Dave Mallett
Thomas Senor
I've noticed the name 'Dave Mallett' on the list of a few folks who
responded to the "Who Exemplifies Contemporary Folk" thread. I'm
unfamiliar with Mr. Mallett and I was hoping that some of you could help
me out by telling me something about him and comparing him with others.
Thanks.
--
Tom Senor
Fayetteville, Arkansas
Fairbankss
Tom,
I first heard Dave Mallett in concert about two years ago and have been
a fan ever since.
I don't know much about his past, but I have one of his albums titled
"Inches and Miles 1977-1980", so I gather he's been around for some time.
My favorite Mallett album is "This Town", which came out in 1993 on
Vanguard. On this album he's joined by Nanci Griffith, Michael Johnson, Hal
Ketchum, and Kathy Mattea . He was also the writer or co-writer of all the
songs on the album.
If you get the chance to see him perform you won't be sorry.
Scott
Christin Keck
Thomas Senor wrote:
> I've noticed the name 'Dave Mallett' on the list of a few folks who
> responded to the "Who Exemplifies Contemporary Folk" thread. I'm
> unfamiliar with Mr. Mallett and I was hoping that some of you could help
> me out by telling me something about him and comparing him with others.
> Thanks.
>
>
Dave Mallett is one of the finest singer/songwriters alive today. He has
more than 5 albums out, (I believe they are all available) and I have 3 of
those. His songs range from very country-ish, to deeply thoughtful and
poignant, and very folk-ey. He is, I have heard, from Maine, but records in
Nashville; his latest album is called "This Town" and is on the Vanguard
label. It has some serious talent supporting his deep, clear voice. Kathy
Mattea, Nanci Griffith, Michael Johnson, Hal Ketchum and Stuart Duncan appear
on various cuts.
A lot of people have recorded Mallett's songs--the Irish singer Dolores Keane
does a version of "Summer of My Dreams" on her crossover album, Solid Ground,
and with her voice and his lyrics, the performance can almost always bring
tears to my eyes. There are lyrics he has written which can pierce your
heart.
Although I've found some of his earlier work a bit uneven, the flashes of
utter brilliance are worth listening for. He does his best work when he's
not preaching or being overproduced.
I don't think you'd be disappointed if you saw him in concert, and I doubt
that you will dislike his latest album, but I will caution you against some
earlier albums--they are still very good, but compared to later works, seem
thin.
Sample lyrics from This Town:
(From "Autumn")
"Autumn comes on like a thief
She needs your comfort in her grief
You walk with her in disbelief
And she dies there in your arms;
You fear her for the strength she holds
But you love hger for the way she folds
The blanket of the years around you
Soft with her sisters' charms"
(From "Pray for Rain")
Long rainy nights I lie here
Wide awake and thinking,
Of all the people I have known,
I see their faces
Though their names are all forgotten
And I don't feel so all alone,
Lately more and more I pray for rain
And I go back again
To the good friends I recall
Every time there comes a little storm
When it rains it pours
And more and more I pray for rain..."
There are many good songs on this album. I say get it and see for yourself.
--
__________________
)__D___o_0_0_o_0_0_)
Christin Keck, Whistleblower
http://www.geocities.com/soho/studios/2088/
Jim Spinelli
> I've noticed the name 'Dave Mallett' on the list of a few folks who
> responded to the "Who Exemplifies Contemporary Folk" thread. I'm
unfamiliar with Mr. Mallett
> Fayetteville, Arkansas
David Mallet wrote "The Garden Song" - that's probably his most famous tune
- Inch by inch, row by row - I first discovered him through picking up his
first album (vinyl) in a discount record bin because it was called
"Pennsylvania Sunrise" and I'm originally from there. Paul Stookey of
Peter, Paul & Mary produced his early recordings, I don't know if he still
does.
I've seen him play at various festivals and in one small venue and found
him to be an exceptional live performer. He puts tremendous emotion into
his music.
