JPF Home Page

This is probably a very weird question, but here goes:

When you are recording, and you sing your song, especially one that evokes emotion from you, do you find that listening to the song later is a much different experience.

For instance, when you were singing a certain passage that seemed brilliant as you were singing it, did listening to it later disappoint you?

I am not talking about being disappointed about one's singing or musicianship. Let's leave that possibility out. This has to do with emotion altering one's perception.

Jean, I find the reverse to be the case, more often than not. I won't feel particularly good about what I sung, or how I sung it, when I do it, but I'll feel that emotional connection when I hear it. (And if I don't, I'll just record it again.)

Joe

Jean, since I found I could act out the emotion phrases is those kinds of songs, I am able to be in more control of the emotional parts, which later has me feeling them more than the moments at the mic. The feeling is there of course at recording time, but not to the point of tears, or depression thoughts, or any number of symptoms I could have had if I had not kept my eye on the ball.

The knowledge of emotion has to be there when recording that type of vocal, but it's effects on me later is much stronger, having the leisure of losing control. Doing a vocal to me is a professional job. It must endure listen after listen and be heartfelt and sincere. ON stage however, is the place when I can let down my guard a bit, for the physical comes in to play, as part of the performance. It's still acting, (with real emotions), but with less rules since communication is instant and with a dual purpose of that performance. I hope that makes sense, in the same way I'm understanding your question, and the way I go about singing now.

Case in point, my dad's tribute song http://soundclick.com/share?songid=2550315 When I hear it now, it brings me to points of more emotions than when I recorded it. I was just pleased at that time that I phrased the lines to have the most meaning communicated. Now I'm hit with all the emotions as I listen. I did that with Scott's song about his wife, (Still Making It Up As We Go). http://soundclick.com/share?songid=5993146 Technique singing at the time with knowledge of the feelings, then feeling the results of that technique later, experiencing the emotions the song communicates.

John

Hi Jean

Lots of good questions & discussion lately started by you thanks!

I am NEVER disappointed by my emotion on a playback. My abilities and most of my existence is based on emotions. I feel everything I do musically and singing is an extra "better pay attention to that kinda thing" lol

What disappoints me most is not sounding RIGHT for the song.
That blend of you fitting perfectly with it. Or anybody you can find for that matter.
It has to sound cool and feel right,natural and convey the song.
The right key or whatever it takes to compliment the vocal.

The things that help this is either a great style of singing that matches a tune.
And then of course PITCH! and dynamics, power and softness. Or of course both.

If I have doubts on a playback the first one is "What's wrong with my song"?
Why can't I sing it even decently?

1- I thought my melodies and phrasings were real solid on this BUT.... Maybe it's not the most singable line...

2- I suck, It needs a different vocalist, I hope they match my emotion, they don't always do that. Even good singers. They can sound forced or out of place and unconvincing.

3- See number#2 again

Jean:

That's not a weird question at all. Very often, a song being recorded will sound really good through my headphones. Upon playback (I often move the song from player to player 'cause they all have slightly different sounds) I sometimes find the song just has to be re-cut. I don't record using tracks. Each session is live. You bet, it can be a real drag but if you are striving for quality, keep recording no matter how many cuts it takes.

Good question. Thanks for asking.

What I am trying to get it is not so much that the emotion is expressed through the singing of it but that the singer is feeling it and that feeling adds another dimension that is not apparent when listening to it.

I think it happens to a lot of listeners when a song is emotionally moving to them. They may think it's the greatest song in the world and maybe it's not that great but their own emotion is enhancing their perception of it.

Let's assume that the song was done really well - very expressively done and listeners respond to it, but when the singer just listens to a recording of it, no matter how well done it was, suddenly the song doesn't sound as fantastic as it felt while singing it.

LOL, maybe that only happens to me. Endorphin rush or something.

First, I think composers are a certain kind of listeners. We listen critically for very small things and changes, always with an analysts perspective.

So I rarely get to enjoy my own songs, ever!

