The anatomy of a song

[Asterix]

Here's an example of a song broken down.

Guitar - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKn9h7TtrTA

Bass - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m05PR2gxuhI

Drums - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzUP45vzAlU

Couldn't find a single track for Kim's playing but I guess that's always going to be far harder as it's more freestyle.

Remeber that with the key guitar, the guy, Chris Cornell, is singing as well.

This is why we're mere mortals.

The full thing - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5ElgKRon80

[Justin Cyder]

Stuff like that is interesting although that riff doesn't look all that challenging to me. Here's one direct from the studio as recorded. Love Spreads - Stone Roses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY7FIkWepJY Guitar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhoVFbyHz_c Bass

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iePKcrATSA Drums

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH7HEiMYUWA Vocal

[Baryonyx]

Asterix said:

This is why we're mere mortals.

I don't get this, are Cornell and co. immortal because they wrote this mediocre rock song?

[Justin Cyder]

Define mediocre.

It may not be a technical wk fest but it has a groove. Some of that fusion ten minute bass solo schtick you love Baronyx is concentrated Nytol to my ears. Horses for courses innit & poor form to sit in judgement of the tastes of others. Musical snobbery is a cultural cul-de-sac.

[Fantuzzi]

Justin Cyder said:

Define mediocre.
It may not be a technical wk fest but it has a groove. Some of that fusion ten minute bass solo schtick you love Baronyx is concentrated Nytol to my ears. Horses for courses innit & poor form to sit in judgement of the tastes of others. Musical snobbery is a cultural cul-de-sac.

True, but he never said the song was lacking in technical prowess and that is the reason for its mediocrity, you were the one who mentioned the guitar part being unchallenging.

Justin Cyder said:

Stuff like that is interesting although that riff doesn't look all that challenging to me .

[Justin Cyder]

Satisfaction is an unchallenging riff. Would you describe it as mediocre? How about Paperback writer or Paranoid? All classics, all easy.

The undercurrent that pervades one or two people's recurrent posting around here is if it's not full of two handed tapping & 16h note arpeggio runs then it's somehow unworthy & that is musical snobbery of the highest order. I have read here in recent days SRV described as 'moderately talented' - millions would disagree & these little tells are often bubbling around the surface in this forum.

Maybe it's time for a pointy guitar sub forum where the masters of the craft can congregate in a circle to slap one another on the back.

[Disastrous]

I can't stand double-handed guitar wanting.

It sounds awful to me. It's like covering up a lack of soul by piling a billion notes into a passage and showing of your grasp of modal theory.

Get a sound first, then a groove and then only play the notes you need to, no extras.

[Mastodon2]

Justin Cyder said:

Define mediocre.

It may not be a technical wk fest but it has a groove. Some of that fusion ten minute bass solo schtick you love Baronyx is concentrated Nytol to my ears. Horses for courses innit & poor form to sit in judgement of the tastes of others. Musical snobbery is a cultural cul-de-sac.

Where is it criticised for not being technical? Get the fking chip off your shoulder or wind your neck in.

[Justin Cyder]

It's not me with the chip - that is the whole point.

So let's start with your neck shall we?

[Mastodon2]

Justin Cyder said:

It's not me with the chip - that is the whole point.

So let's start with your neck shall we?

Oh hoy a sock in it, it's dreadfully tiresome seeing your constant posting decrying anyone who has aspirations of reaching their potential on their chosen instrument. Too many notes, scales other than pentatonics, inversions, odd time signatures, too fast, too difficult to play, you just seem to hate it all and wail on at anyone who likes something different to you.

This is what I think of every time I see you trying to force your old fashioned, ridiculous views about playing or listening to what you perceive to be overly "technical" music;

[Dr Z]

Ah! Normal service resumed! This is PH after all!

Guys, it's hilarious! Thanks for making my evening!

[Justin Cyder]

Mastodon2 said:

Oh hoy a sock in it, it's dreadfully tiresome seeing your constant posting decrying anyone who has aspirations of reaching their potential on their chosen instrument. Too many notes, scales other than pentatonics, inversions, odd time signatures, too fast, too difficult to play, you just seem to hate it all and wail on at anyone who likes something different to you.