So there you go - a hearty endorsement. Lot's of good tunes..
Jim spin...@island.net
Nanaimo, BC
Canada
MIKE REGENSTREIF
In article <3488E7AC...@concentric.net>, Christin Keck <she...@concentric.net> writes:
>
>
>Thomas Senor wrote:
>
>> I've noticed the name 'Dave Mallett' on the list of a few folks who
>> responded to the "Who Exemplifies Contemporary Folk" thread. I'm
>> me out by telling me something about him and comparing him with others.
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>
>Dave Mallett is one of the finest singer/songwriters alive today. He has
>more than 5 albums out, (I believe they are all available) and I have 3 of
>those. His songs range from very country-ish, to deeply thoughtful and
>poignant, and very folk-ey. He is, I have heard, from Maine, but records in
>Nashville; his latest album is called "This Town" and is on the Vanguard
>label.
Actually, David has returned to Flying Fish Records (Rounder) which
recently released a new live album called PARALLEL LIVES.
David's first three LPs were recorded for Noel Paul Stookey's Neworld
Media label and have not been rereleased on CD although a compilation of tracks
from those albums was released as INCHES & MILES (Flying Fish).
Mike Regenstreif
"Folk Roots/Folk Branches" on CKUT in Montreal
mre...@vax2.concordia.ca
Frank Fagone
See the David Mallett website at http://www.Bicoastal.com/dmallett
This lists his tour schedule and CD's.
His latest is "Parallel Lives," Flying Fish CD FF670, available through
Rounder Records. Excellent CD, recorded live in a small folk club
setting. (The Rounder web site is www.rounder.com.)
I would also recommend "Inches and Miles, 1977-1980," Flying Fish 110.
This has most of his early work. The latest, Parallel Lives, returns to
this pre-Nashville style.
--
Frank Fagone
fra...@magpage.com
Timothy Jaques
He wrote The Ballad of The St. Ann's Reel, which I believe is on
Pennsylvania Sunset.
--
Timothy Jaques tja...@netcom.ca
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
"Common sense is that set of prejudices we attain by the age of eighteen."
Thomas Senor wrote in message ...
Chad Haatvedt
Thomas Senor wrote:
>
> I've noticed the name 'Dave Mallett' on the list of a few folks who
> responded to the "Who Exemplifies Contemporary Folk" thread. I'm
> unfamiliar with Mr. Mallett and I was hoping that some of you could help
> me out by telling me something about him and comparing him with others.
Dave Mallet has been around for a long time. His most recent CD is
titled Parallel Lives, and is a live collection of some of his classics,
plus a couple new songs. Nice listening. The album prior to this one
is titled In the Falling Dark. This is Mallet at his best, which in not
meant to slight his other works. If I had to pick only one of his CD's,
I would go for Inches and Miles, just because it covers such a spectrum
of his music and has so many of his songs (I don't have it in front of
me, but I think there are about 18 songs on it.
Anyway, give him a listen. Oh, and thanks for bringing him up in a
positng. He should get more attenion in this group.
Chad
********** ************ *************
NOTE: to reply, be sure you delete the 'NOSPAM' from my address
********** ************ *************
Chad Haatvedt
e-mail fol...@uarcs.com
http://www.uarcs.com
John Fereira
In article <3488E7AC...@concentric.net>, Christin Keck <she...@concentric.net> wrote:
These are the kinds of threads that are predominantly the reason that I
read this group. I've discovered a lot of new artists when a discussion
like this comes up.
>Dave Mallett is one of the finest singer/songwriters alive today. He has
>more than 5 albums out, (I believe they are all available) and I have 3 of
>those. His songs range from very country-ish, to deeply thoughtful and
>poignant, and very folk-ey. He is, I have heard, from Maine, but records in
>Nashville; his latest album is called "This Town" and is on the Vanguard
>label. It has some serious talent supporting his deep, clear voice. Kathy
>Mattea, Nanci Griffith, Michael Johnson, Hal Ketchum and Stuart Duncan appear
>on various cuts.