Allthough I practice the songs before I record, and get a certain feel about them, recording is most often a scary moment where the song is fixed for the first time. That impression is really hard to alter (for yourself), so I almost never feel to good when recording.

It's like a downhill race, always feeling on edge. But it's necessary, as if I'd record too much in a comfort zone, I wouldn't be able to capture the necessary emotion.

So for me, the first recording is connected with unease, nervousness and insecurity. I depend very much on others to evaluate the recording, as Im always analyzing and looking for small things to improove.

Therefore I never really gets dissapointed, because I was never really happy in the first place. But quite often after listening to the recording after a while, it alters my perception of what the good and bad parts were.

Sometimes they switch place, and if hvae worked fast and got a more elaborate demo, Im in a situation where I feel I went the wrong way with the arrangement, trying to enhance the wrong parts of the song.

A composers job is not easy. Like someone once said, if you feel good about songwriting, you are probably doing it wrong!

IMO good singers have to be good actors as well..... they can turn emotions on and off like a tap to suit the mood of the song and occasion despite how they may actually feel at the time.

I have had to sing happy upbeat songs just after having very bad news about a loved one and often sing sad songs when feeling happy. Being convincing and in character is all part of the business.

That's a great comment, Big Jim. I've found this to be the hardest part, ever! I need at least a day in between recording sad songs and happy songs, to be able to recover my mood.. hurraa for amateur recording at home :-)

I agree with Jim above: Good singers are good actors!

That is the number one reason that I don't like performing as a lead vocalist live. I feel very uncomfortable pretending I'm someone or feeling something I'm not. It just seems dishonest to me. There are a lot of songs I've written that I can perform in the studio but virtually never perform live, or are very "flat" sounding live. In the studio, I feel I am more free to be myself. Also, in the studio (my own studio, no dollar clock running), if I am not feeling it that day, I just don't do it and wait until a time where I am feeling it. You don't have that option for live performances, at least not if you plan to have a successful career.

And then sometimes I am very happy with the end recorded result but feel a little embarrassed letting others hear it, especially if I was portraying an emotion I rarely, if ever, normally feel or sometimes even agree with (where I basically assumed a role). "Mr. Henderson, We Meet Again" is a recent example I recorded where I tried to assume the role of the bad guy in a movie I had just seen. My observation is that most people don't look at singing as acting and assume anything you sing about is what you honestly feel and believe. But I often try to put myself in other's shoes and try to feel what I think they might be feeling. Maybe because if I only wrote about what I truly believe and feel my songs would be too logical, clinical, and boring as hell. I'd rarely, if ever, write a love song (I don't write too many as it is).

"You're Not Good Enough," in my video below, is another example where I tried to assume the role of a father meeting his daughter's boyfriend, whom he doesn't like, at the front door. I've never been married and never had kids, so this is a stretch for me. Of course, maybe that is why my stuff is usually labeled as "quirky," because I may be stretching too far and am not convincing enough.

This may also be why I tend to do a lot of humorous or sarcastic songs. I find it easier to get into those moods.

Au contraire. I love pretending to be someone that I'm not. Yes, as Big Jim said, it's acting. But for me, I have a stage persona and a different name to go with it. I have friends who have been very critical of the stage persona I've created. They can't get past the fact that it's acting and that I've never really done the things I've sang about as my "alter ego" - as one DJ put it.
As far as Jean's question goes, I'm usually dealing with humor - but there's still emotions involved. After listening to a recording, I've thought many a time that I should have been more loose with the attitude I had while recording. Like John,I put my business face on when I enter the studio - when it really would help me to loosen up. When I performed live, I consistantly was able to win audiences - as an entertainer. So I find that my live performance seems to surpass my work in the studio - which is probably why most comedians record live performances. Although I'm not a comedian, novelty is similar to comedy in that many of the elements are the same. So I do experience some disappointment in most of my recordings whereas as I find more satisfaction after live performances.

HiDee Mz Jeannie!

