Some songs are inexplicably easier than others.

[bluegoatwoods]

Full disclosure here.......I don't qualify as a musician. I've never gotten beyond 'beginner' status on any instrument. And I've never had a song idea in my life. I kinda think I could do better at my present stage of life since I understand music better than I did thirty years ago. But I don't have time for all of that practice.

But I'm a singer. I wasn't blessed with a great voice in terms of harmonics and tonality. But I was granted range and power. And I take some pride in handling difficult material with pretty good control. And I put life into my performances. No one is going to hear me and think, "That guy should be a star", but I'm confident in claiming that my performances are entertaining.

But some songs are harder than others in ways that seem mysterious to me. I'm a big fan of Justin Hayward. And I've imitated him pretty well on some songs. But there's one that I want so bad that I can taste it. And yet I just can't get it right. It sounds like it ought to be within my grasp, yet it's elusive. No big deal, though. It happens. It's not the first song I've had to give up on. After making my poor family hear all of the rather poor attempts I'd made. (They suffer for my 'art' more, perhaps, than I do. )

The other night I had an opposite experience. I came home from work with that urge to do some hollering into a microphone. So I chose two songs that I'd been vaguely thinking of recording for some time. "Cracklin' Rosie" by Neil Diamond and "We've Got a Groovy Thing" by Paul Simon. I perceived them to be challenging, yet not so difficult that I'd be drawn into a long, hard project.

They came together surprisingly easily. I could have done them in one take. I still did two takes because I usually regard take 1 as practice. On the really difficult material, 10 takes is not uncommon. And I'm pretty sure that the pros go a good deal further than that.

I had them in pretty reasonable shape that evening. And about an hour each of further sound engineering the next day got them in about as good condition as I'm able to achieve. They're not the first songs I've recorded that came together more easily than I'd imagined. But many songs have taken more effort. And on some I've beaten myself nearly to death without achieving a darned thing.

I remember bands I knew having similar experiences. There were songs that they'd want pretty badly, yet they couldn't get them right. Maybe they were a bit smarter than I, though. I think I remember them dumping the dogs quicker than I'm inclined to do. I guess I've tended to beat a dead horse a bit. I suppose the difference is that when you've got 4 or 5 people involved there'll always be one who will blow the whistle fairly early in the game. And the others don't feel like fighting it. So they give up on that song. One guy working alone can get so focused that he loses the forest for the trees.

It's just kinda strange. Some come together so nicely while others fight you like a mad dog until you're defeated. Then there are others that were about as difficult as you'd imagined. Something of a challenge, yes, but not hugely different from what you'd anticipated.

And there's another reason that I'm posting this beyond mere musing about relative difficulties. I'm a performer. I crave an audience.

So feel free to have a listen and see what you think.


https://youtu.be/qpvbn9rHVuw

https://youtu.be/iLLbO8-uKDg



PS: Now that I've listened to them several times I'm hearing little weaknesses and I'm wishing that I had done 10 takes.

That's another odd thing about hobbies. The urge for perfection simply doesn't allow you to be satisfied. I have a similar problem with motorized bicycles. Anyone else?

 

[Tony01]

Well I can tell you that you're a heck of a lot better than the singer we had in our band in 2008. He also wasn't a "real" musician but he also refused to take lessons or learn an instrument, citing his poetry and willingness to be a frontman being more than enough to bring to the table as the 35yrs combined music experience and training between me and the guitarist. We did a demo that cost us $1200, my entire contribution was ONE TAKE on 10 tracks which were supposed to be redone but we found that most of the money would have to be spent pitch correcting the singer that didn't want to improve himself. F**k that guy....

I listened to your audios, and I'll tell you right now, you have the talent and with a little bit of work you could be great. You got a good baritone/bass voice, great sense of pitch, and good rhythm.. even for a non-musician.

If you're interested in improving, I'd suggest picking up the bass guitar. A bass will play notes that are in the same range as your voice, so learning to tune it will only improve your talents (and having good pitch is somewhat difficult in the lower bass notes.. so you're already ahead there). Also it will teach the basics of rhythm, chord progressions, pretty much basic musical theory. In my opinion bass is also one of the easier instruments to learn to be versatile in 80% of music within a year or so. Jazz training will help a LOT, I learned my dynamics and detailed skills on jazz and brought them to rock'n'roll.

I've always said, if I wasn't born a drummer.. I'd be a bassist. Bass players and drummers have all the fun!!