>
>A lot of people have recorded Mallett's songs--the Irish singer Dolores Keane
>does a version of "Summer of My Dreams" on her crossover album, Solid Ground,
>and with her voice and his lyrics, the performance can almost always bring
>tears to my eyes. There are lyrics he has written which can pierce your
>heart.
When I see praises like this about a "singer/songwriters" lyrical genius I
often wonder "but what is his/her voice like". So what is Mallet's voice
like?
I thought I'd also comment on the Dolores Keane recommendation as I think
she's a wonderful vocalist that isn't discussed often enough. The "Solid
Ground" album is indeed quite good, especially the title cut with Davy
Spillane providing a really hot Uillean pipe solo that ends way too soon.
Those interested in hearing more might be interested in her new "Best of
Dolores Keane" album that was just released.
John Fereira
ja...@cornell.edu
Stop Unsolicited Commercial Email - Join CAUCE (http://www.cauce.org)
Support HR 1748, the anti-spam bill.
Mark E. Mallett
In article <66hh5i$o...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
John Fereira <ja...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>
>When I see praises like this about a "singer/songwriters" lyrical genius I
>often wonder "but what is his/her voice like". So what is Mallet's voice
>like?
A very rich, deep voice. Not sure that it really matters in a
folk singer anyway :-)
See him in concert if you get the chance, it's worth it.
-mm- (no relation that I know of)
ghost
>In article <66hh5i$o...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>John Fereira <ja...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>>When I see praises like this about a "singer/songwriters" lyrical genius I
>>often wonder "but what is his/her voice like". So what is Mallet's voice
>>like?
>A very rich, deep voice. Not sure that it really matters in a
>folk singer anyway :-)
He ain't Stan Rogers. He ain't Garnet Rogers either. However he does have
a baritone-ish voice, & doesn't cast it way up into the tenor realms like a
good country baritone (or good Canadian baritone) might. (Just for the
mixed-example record, I'd call Stan Rogers a bass casting his voice into
baritone, & Garnet Rogers a baritone who used to sing tenor but not so much
anymore). Mallett's voice is a little gritty, not very.
(As in, he's not Greg Brown *either*.) We're not describing gravy here anyway,
so what the heck. Sounds a little like Tom Rush, actually.
Maybe a lot like.
I wasn't leaping into the "what kind of singer-songwriter is Mallett"
because mainly I agree with what's been written so far. When he's writing
things like "The Last Time I Saw Annie" or "This Town" he's up there with
the best of them. But a lot of his stuff, over the years, has been filler
that I can't get too excited about. Probably a "best of" album,
or a live concert where even the filler gets a good delivery, is your best bet
for an introduction.
Mallett is a good example of a decent singer-songwriter with
intermittent flashes of genius (almost exactly what another review said).
I don't think having to make an album at very regular short intervals
is exactly the right recipe for such a singer-songwriter, but that's what
the market is pushing people to right now.
If it keeps pushing, & the people keep letting themselves get pushed,
Richard *Thompson* is going to come off looking like he has only
intermittent flashes of genius (yeah, that does mean I think large sections
of *his* last 2 <3 if you count "Industry"> are no more than examples of
"a genius stuck with his wheels spinning" ).
Thomas Senor
Thanks to everyone who replied to my initial question about Dave Mallett.
I appreciate the help.
Christin Keck
John Fereira wrote:
> These are the kinds of threads that are predominantly the reason that I
> read this group. I've discovered a lot of new artists when a discussion
> like this comes up.When I see praises like this about a "singer/songwriters" lyrical genius I
> often wonder "but what is his/her voice like". So what is Mallet's voice
> like?