Since I've rarely sung-live, I've yet to really decide an answer to your question. (Have found on a few REALLY Sad Ones I can't even DARE sing-'em-live, or I'll tear-up.)

I've always enjoyed Studio-Singing, since it gives me LOTS of Control over what's just happened. Some, when Listened-to-Later, yeah...I KNOW I could've done better.."Singing-Wise", since I recorded with a Serious Head-Cold more'n' once. Some..it's the Music that's "off"... But most-often, I'm at least "Content" with The Content/It's the Best that Could've been Done..under Whatever The Circumstances.

When I have done the Live Bit, I find it's easy to Embellish a Bit & make it more Audience-Worthy. (Having rehearsed about 3 Months so I REMEMBER the Lyrics..I Hope!) You get a LOT More Feedback from an Audience..& it's MUCH more-direct. (I find Humor to be LOTS "Safer" to deliver than "Serious"..as far as my Feedback goes from an Audience.) I'm not too hung-up on "Brilliant"...it's far more-important to Have Entertained-Well (& that All have Enjoyed the Get-Together).

Thanks for the Inquiry, M'LadyChum!
Big Hugs,
Stan

What goes into the song doesn't always come out of the song.

My answer to Jean's questions is yes, all around. I've given heartfelt performances that later left me wondering what I thought I was putting across. And I've sometimes realized later that performances were better than I thought.

When I'm "in the zone" I just let it all fly. When I hear it again some other day, it doesn't always sound like I thought it did.

This reminds me of what I tell people who drink or get high when they perform: just because you FEEL amazing doesn't make you SOUND amazing. It's everyone else's perceptions that you have to chase down and impress.

Thanks, Mark. I was starting to wonder if it were just me.

Personally, I feel I sing best when I'm singing a song that I can sing with integrity. So I write songs that are truthful to me and that allows me to put genuine emotion in a song. And I would only attempt to cover songs I relate to and that are also true to me. I feel that puts me "inside" the song and in total control, whereas when I try and sing songs that I don't really relate to and that I can't sing with integrity, then I kind of feel like I'm lying, and no matter how much effort I put in, it never sounds right.

I've heard it said that, technically, the song I Dreamed The Dream is sung better by "Professional" singers like Elaine Page, but to me, the Susan Boyle is in a different league because, along with the fact she sings is very well, she sings it with genuine, authentic emotion.

"I had a dream my life would be. So different from this hell I'm living. So different now from what it seemed. Now life has killed the dream I dreamed."

Elaine Page has not earned the right to sing that lyric, you have to have some kind of lousy life to sing such a lyric, and that's where the power of Susan Boyle's performance of this song in particular comes from - the fact it's obviously a reflection of her life.

I think that's a big X-factor a lot of people overlook, it's not something you can always put your finger on, but sometimes you can just tell a singer is being an actor, and that kind of kills it, for me at least.

Lucian

"just being an actor"....

Them's fightin' words!

Okay, not really...but you gave me an opening to mention something that's been on my mind for awhile now.

I spent years acting, and I've always tried to bring that same sensibility to every song I sing...because I believe a voice that sings a song has to be "in character" for that song. You can't just "be you" all the time, in every song. It's not always "you" when you sing four sets of songs at a bar from 9pm to 1am. In fact, the bands that have that one guy or gal who always sounds the same...are kinda lame.

But I agree about not wanting to ever sound phony. thing is, there are a lot of different personalities wrapped inside all of us, and it's good to invite them all out to play in different types of songs.

When you watch your favorite movie, you probably have fallen under the spell of a good actor, and "fake" doesn't spring to mind. I also think when a great singer sings a song with a lot of feeling, it's not necessarily that the singer is singing their own absolute truth, but simply that they can bring a variety of different feelings and sensibilities into their performance, because they are, well, good actors. That's the craft, to create a willing suspension of disbelief, made easy by a great interpreter.

A good actor gets inside the mind of the character, and reacts to the same stimulus with the same motivations that drive whoever they are playing. It's difficult, and good performances feel real, not fake. The many voices of Paul McCartney have propelled a lot of different songs into our collective consciousness due to his "good acting" techniques as a vocal interpreter.