 

[bluegoatwoods]

Thanks, beginner01.

As a matter of fact, the bass guitar is the instrument that I got furthest with. Still didn't get all that far and that was 30 years ago.

It was at the same time that I was hanging out with musicians and trying to get into some sort of band. I didn't succeed. At least part of the reason was that I still had a lot to learn. But I also got turned off to the whole thing because of folks like the singer you mentioned. Plus others who were less annoying, yet still couldn't just manage to be a contributing member. And some of them had real talent. But I knew more than one band who'd just about get something pretty cool worked out, only to have one member flake out in some way or other. Then they'd have to replace him and start out at square one. And it would happen more than once to the same band.

While I was reading your description of that joker I was thinking, "I might have lived this. I certainly saw friends going through similar stuff".

I did learn to dance hanging out with musicians. I'd go to their gigs and ask girls to dance. I might have been too chicken to do it. Even today I really don't feel 'graceful', or whatever, on a dance floor. But I got up the guts to do it in order to help out my friends. I was encouraging the others at these bars to start dancing. I guess I was a 'shill'. If that's the right term. I met a couple of on again/off again girlfriends that way. So it wasn't all bad, by any means.

Think of the biggest names in music. The Beatles, The Who, etc. Most folks would consider them fortunate for having gotten to the top of the industry. Yes....they had talent. But a lot of bands with talent never got anywhere.

But something that might be less obvious on the surface is that they were also fortunate to have kept four or five guys working together well enough and long enough to manage to put together a good sound and a good act. It's anything but guaranteed.

 

[Tony01]

Yeah I know what you mean. I was never fortunate enough to have a full lineup of decent players in rock bands. Different story in jazz though.

The bands that 'made it' spent 10 to 15 hrs per day on their instruments alone and together. Their luck came from being prepared for the opportunities presented to them. To get proficient expect to put in at least 6hrs a week, the more the better. After 2 weeks of this your calluses will harden and not bother you any more. When I started out at the age of 11 until I graduated high school I spent all my time on the drums. I probably put about 10k hrs in that time. My first year of college I was in such demand that I played 15 jazz gigs per month on average for two straight years. The high point was 6 jazz combos and helping out 3 symphony orchestras. Too much work for tips and tush.

Nowadays I won't touch my drums for a year or more.. maybe just pull them out occasionally and bang on them as a nostalgia sort of thing as when a 5yo plays with toys he played with when he was 3.

They say "practice makes perfect" but what they really should say is "smart practice...". Take lessons. The more the better starting. It could be the difference between being in a half-decent band 3 months from now, or 1 year from now or never. My guitarist didn't practice a lot, but he had a solid foundation and could 'wing it' most of the time.. sometimes it showed.. I'd come in drunk sometimes and it showed too..

I do bikes now because it's an expression of art in which success doesn't depend on other people. Sad but true.

 

[bluegoatwoods]

I'll veer just a bit off-topic here and give a plug to a band who I've thought are very, very under-appreciated.

They'd be local to you, beginner01. They're from San Francisco. The name is the Flamin' Groovies. They started in the mid-late 60s and recorded through 1979 or 80. Plugged along doing live gigs through the 80s. But I think those days were merely the lead guitarist and musicians he'd picked up along the way, using the name. Dormant after that until a reunion tour in 2014-15.

(Also, their original lead singer and front man left in the early 70s. Eventually formed a band called the Phantom Movers. I think they've played bay area gigs ever since. I think they're still doing so today. He was a rock-a-billy type. And very good at it.)

The Groovies' old studio recordings are top notch. Just loaded with musicianship, personality, excellent vocals and so on.

I was really pleased to learn of them re-forming. Then I'd pick up on youtube videos from the early part of their tour. I was kinda unimpressed. Though happy to see them giving it a go, of course. It just seemed that they didn't really 'have it' anymore. But they improved. Getting into 2015 the performances got better.

An example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KXwmgAHH98

I was always impressed with the drummer back in the studio days. He ended up joining the Phantom Movers, for that matter. But I'd seen no sign of him in anything recent. I'd begun to wonder if he'd passed on or something. Yet the guy in the current Groovies does look something like him. And he has a similar style. That might be the guy. I'm not sure.

But the others are the original bassist and the original lead guitarist plus the rhythm guitarist/lead singer who joined about 1972 or so.

Oh, well. Maybe this is more detail than needed. In any case I've always felt that these guys really should have made it big. And they well deserve my recommendation.