>
Mallett's voice is a baritone, slightly reminiscent of Johnny Cash. Faint twang at times. It
can be mellow and smooth, sometimes plaintive, never harsh or grating. One of those "friendly"
voices you can listen to all day and not tire of. Plenty of color, plenty of character, not too
much perfection. When he sings softly and thoughtfully, he can bring tears to my eyes.
Christin Keck
ghost wrote:
> I don't think having to make an album at very regular short intervals
> is exactly the right recipe for such a singer-songwriter, but that's what
> the market is pushing people to right now.
>
> If it keeps pushing, & the people keep letting themselves get pushed,
> Richard *Thompson* is going to come off looking like he has only
> intermittent flashes of genius (yeah, that does mean I think large sections
> of *his* last 2 <3 if you count "Industry"> are no more than examples of
> "a genius stuck with his wheels spinning" ).
You know, you've said something very worthwhile here. You're absolutely right! I
really don't know enough about Mallett's history to say with any conviction whether
or not he was "pushed" into recording so many albums, but there's certainly a case
for that point of view. I am very reluctant to call anything by a songwriter as
good as he "filler," but a lot of what I heard on some of his earlier albums sounds
exactly like that's what it is. As with so many other songwriters. There are
certified geniuses around, for sure, but most are not--and the result is an ocean
of songs, with tiny islands of worthwhile songs interspersed. Sometimes it's
tiresome wading thru that ocean in search of the satisfaction a truly great song
gives.
You've made a great point.
John Fereira
In article <66hmdc$bva$1...@pyrite.mv.net>, m...@mv.mv.com (Mark E. Mallett) wrote:
>In article <66hh5i$o...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>John Fereira <ja...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>>often wonder "but what is his/her voice like". So what is Mallet's voice
>>like?
>
>folk singer anyway :-)
It does to me. I don't care how good a lyrcist someone is; if I don't
like their voice I'm not going to enjoy listening to them perform their
music as much. It's a personal preference thing.
ghost
In article <348E2B91...@concentric.net> Christin Keck <she...@concentric.net> writes:
#>ghost wrote:
#>> I don't think having to make an album at very regular short intervals
#>> is exactly the right recipe for such a singer-songwriter, but that's what
#>> the market is pushing people to right now.
#>> If it keeps pushing, & the people keep letting themselves get pushed,
#>> Richard *Thompson* is going to come off looking like he has only
#>> intermittent flashes of genius (yeah, that does mean I think large sections
#>> of *his* last 2 <3 if you count "Industry"> are no more than examples of
#>> "a genius stuck with his wheels spinning" ).
+>You know, you've said something very worthwhile here. You're absolutely right! I
+>really don't know enough about Mallett's history to say with any conviction whether
+>or not he was "pushed" into recording so many albums, but there's certainly a case
+>for that point of view. I am very reluctant to call anything by a songwriter as
+>good as he "filler," but a lot of what I heard on some of his earlier albums sounds
+>exactly like that's what it is. As with so many other songwriters. There are
+>certified geniuses around, for sure, but most are not--and the result is an ocean
+>of songs, with tiny islands of worthwhile songs interspersed. Sometimes it's
+>tiresome wading thru that ocean in search of the satisfaction a truly great song
+>gives.
+>You've made a great point.
Thanks.
Some people have 1 or 2 or 3 great songs to write in their lives, some have
maybe 10 or 12, some have maybe 142 or so (Dylan, Thompson). And some
don't even have any *OK* songs, but singer-songwriters they want to be
nonetheless.
I'm getting more lenient in my older age about albums full of filler,
probably because I've got more money to spend on albums. It used to be
that if it didn't have all, or almost all, great songs on it, I didn't buy
it. I wanted when that truck hit me flat in the street to die with (I
could only hope) spotless underwear on & a record collection of which the
assembled mourners (the music-appreciators among them, anyway) would say
"there's not hardly any filler in here". That part about
the recording collection won't be true anymore. (I can only hope about the
other.)
Sometimes the singer-songwriter doesn't even know they're filling the
recording up with filler, but I feel that lots of the time they do.