So, I agree with you Lucian that a performance that sounds unconvincing or phony is a mark against it...but I also think that "being an actor" is an essential skill for a good vocalist. The truth doesn't have to be lived through in order to be conveyed in a song.

Well said, Mark. This does tie into my question. I have had to sing songs I didn't really like but the listeners couldn't really tell.

How about when you are composing? If there is a passage that evokes emotion from you when you are singing what you just wrote, do you ever listen to it later and realize that the emotion you experienced at the time was part of what made you think that particular passage was good. And then perhaps later, you realized that particular passage needs to be re-written because when the emotion is removed it cannot stand alone?

Yes again, in my case.

Some of those I just leave them as they are and call them "my" songs. Others I rewrite until they can stand on their own.

Still, I try to be careful about judging its ability/non-ability to stand alone...those emotional passages can evoke a lot of different opinions...sometimes the raw emotion is more powerful and valuable than popular opinion. Some songs sell, and some songs just need to exist whether they're salable or not.

In my case, most of the songs that I write are meant to be sung by others, so I usually reevaluate them.

Mark/Jean, I was just giving my opinion about my own personal tastes. Singing sets of different people's songs is not something I have ever done or ever intend to do, so different sets of rules apply to that, and, of course, you vary in your mood or motivation on any given days and have to "act" somewhat, just as I often had to do in my teaching days. But great actors pick the roles to play that suits them the best. Tom Cruise was great in Top Gun. Robert De Niro was great in Raging Bull. Both would have been terrible the other way around.

Same rules apply for singers. It's important to know who you are as a person and as a singer, and exploit your strengths and avoid your weaknesses. I don't write soppy love songs 'cos I aint never told no girl I love her... (apart from one time but that didn't count 'cos she knew I was just messing around) so how could I sing a soppy love song with that being the case? It would be ridiculous! Now, a soppy love song about my cats, I could do that great!

Lucian

Lucian, everyone has their own opinion and is entitled to it.

Hi Jean,

To make a comparison to film again, sometimes I "method act" my vocals, other times I sing them "stone cold", paying only attention to surface details, edit them together from the "phrase" level.

I don't believe a singer must sing a vocal "connected" emotionally at all, but must simply put all the necessary "surface" components into that vocal, which can ultimately sound "emotional" to the listener, when all is said and done.

On the other hand, "method acting" a vocal, ie finding that "point of connection" with the lyrical material and altering ones mood can serve to enhance and direct one into a more emotive performance.

When I get lost in "method acting" a vocal, I do certainly feel disappointed later when listening. I already had the catharsis, the peak experience, no further "listening" can seem to measure up to the act of "singing from the point of connection." In fact, if I had no "seer" in my head as I recorded, my emotional performance may not translate at all. Some objectivity needs to always be there, for me.

I ultimately believe that as long as I "know" HOW I want something to sound, and can get my vocal chords to do precisely that, I don't need to connect up during the actual singing at all, imo, and sometimes, depending on the song, doing so can actually be a hinderance, especially if the song has plenty of emotions, right there on the surface, one always runs the danger of a sappy performance.

It's like Sir Lawrence Olivier's comment to Dustin Hoffman, after Hoffman had been "method acting" by staying up all night, jogging frantically, for a scene from "Marathon Man" and then Olivier sees Hoffman stumble, disheveled onto the set and says to Dustin, "dear boy, why not try acting?"

Mike

Maybe that was just Sir Lawrence's way of rehearsing for the torture scene.

Larry a closet method actor?

Lucian has a point that there are lots of people who tend to do mainly originals because it was written by/for them and is in their character. Any covers they sing must be heartfelt and not sound phony.

There are loads of pro singers who can sing just about anything in character without sounding phony. Most stage musical singers and any pro cover artist HAVE to sound convincing for every song every time they perform.

Sometimes we who perform for a living either live or in a studio have to sing what is expected and what we are "paid for" whether we like the song or not.