This is what I think of every time I see you trying to force your old fashioned, ridiculous views about playing or listening to what you perceive to be overly "technical" music;

You big cry baby!! How many times do you need it explaining to you? I'm literally amazed at the obtuseness on display, or maybe you really don't understand?

I could not give a wet st if you want to play nu jazz fusion sweep picking, two handed big hair neo classicla creaking leather pants entirely stuck in the eighties wking on one of those st Malmsteen 3/4 of a fretboard strats you cry aboiut every five minutes.

What I object to is the snide underhand commentary that creeps in from you & your blurry handed pals whenever something that fails to meet with your approval comes along - mediocre, moderately talented... I could go on.

You are precisely & exactly guilty of the offence you would gleefully accuse me of perpetrating! This is why the chip is on your shoulder not mine and what makes me laugh at you all the more is you'll never see it. It's risible that I should want to someone not to meet their potential when it's exactly what I strive to do every day, I just don't like some hothouse flower looking down their nose at everyone else who doesn't meet their idea of musical perfection.



Another decent thread shafted by the spandex & hairspray militia.

[Gaspode]

Paul Gilbert describes the differences between the two approaches very well in this youtube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFr3TRN2CWk

I'm definitely in the rhythmic camp, if it doesn't make me move it doesn't interest me, but what I admire about Paul Gilbert is his true mastery of both approaches.

[Mastodon2]

Justin Cyder said:

You big cry baby!! How many times do you need it explaining to you? I'm literally amazed at the obtuseness on display, or maybe you really don't understand?

I could not give a wet st if you want to play nu jazz fusion sweep picking, two handed big hair neo classicla creaking leather pants entirely stuck in the eighties wking on one of those st Malmsteen 3/4 of a fretboard strats you cry aboiut every five minutes.

What I object to is the snide underhand commentary that creeps in from you & your blurry handed pals whenever something that fails to meet with your approval comes along - mediocre, moderately talented... I could go on.

You are precisely & exactly guilty of the offence you would gleefully accuse me of perpetrating! This is why the chip is on your shoulder not mine and what makes me laugh at you all the more is you'll never see it. It's risible that I should want to someone not to meet their potential when it's exactly what I strive to do every day, I just don't like some hothouse flower looking down their nose at everyone else who doesn't meet their idea of musical perfection.



Another decent thread shafted by the spandex & hairspray militia.

For someone who seems to want people to "meet their potential" you seems awfully old fashioned and narrow-minded about what that "potential" might actually include, as if their musical goals do not meet your infallibly correct standards. It seems that you don't want anyone to "meet their potential, but perhaps only meet your approval. News flash, not everyone likes the same things as you, you don't need to keep going on about it and making snide comments whenever someone says something you don't agree with.

[Justin Cyder]

Yeah, once again, you're just repeating my words back to me.

You're nuts.

Like this:

[Fantuzzi]

Justin Cyder said:

Satisfaction is an unchallenging riff. Would you describe it as mediocre? How about Paperback writer or Paranoid? All classics, all easy.

The undercurrent that pervades one or two people's recurrent posting around here is if it's not full of two handed tapping & 16h note arpeggio runs then it's somehow unworthy & that is musical snobbery of the highest order. I have read here in recent days SRV described as 'moderately talented' - millions would disagree & these little tells are often bubbling around the surface in this forum.

Maybe it's time for a pointy guitar sub forum where the masters of the craft can congregate in a circle to slap one another on the back.

Interestingly, I was going to mention that 'you really got me' by the kinks, is far from mediocre, yet very easy.

As are many of the works by Elvis to add to your list Justin as good but simple.

But to avoid mediocrity, you must avoid repetition and clichés.

Many of my friends aren't 'pointy guitar' types, a few Punk fans, classic rockers, blues, yet don't like Chris Cornells work, they think its a bit average, a bit meh. Not because he isn't shredding his tits of, or that the band aren't using mad jazzy influences or exotic scales and patterns but,


because they have heard it all before. They weren't impressed by the same old thing. Nor do they find most of their songs distinctive. Although Black hole sun is the obvious exception.

I could write a song like Sabbath, now, in 2013.

Could I have written one in 1970? No.