I bought a used record a while ago that I just had time to play a few weeks
ago; its the album Steve Young 1st recorded. He's the guy who wrote
"Seven Bridges Road", & I take it from his liner notes he is, or was,
a country star of some sort. He talks in the notes about this being his
dream project, & how glad he is to see its re-release.
Its a decent album, with 2 or 3, maybe 3 or 4 standout songs on it,
"7 Bridges" being one & a cover of Utah Phillips' "Rock Salt & Nails" being
another. But its not the killer album Young apparently thinks it is.
He's very proud of it. I would have replaced some of the songs with
stronger songs, even if he didn't write them (as with early
singer-songwriter albums, its generous; he didn't feel he had to write
*all* the songs). I was kind of hoping for 11 more songs just as good as
"7 Bridges", though, & except for "Rock Salt & Nails", which I already
knew, I didn't get that, not quite. I think if you're only capable of
writing one song as good as "7 Bridges" in your life (what else that I know
has Young written?) you've done quite a lot, & your contribution to songs
*on record* should be to find 11 or so songs as good & put them on the album,
so that that great thing you wrote will be in good company.
Back to Mallett; people know him for
"The Last Time I Saw Annie", & for the song about his family's house
burning down, "Fire In The Barn", a song who's matter-of-fact delivery
is very much in the line of American old-time songs in which the narrator
is a bit detached from the telling no matter how involved they were in the
story, but who's bit-detached delivery has nevertheless, from my
love-of-anguished-sounding-singing standpoint always bothered me,
& for "The Garden Song", which whether I like it or not has gone way beyond
Mallett & is the one *everybody*, like it or not, knows. And recent things
like "This Town". And apparently from recent discussions here they know
him for that "Ballad of Ste Anne's Reel" song, thought I can't place it.
If I was more familiar with his repertoire maybe I'd pick out other good
but less spectacularly memorable songs; maybe not.
I don't think Mallett was ever actually *pushed* by a record label,
but he may have been groomed, or was grooming himself,
to fill a role for which he'd have to have lots of *original* material.
PegBertsch
ghost wrote:
>Sometimes the singer-songwriter doesn't even know they're filling the
>recording up with filler, but I feel that lots of the time they do.
>I like this discussion.
As a listener, I have often shared your suspicions; as a singer/songwriter,
however, I have to say that the line sometimes becomes blurred in determining
what's "filler" vs. "substance," especially in predicting how your *audience*
will perceive certain songs.
Have you ever heard one of your favorite songwriters talk about what their
favorite songs (of their own) are? And have you ever been surprised by their
responses? I know I have. Sometimes they talk about the songs I like *least*
(though sometimes hearing why the song is important to them gives me a new
perspective)....and when the interviewer asks them about a song I *love*, they
say something like, "yeah, I guess that one's okay..." and I'm thinking, "Damn!
That song was just a *throwaway* to them????"
Of course, it doesn't always happen that way. Sometimes as a writer you come
up with something that feels kind of special, and the feedback you get from
your audience confirms that instinct. That's one of the greatest feelings
there is for a writer, I think...but it's one that is far too elusive, and
doesn't happen nearly often enough for *any* songwriter (especially those who
try to demand more of themselves and their songs).
As a writer, I like to think I'm hard on myself; I'm not interested in
contributing to the mediocrity by putting out a CD with songs that have no
meaning to me. But in a way, it's like trying to catch lightning in a
bottle...my window of songs I feel really, really strongly about is always
moving, a lot faster than the pace at which I write new songs; I hope it
always does. I think that's a sign of creative growth, and I know it keeps me
striving to improve. When you play your songs over and over and over again,
you start to lose perspective. You can outgrow them. But sometimes your
audience (or a portion of it) surprises you and tells you that they love those
same songs. So do you *not* record songs other people have told you they love,
just because *you* don't feel as strongly about them anymore?