Any pro actor will play the part convincingly whether they like the part or not.

Guys, I know it must be phrased awkwardly. I told you it was a weird question.
This is about your emotion altering your perception. I have added another part to it, hopefully to make it clearer.

I am starting to think that this only happens to Mark and me, LOL.






Here is an add on:

Hi Jean.

There has been a few of my own that have elicited a emotional response when sung. These 'gems' I find still ring/sing true even later, at time years later when I sing them again.

To answer your question though I would say no. Those line/hooks still envoke the same response with me no matter the time frame.

Hope this helps.

Douglas

Jean, the thing is, with an emotional passage...how you feel when you sing it doesn't mean doodly-squat--hey, I love saying doodly-squat!...sorry. Anyway, it doesn't mean doodly-squat to the listener...unless you make the listener feel the same way.

I've written songs for dead loved ones, and they're hard to sing. Sometimes I lose it a little, and a part of me thinks, well, that was a little embarrassing, but at least I put across some truly deep feeling there.

Sure, then I listen later...yikes...it actually kinda sucked!

Sometimes you need to professionally articulate what you feel, rather than just feel it. you sure don't want people saying, "Well, I guess ya had ta be there..."

This is why I brought up acting. An actor is concerned not only with the performance, but with the net effect of the performance...all that work of finding the character and portraying it needs to put something across that affects the audience. Singers and players need to do the same thing when performing the emotional stuff. Well, I think so anyway.

Jean,

Here:

When I get lost in "method acting" a vocal, I do certainly feel disappointed later when listening. I already had the catharsis, the peak experience, no further "listening" can seem to measure up to the act of "singing from the point of connection." In fact, if I had no "seer" in my head as I recorded, my emotional performance may not translate at all. Some objectivity needs to always be there, for me.

I thought that clearly answered your question. When I enter into a song and allow the emotional connection, no later listening is ever as good.

Mike

I would take it a step to the side and compare it to writing short stories and THEN casting yourself in whatever role..storyteller/character ect.

If you are writing from personal experience it happens more(I would think)...it does for me anyway.If I am singing something that resonates with me,it always "feels" stronger than it comes across to my ears later.

If I write from imagination(inventing characters and situations),I dont really notice any difference.

I could take two songs,the first being very personal about a house I lived in and wrote about missing it and all that transpired there.Every single time I play and sing it,it never fails to "feel" very powerful for me even now,19 years later.

The other song about two hard luck fictional characters can be very daunting to get behind sometimes.

The first comes easy and really has no elements of "acting",the second NEEDS some acting to give it life when performed.

Seeeewwww.....YES,I get that same disparity,but only with the truly personal ones.

I would sum it up with one word...EMPATHY.
If the singer feels empathy with the song and the listener/audience feels the same empathy then the whole thing clicks. If there is no empathy then the whole thing can come across as false or staged.

EXAMPLE. I watched the MJ tribute concert the other day. I did not feel much empathy with any of the songs, artists or speakers and felt the whole thing was stage managed, cheesy and a bit OTT. Some of the performances supposedly from so called "stars" were woeful, especially Mariah Carey. Melodically she was all over the place and emotionally I felt nothing special eminated from her performance. She might have been sincere with her oversinging but it came across as falsely going through the motions and did nothing for me.

Hi Jean,

I mainly write my own lyrics and melody and the only thing I feel bad about it is hearing my own voice. Sometimes I laugh to myself and wonder what will demo companies think of my voice everytime they hear version of my rough voice. I really need vocal lesson for real. So this is what I have to deal with when it comes to disappointment but when I begin to love my lyrics and it feels good, I beging to later feel emotionally attached to its words rather than what I hear. If I do a terrible job singing it, I repeat it all over again.

The handiest thing I got is an application called Voice transformer in my Iphone and it only cost a dollar to download it when you have an iphone. I can now sing anywhere I go and listen to it anytime.

