory
etc etc etc

Then there seem the 'real-life' evolving forces like, I dunno:

heart-brake
romance
caffeine and/or drugs
other arts, sorceries,

adventure --> song emotives
encouragements and/or feedback
intuition
shrewdness and logic

lust, pride, ego, and/or libido
lover, deity, faith, metaphysical awareness, etc.

sensual and/or spiritual appetites

I'm fairly certain most artists + songs evolve from so numerous a bunch of metaphysical forces.

Philip


happy accidents
loving collabs
sketch development
song creation --> arrangement
genre inclinations
familiar artist emulation

performance vs. sample experimentation
re-writes: Lyrics + beatz + melodies
vocal and instrument deliver
music theory
etc etc etc

Then there seem the 'real-life' evolving forces like, I dunno:

heart-brake
romance
caffeine and/or drugs
other arts, sorceries,

adventure --> song emotives
encouragements and/or feedback
intuition
shrewdness and logic

lust, pride, ego, and/or libido
lover, deity, faith, metaphysical awareness, etc.

sensual and/or spiritual appetites 

Nice song, what's it called?

Interesting how songs evolve, indeed. +1 on the immersion, Moshkiae and Crg,

 
For me, surprisingly enough, many times, the result is not the issue at all, because the being involved part is way better, than the rest.
 
It is, for me, one of the craziest things about listening to music ... we're listening to it "after the fact", and on top of it, we're "creating" an imaginary idea to what we're listening that is satisfying to ourselves, as it supposedly makes sense to our own noodling.
 
Any one single "moment" of that experience, can be a song in and of itself. The whole concept can, as well, but it would have to be done with rock lyrics that defy sensibility and you still wonder what a stairway to heaven is, and if your favorite sex dream partner is there waiting for you ... so you can make a song out of it! ... which of course, all comes crashing down when it doesn't happen, or she leaves to go home!
 
Too much of "song writing" or "evolution of a tune" is centered on one theme, or idea and nothing else ... and the funny thing, for me, and the artists around me, is that this is backwards for them ... because it is the "doing" that helped create the poem, or song. But then, Mick says that he picks up a vibe off some pieces of music, and then he is capable of adding words to it ... that's another process, and then later you can define how you want to start it, and how you want to finish it, depending on how your middle goes.
 
I really think the only essential part of all this is that we do not define it at all ... to explain your way of seeing is one thing, but to think that is the only way to put it together is ... scary ... and myopic!
 
The tougher question is ... if you can concentrate for 4 minutes, can you do the same for 40 ... and create a symphony ... and this is to me the difference between the really good musicians and the rest ... because too much of the popular music is just rehashed melody and solos ... that are (eventually) easy to learn ... and too many folks can only learn the notes on those and never really recognize the feeling that brought it out in the first place. That strength of feeling, made it stand up in the first place ... and to me, this has ALWAYS been the clue ... learn to express yourself with the notes, and stop copy'ing others ... the minute you "sync" to your own "notes" ... everyone around you will notice!

If it's an original I'm working on, anything goes really. I did a song once, and by the end of it, the only thing that was original to the idea I had was the opening line of the vocals, and the guitar lead at 2:30. That lead was originally 35 or so seconds at the beginning. I had it completed a couple times and kept getting idea's for it and the song molded itself around the original opening lyrics and original lead.

Here's the tune.

I kept adding to it, taking away, changing things.

When I started the song, I had a really bad cold. If you listen real close to the opening lyrics you can hear it. That's what prompted me to use those effects on the vocals, to kind of hide my cold. It's not like I had to carry a tune, ya know ... it's a rap song. It sounded good, so I used it through the whole song.

There's a lot of loops in it IIRC. It's been a while. But, I made all the loops with Sonar. I made loops out of the rhythm guitar, then played along live to give it a live feel. Same with the drums I think. Some are loops I made, then I used my Alesis SR-15 to play along live.