It's a tough call. I never realized how tough until I went into the studio
recently to start putting together my first CD. The thought that I might put
out an album full of perceived filler is certainly one of my greatest fears;
but one of the hardest lessons I've had to learn -- I'm still trying to learn
-- is that I cannot please everybody. No matter what I do, I can never write
the perfect song that is all things to all people. And if I'm having this
problem with material selection for my *first* CD -- the one I've had my entire
life to this point to write (even though I did get a late start on this writing
thing) -- I can't imagine what it's like to try and put out subsequent CDs
every other year or so and feel absolutely sure that the songs will wear well
for your listeners (and yourself!) over time.
So you do the best you can to put together a collection of songs that say
something about you, the experiences you're going through, the beliefs you've
developed and are still developing. Sometimes, you aren't as successful as
you thought or hoped in communicating the emotion you felt when you wrote the
song, so even though the song means something to you, it may fall flat with
other listeners...but there might be one person out there who *does* understand
what you are trying to communicate, and that song may become one of their
favorites.
The process of setting songs in stone (as it were) by recording a CD can be a
very scary one; I sometimes wonder if I will look back on this project in
years to come and wonder what I was thinking, why I ever thought these songs
were worth recording. As it is, I've waited a long time in going into the
studio because I kept waiting for some kind of validation that I *should*
record an album -- and despite the fact that I have received that encouragement
from various sources, I still find myself wondering if I might have a *better*
album if I wait just one more year, and write stronger songs. But that year
has grown into 5, and the window of what I consider to be "strong" songs keeps
moving...at some point, you just have to take the plunge and trust that if the
songs you've written meant something to you when you wrote them, then hopefully
they will mean something to someone else, too.
Someone once told me that I should look at all this as just taking a snapshot;
a lot of us might go back and look at our high school yearbook picture and
cringe at our old hairstyle or the clothes we used to wear...but all in all,
it's probably a pretty accurate representation of who we were then. Warts and
all. And putting out a CD is kind of the same thing.
I try to keep that in mind. Although I really *hate* my high school yearbook
picture! ;-)
--peg
PegBertsch
>>I like this discussion.
(oops, that was my line, not ghost's -- despite how I made it look...don't
want to be putting words in her(?) mouth ;-)
--peg
Tom Berson
peg,
I tried to post here last night with a very similar theme but it
either got lost in cyberspace or this ng has a moderator with a taste
for eloquence and subtlety, far supreme to my own.
Excellent points from a songwriter's perspective. Could it be I
put too much "filler" in it, ha? :>)
ps first time posting here...or maybe that is, we'll see...
ghost
>ghost wrote:
>>Sometimes the singer-songwriter doesn't even know they're filling the
>>recording up with filler, but I feel that lots of the time they do.
>>I like this discussion.
>As a listener, I have often shared your suspicions; as a singer/songwriter,
>however, I have to say that the line sometimes becomes blurred in determining
>what's "filler" vs. "substance," especially in predicting how your *audience*
>will perceive certain songs.
I want to go back & put a little perspective (since people elsewhere having
been flashing the term around) on that summation I gave of that Steve Young
album. *He* was pretty clear in the liner notes to the re-release that
there was a buzz going around at the time of something new on the
country scene, which was the alternative/"outlaw" country of the 70s & part of
the 80s, & he was proud that his album was in the vanguard of it. He mentions
Gram Parsons cutting one of *his* albums, or maybe on of the Burrito Brothers'
albums, in the same studio at the same time & being around to give
moral support on a few cuts (though I don't think Parsons plays on
Young's album). From *that* "vanguard of 'outlaw' country" perspective,
Young's album does what he intended it to do, & if he'd stacked it full of
songs like "7 Bridges" & "Rock Salt & Nails" it wouldn't have done the job.
From *my* perspective of looking for an album full of great
singer-songwriter-almost-semi-mystical-songs like "7 Bridges" &
"Rock Salt & Nails", it just didn't fit the bill.