Good luck Cheers

Jean:

I do not try to sing what I write, and I have been told by eveyone from my mother on down that I can't sing and have the equivalent of "two left feet" on that one. I have occasionally performed my work as spoken word at open mikes, and am now in the process of seeking a booking at a local coffee shop. But when I go out to hear music there are certain songs that will grab me in certain way and others to which I am indifferent. I think it all depends on what the listener is seeking, ranging from something that relates to their experiences at present or past, all the way to seeking something with a good dance beat.

Now I'll pick your brain a bit. Do you recall a song that was inspired by one going to hear a certain performer that became a huge hit many years back? If you can't, I shall tell you in future post what it was.

Killing Me Softly?

This is starting to veer off topic. Here is the topic again, to save scrolling time:

Used to be inspired by Michael Jackson's songs and poems! might be cheesy, so far that's all I remember. :O

Jean,



I think it is a very interesting and difficult question, that you are posing.

When I read this, your question are implying at least two things.

1. That composing for a lyric always happens on a line by line basis OR that lines in a lyric emotionally can be isolated one by one.
2. That sections of a lyric can stand alone without emotion.

To me this suggests that composing for a lyric is a completely rational and linear process.

Rather for me, songwriting is about containing complexity. In practice this could mean, even if Im working on a lyric line by line, that I accept music for lines or parts of the lyric to go astray. Either the music not being emotionally what I would exactly want, or I think the lyric would need, but in stead a part that I don't really understand. When I come up with something like that (and I do frequently), I do not use my right brain to evaluate it as a 'nono' in the creative process, but in stead leave it, to see where it takes me and the lyric.

If I then think of your question, I would certainly feel something when doing that, but it is not always a feeling that this is good. It's a variety of feelings, and perhaps even more a sense of couriosity. I want to see where this takes me.

Sting one time said that composing is about going places you haven't been before, trying new things.

So, your question is really difficult. For we might not be conscious of what we are doing when we compose. Sure we might select an interval, scale or chord sequence, or make other choices based on logic..

This logic could be:
- ahh, this lyric reminds me of a song - let's start this off with a minor third, like in "Greensleeves". That might let the listener make an unconscious association.
- Ohh, this is sad. But not sad-sad, so let me try out a melody or chord sequence in the Dorian mode.
- This is sooo pop. Let me try a doo-wop chord progression for this (C-Am-F-G). Hell, it worked for Leona Lewis in "Bleeding love", recently.
- Hmm, this lyric is very spiritual for me. Let's try out the key for that. Hmm the classical composer disagree witch one.. should it be C major or B major.. Let's try B.

Also there are several theories about which emotions and perceptions the particular keys and chords evoke. And you can attribute aestaetic theory too, like Goethe's ideas of colors (Alanis Morisette is a keen believer in this), or should we go with Wittgensteins ideas on colors.. hm what to do, what to do...

HEY, here it is, now WHAT did I play?

Sorry, Im babbling. But then again, this is a 'babble' subject. Point is, all of music theory still needs personal interpretations (I feel mixolydian as a relaxing scale!). Lyrics do too.

And if a composer will do music, this can't be done without conscious and/or unconscious interpretations. And as emotion IS a part of the brain (BIG mistake to split heart and mind), logic intertwines with irrational complexities.

Therefore you really can't compose for a lyric, line by line. Well, you can think so and we do try, but either way the emotion of the unity is what people responds to. Therefore lines with strange chords and melodies that you don't understand, can still be part of a great song.

Also a lyric without emotional interpretation is just a collection of sequenced letters in a pattern - it doesn't MEAN anything to anyone. So IMO words cannot stand alone without emotional interpretaion.

Therefore your question, Jean, is an impossible one. On the surface it looks completely rational and logical, but that is excactly the false premises (or promises) in it. :-)

Gee, Magne,

I can't find anywhere in my questions or statements where I implied anything.

I was asking if others had an experience like that.

Some had. Some did not seem to understand the question, perhaps because it was not phrased in a way that made it clear to them, or perhaps because they may have never had an experience like that. Some understood the question and had not had that experience.