Its of course all subjective, I could name 100 'classics' I adore you don't rate at all, and vice versa. Of course then there is the element of it being distinctive. Just as the Darkness' 'I believe in a thing called love' isn't anything new, it is fking great. So sometimes having a great song despite its lack of ingenuity can get you noticed, but will darkness be on par with thin lizzy? No sadly not, why? they are simply continuations of that movement. Doesn't make it any worse a song, in fact in a world of Hip hop and r and b domination in the charts the darkness could say their songs were something really special to break through the chart and get to number 1.




Also on a side note, technicality is entirely based on 'what you are used to'.

Hendrix was a fking shred machine in the 60s, as was Blackmore in the 60s/70s, as was Randy Rhoads and EVH in the 80s. Now their techniques and styles have been incorporated into mainstream techniques that aren't considered overly impressive.

Also I suspect you have a fairly poor knowledge of classical music, and classical musicians, many of which would find it very funny that you seem to think that music with technicality cannot have soul, passion or emotion.

Liszt was awesome, but he is far from soulless.

[Justin Cyder]

Not at all, classical is very much a passion of mine. Why would you assume otherwise?

Let's have it right, whilst I expect Mastodona to throw his tea out the window at the slightest provocation, it's illuminating that Baronyx should describe a song as mediocre for well worn reasons & when challenged, the spandex comes riding over the hill like a stung wildebeest, Jacksons raised & loaded in my direction.

That slightly sneery under tone is noticeable round here & ironically usually it can be laid at the door of the fans of all things withered on the vine thirty years ago.

Love what you like, it's a free country just expect to get a mirror held up to your face once you start knocking other people's taste. Yes, Don & Barry, that means you.

[Fantuzzi]

Justin Cyder said:

Not at all, classical is very much a passion of mine. Why would you assume otherwise?

Well you've done enough assuming in this thread given Baryonyx didn't say he thought it was mediocre because it was simple. You said it was simple, not him, you.

YOU assumed this.

So I thought given your abhorrence to technical music you wouldn't be aware of the great virtuosos in the 'classical' world, particularly in the Baroque era of shredding violinists, who's music was both incredibly technical yet rather emotive.

Justin Cyder said:

Let's have it right, whilst I expect Mastodona to throw his tea out the window at the slightest provocation, it's illuminating that Baronyx should describe a song as mediocre for well worn reasons & when challenged, the spandex comes riding over the hill like a stung wildebeest, Jacksons raised & loaded in my direction.

Baryonyx hasn't responded to why he called it mediocre, you assumed that it was due to technical reasons, but I think I've mentioned this...

Justin Cyder said:

Love what you like, it's a free country just expect to get a mirror held up to your face once you start knocking other people's taste. Yes, Don & Barry, that means you.

Well with all due respect to Asterix, if you claim a band are superhuman musicians, you might get a bit of interest in that opinion if its a little against the grain. Although I don't think this is how he thought the thread would pan out...Sorry Asterix.

[Justin Cyder]

Nice dissection, but I did ask Baronyx to define mediocre way before anyone else reached their own conclusions & decided to weigh in with their size tens...


Whilst we're on the subject of assumptions, you've made another one right there. I don't abhor technical music. I abhor adherents of it in these pages looking down at anything that they feel they can point at and laugh whilst saying look at these simple people and their unrefined palate. And I've been around here long enough to judge that attitude quite accurately in a few 'contributors' around these parts thank you very much.

Edited by Justin Cyder on Thursday 10th October 21:06

[Mastodon2]

Justin Cyder said:

Not at all, classical is very much a passion of mine. Why would you assume otherwise?

Let's have it right, whilst I expect Mastodona to throw his tea out the window at the slightest provocation, it's illuminating that Baronyx should describe a song as mediocre for well worn reasons & when challenged, the spandex comes riding over the hill like a stung wildebeest, Jacksons raised & loaded in my direction.

That slightly sneery under tone is noticeable round here & ironically usually it can be laid at the door of the fans of all things withered on the vine thirty years ago.

Love what you like, it's a free country just expect to get a mirror held up to your face once you start knocking other people's taste. Yes, Don & Barry, that means you.

Why would he assume that? Because you can't resist having making snide remarks about anything more technical than your own tastes, as if it's a negative trait to be able to play in a fashion where physical and creative restraints don't hinder composition, and to actually be able to compose with those abilities. You don't like listening to music from artists on that level, you don't have to bring this up every time someone says something you disagree with.