>Have you ever heard one of your favorite songwriters talk about what their
>favorite songs (of their own) are?
They do a lot of radio interview around here, so I've heard a lot of this.
Usually they're not asked about their favorites so much as
"did you think that song that everyone knows you for would *be*
the song that everyone knows you for?"
>And have you ever been surprised by their
>responses? I know I have.
The main interview-given response to their most requested songs
seems to be "It was too easy to write. It was like taking dictation."
They sometimes don't trust it when the song "writes itself" that easily.
Cheryl Wheeler in particular didn't trust "Arrow", & wasn't going to put
it on her 1st album until people kept requesting it.
>Sometimes they talk about the songs I like *least*
>(though sometimes hearing why the song is important to them gives me a new
>perspective)....and when the interviewer asks them about a song I *love*, they
>say something like, "yeah, I guess that one's okay..." and I'm thinking, "Damn!
> That song was just a *throwaway* to them????"
I have a feeling, if the interviewer pressed a little harder for the
answer, they'd get the answer Dave Palmater (the prime interviewer around
here) gets about the song "writing itself". Some people wait for that
moment, others want the thing they put a *lot* of work into to be
appreciated instead.
>Of course, it doesn't always happen that way. Sometimes as a writer you come
>up with something that feels kind of special, and the feedback you get from
>your audience confirms that instinct. That's one of the greatest feelings
>there is for a writer, I think...but it's one that is far too elusive, and
>doesn't happen nearly often enough for *any* songwriter (especially those who
>try to demand more of themselves and their songs).
Where you & I part company here is that I don't really even *want* to hear
the songs that didn't "almost write themselves, like the songwriter was taking
dictation" &/or aren't songs the audience keeps requesting, because they mean
something for the people who hear them (as well as, hopefully, for
the singer too).
I think most of the other songs in the singer-songwriter repertoire
generally *are* filler.
Look, I'm not a public singer, but if I was I know I'd want to be singing
the songs that meant something to *me* &/or that had that "kind of special"
effect on me. I don't know why professional singers who also happen to
be songwriters can't treat their audiences the way *they* would probably
want to be treated.
I can understand why songwriters might have to toil away at songs for a
project (Broadway play, etc) someone hired them to write which they hope
might make them a living, but I don't want to go to a club & hear the
result of a lot of calculated work. (Some of those Broadway guys, in
interviews & memoirs I've read, also say the writing was very easy when
they got going, &/or that they always had an arsenal of songs already written
they were just waiting for an opportunity to use.)
PegBertsch
(ghost wrote:)
>Where you & I part company here is that I don't really even *want* to hear
>the songs that didn't "almost write themselves, like the songwriter was
>taking
>dictation" &/or aren't songs the audience keeps requesting, because they mean
>
>something for the people who hear them (as well as, hopefully, for
>the singer too).
I know what you mean; but it leaves me wondering -- and I don't mean this in a
critical way at all, which it could come off sounding like in this
less-than-perfect means of communication we call the internet newsgroup -- if
you write songs yourself.
I have this belief that all songwriters discover they are really songwriters
when they have one of those magical moments you described, where a song seems
to write itself. Because you start to believe that maybe you have some sort
of gift that allows this to happen, that the song selected *you* to write it.
Maybe that sounds too melodramatic, but I'm hoping you'll sort of know what I
mean.
But the muse rarely works that way...at least for most writers I know. More
often, it teases you; it plants this seed of an idea in your head that's like
a mosquito bite or something...it just keeps itching and you find yourself
scratching at it even when you don't want to.