Aside from the above, You have made some statements about the song writing process which may elicit some interesting discussions. I would enjoy seeing you post some of them as separate topics in a different thread because I would love to respond to them.

You cant ask a question without implying something, Jean. Im not bashing you, I just carved out a spot for me to put in my own thoughts, thats all :-)

It's all done in good spirit, having a little fun, I hope that comes across..

I think this is what Jean is getting at.

Sometimes we feel things very deeply when we perform them. But later, we realize that those feelings didn't translate so well in the recording. We FELT it personally, but it doesn't come through to the audience with the same emotional weight.

It happens to me a lot. As a matter of fact, I hear it all the time in other people's stuff too. Sometimes they'll mention how much the song meant to them when they recorded it...and when I hear it, I sometimes think..."hmm, really?..."

I do not think we have veered off topic. I think it is all about learning how to give a good performance and controlling emotions rather than let emotions get the better of us. Sometimes it is only when we hear the playback do we realise that the performance was not as good as we thought whilst recording. It is possible that the emotional thing is actually the cause of a bad performance rather than a reason for a good one. When a song or part of a song is particularly emotional we can put too much into it and this results in oversinging A BIT LIKE AND AS BAD AS OVERACTING.

Oversinging is when the volume is raised and we belt out the song usually whilst trying to stress the important part of the song. This tends not to work and we just strain our voice.
We are all capable of expressing emotions in a subtle way when speaking. You do not have to yell to let someone know you are angry. The same applies to singing. Subtle inflections and control are enough rather than an uncontrolled blast out.
Another part of oversinging is when our voice starts to quiver and shake during an especially emotional song or when we are nervous. This is also normally not a good thing.

There are people who I would describe as "monochrome" singers in as much as they might be able to sing in tune but there is no light, shade, emotion or inflection in their voices. Singing is not just about hitting the right notes and keeping in time. It is about evoking emotions and getting empathy from other people who may be listening. This has to be done in a subtle and controlled manner. No amount of extreme emotion will help produce a better performance.

Here are a couple of links that explain oversinging and some tips to help aspiring singers to give better performance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversinging

http://www.jazzboulevard.com/bksample.html

Jim.

What is the topic?

Failing to put in a decent performance because you are too emotional about the song!

Jean, maybe you should elaborate on just what you found disappointing after you thought at first it was brilliant. What was "it"? The singing? The lyric? The song?

Hi Jean,

Sorry to take you "off topic" again, but having witnessed how this thread has progressed, I must say, I'm dying to know...what grade of school do you teach? Are you now on vacation, by any chance?

Mike

Ah, the voice of reason! Thanks, Mark. Guess I should have done that in the first place but it was easier (I thought) to write the question.

OK, Here goes:

This happened to me just recently. I rarely write secular music but I was doing that this time.

Normally I compose at the computer, working from lyrics. I sing the words quietly to myself to find the melody and then enter in the notes and words. I test the song to see if it's singable. Then I work on the chords and harmonies later. This has been working very well for me for several years.

For some reason, it just wasn't working for me this time. So I decided to try working from chord progressions like I used to do many years ago. So I took my guitar and the lyrics and went at it.

I finally came up with something workable but it still wasn't quite meshing. So I thought what if I sang it with conviction as if I were performing in front of an audience. The conviction was easy to call up as I was very frustrated and passionate about making the thing work. So I started working on it that way, and made a few changes. I must say I got myself pretty worked up. And after a while, "Eureka!" That's it. Elated, I sang it several times more, each time more excitedly and passionately. It seemed perfect!

I went back to the computer and began notating it and added the words and chords. I took a little break and then went back to listen to it again as I sang it silently to myself. By this time, of course, I had calmed down completely. My bubble burst. I didn't really have it after all. It was close but no cigar.

After listening to it some more and analyzing it, I discovered I needed to make some major lyrical changes and some minor melody adjustments. Finally the thing fell into place. The words and melody expressed more of what I wanted to convey. And the song sings very well now, passionately or otherwise. LOL, at least I think it does.

