Brandon,

Again I don't know when you posted this or if you got some answers, but re-reading some of your comments I am seeing some familiar things that come across our desks as NSAI evaluators (I've been one for about 15 years) and in overall workshops, critiques, etc.

,"seems like there is to much need to cut a little back and make the true parts stronger." What do they mean by that exactly?

What that means is that most songwriters actually have TOO much going on in song. There may be supporfolus, extra characters that are unnesasary or add nothing to the story. Often writers will have too much going on which has nothing central to the action of the story. They will introduce characters later in the story, have miss-understood language of who is speaking, where the focus of the story is.

There are often TOO MANY THEMES going on that deflect the listeners attention. Many writers will actually have two or three stories going on in the same song and so the listener is confused as what is the purpose for the song.


On the "Truth" issue, it might mean that there is flowerdy, poetic language, that doesn't sound "realistic" enough. A writer might be dwelling too much on the emotion and not enough on the "Concrete visual furniture" that are required in songs that come from Nashville and actually in most of the commercial songwriting world.

"well the idea of all the songs are awesome i cant lie its bad ass and i think 3 or 4 could be hits"

This is sort of a "back handed compliment. "Sounds like hits" are a very throwaway line that means it sounds like something on the radio. That usually means it does, but actually it doesn't. Very few people who do critiques will come out and say "you're song really sucks" , because they don't really feel like that. But they do feel that it doesn't stand up any more than what is already out there.

One of the phrases I will often use is "There is nothing particularly WRONG with it, just not enough RIGHT WITH IT. What that means is simply that it is nothing special. It is not bad, not good, just average.

"I have a song called shes the man but my bridge isnt strong enough and jason aldean passed bc of that."

That is actually a phrase that has been used quite a bit in Nashville songs for many years. The phrase "Whose da Man" came out about ten years ago and that particular phrase and variations of it have been used in a lot of songs, particularly by songs that HAVEN'T gone anywhere. "She Da Man", She's Da Man" "I'm Da Man" Who's Da Man", etc are one of those phrases that kind of got really hot for a while and then sort of played out like phrases like "Where's the Beef" and others that hit the public conciousness, in a commercial or bumper sticker. Once they hit airwaves, you hear a lot of them, and then they all sort of die out. It's called "having a song with a shelf life."

The reality is that if you had songs that WERE HITS, am some person doing a critique heard them, they would contact you and try to become involved with the songs themselves. Everyone goes through the friends and their own emotions that go "That's as good as anything on the radio," Or "that's better than all that CRAP" on the radio, etc.
In reality, most songs are not really bad, or good, just sound like other songs. That happens with those of us IN THE TOWN as well. And now the "inside cut" (those written with or by the artist, those that are the producer, inner circles, etc) are going to take presidence. If you have songs that are "Just as good as what is on the radio" it simply means you are not BETTER than what is on the radio.

You just have to shake it off and write more songs. If you actually want cuts, you will have to find artists to write them WITH. Just a fact of life you can either except or reject, but it doesn't change that it is a fact.

Good luck.
MAB