I sang it for my daughter (22) and asked her what she thought. She said it wasn't Spinal Tap but it was pretty good. (I don't write the kind of music she likes.)

So that made me wonder why I had been so convinced that the song had accomplished what I wanted it to do. It wasn't just wishful thinking. After a while I realize that it was the emotion that affected my perception on this particular occasion. Later, recalling the emotion that I had been feeling, I was able to bring it out more with the lyrics and the music.

Perhaps it had happened to me before and I just didn't notice it because the song happened to work out. Anyway, I wondered if that happened to others too.

LOL! And isn't that what we all want--to write the perfect Spinal Tap song?


This happens in so many ways...

I fall in love with every song I write. I'm such a tart. But really, every song feels like a new romance, and I usually love them to bits when they first get written. And so many times I look back and wonder why I thought that miserable thing was lovable.

And recording, I've gone to bed all excited about the great take I just recorded...and in the cold light of morning, oh boy, it's coyote ugly. I have permanent chew marks on my arms.

This whole topic is why I put songs up for critique...I've learned to trust myself just a little less, and complete strangers just a little more.

What's up with that?

But you know, we need to have those emotions front and center when we write...otherwise it all ends up too sterile and logical. Those same emotions that fool us also give us our best stuff.

Jean:

You've posed an interesting and complex question. Emotions, euphoria... or just plain "buck fever" can enter the songwriting equation during the early phases. Like Mark, every song I create seems to become one of my children. While writing and recording, sometimes I think I've created a masterpiece... but by the following morning, when I listen to my latest stroke of genius... sometimes I just have to walk away, muttering to myself, "What was I thinking?" (Thankfully, it is not always that way.)

I also believe that a song performed without the necessary emotional emphasis is usually doomed to failure. Naturally, that is a variable element depending upon too many factors to list.

Regards,

Dave Rice

http://www.showcaseyourmusic.com/DaveRice

The scenario Jean mentions happens all the time. Often whilst recording a song that has been worked and re worked I suddenly realize that it needs changes. Sometimes the melody or maybe chords just does not sit right or sometimes the tempo needs altering sometimes a line just does not seem to fit or sounds weak. Maybe it would sound better with a guitar rather than piano. Sometimes the chorus does not suit or is too similar to the verse. Sometimes it may need a bridge, a lift, a key change, sometimes ............. sometimes..... the list can be endless. All to often these things only become apparent when the rough demo has been done and we are in the studio recording the final take.

Another weird thing is performance. Sometimes what you think is a pretty good performance turns out to be weak when you hear it back and other times what you think is a weak performance turns out to be pretty good. Sometimes a mistake can actually improve the song and take it into another direction.

Dave has made some great points and observations. The masterpiece can sometimes suck and the crock of crap turns into a masterpiece. That is another weird regular happening. The band Slade who recorded best selling multi million Christmas song "Merry Christmas Everybody" admit it was a bit of a joke and accident when it was written as the "Merry Christmas" hook was actually just put in for a laugh whilst writing other lyrics about a completely different topic. This song was done and dusted in a few minutes and remains one of the top Christmas songs ever netting them millions in earnings. It is re-released every year and sells another few million.
Sometimes songs that take a huge time to write and record are only worthy of the bin whilst others that come together in only a few minutes turn out pretty good.

I remember recording one time whilst singing with a head cold.....we got through tons of stuff and all of it turned out pretty good. Another time when I felt great we got through very little and what we recorded sucked...even more than usual.

Thanks, guys! Nice to know it happens to others too.

I was watching a documentary a few days ago about a guitarist who had suffered a brain hemorrhage and fought his way back from a vegetative state.

When he began to play again he was frustrated. He had managed to play technically very well again but he was unable to connect emotionally to his music. In the video, you could hear him telling the people who congratulated him, "but I couldn't FEEL it." Yet, he was playing very well and the audience was connecting just fine.

After watching the video, it occurred to me that what he was experiencing was exactly what I was talking about. Emotions affecting our perception of reality.