And that's where the 1 percent inspiration/99 percent perspiration theory of
creativity comes in. I don't think that just because a song didn't come out
in one big gush means that it can never have that transcendental quality that
"great" songs seem to have, any more than songs that *did* come out that way
are always "great". Songs that took a lot of work can have that same seamless
quality -- maybe even more so. When you write as a way of life, you learn
that while those flashes of inspiration are always welcome and almost
invariably to be trusted, they aren't always *enough* to carry the
song/poem/whatever to its fullest potential. There is no shame, IMO, in
refining the inspiration with actual *work*, where you consciously make choices
based on your knowledge of craft and technique, and shape that initial
inspiration, polishing the rough edges ( to me, this is what often separates
those who do it for fun from those who do it for a living -- the willingness to
dig in and *work* at it when it isn't coming at you like dictation). There
are some truly great songs that come out of that conscious, calculated effort
(I base this on having heard songwriters describe their struggles with some of
their "great" songs). And I don't think we can always tell (if the songwriter
did the job right) which song came about which way.
The trick, of course...and the one we all hope to master... is to learn to
craft our songs in such a way that they never *sound* crafted, that they sound
as if they *did* just out of the ether and through our pens and onto the page
that way. IMO, that's the special ability that separates a great songwriter
from a good one.
--peg
ghost
In article <19971213104...@ladder01.news.aol.com> pegbe...@aol.com (PegBertsch) writes:
>(ghost wrote:)
>>Where you & I part company here is that I don't really even *want* to hear
>>the songs that didn't "almost write themselves, like the songwriter was
>>taking
>>dictation" &/or aren't songs the audience keeps requesting, because they mean
>>something for the people who hear them (as well as, hopefully, for
>>the singer too).
>I know what you mean; but it leaves me wondering -- and I don't mean this in a
>critical way at all, which it could come off sounding like in this
>less-than-perfect means of communication we call the internet newsgroup -- if
>you write songs yourself.
Nope, but I come up with tunes from time to time. Usually I'm not near a
tape recorder at the time & can't remember them when I've gotten to one.
And usually my tunes are, upon examination, way too close to existing tunes.
Usually the thing nags at me until I figure out what existing tune I've
plagiarized XXXXX reinterpreted. Sometimes other people's tunes nag at me
the same way, for exactly the same reason. I didn't know til someone told me
that that's how most decent tunes *are* invented; coming up with something
out of whole cloth that resembles nothing else on earth is not only difficult,
its probably unnecessarily difficult. I'm good at harmonizing, & improvising,
& I think that's how many tune-variants are born; just somebody playing around
with the tune.
But back to your original question, about *songs*:
I don't usually come up with words for my little tune-fragments, in fact
I'm quite at a loss for words. Don't have anything to *say*, believe it or
not, at least not in song. I can come up with place-holder stuff, but
that peters out after a verse or two. (I do know that you can sound
awfully obscure when you really have nothing to say in a song; that's
probably how a lot of singer-songwriter stuff is born.)
When I was a kid I used to write poems that were probably on their way
to being decent song-lyrics, but I can't/don't do that anymore. But I do know
that "it just hit me" feeling, both from dim memories of childhood poems
(even though it was more like standing around in a daze waiting for
the right words to occur than "taking dictation"), & I could no more sit
down with pencil & paper (or keyboard) in hand & say "OK, you're gonna
write 6 verses on the topic of X" than I could, say, lay an egg &
squalk while I'm doing it.
I avoided term-papers in a major way in school (usually by taking courses
that didn't assign them).
I also never have kept a journal in my life (to address the
local interviewer's set of questions) unless you want to count a few days
attempting to fill in a diary someone gave me with about 5-lines-day
available space. I usually couldn't find anything to say beyond
"I saw so-&-so & so-&-so walking down the street". I don't *understand*
people who fill journals full of heartfelt prose & description & so forth
that no-one but themselves are ever going to *read*, though I can see a
purpose to keeping a journal on a trip if you're planning to write a book,
or want to keep the memories fresh for your letters home but can't find
time to finish one every night or something.
Now, if you wanna ask about writing *usenet* articles....
Seriously, I have a very hard time saying "I want to write an article on
thus & such topic" & then doing it, though I have written a few such
self-assignments that way. Its grueling, even when I have something I
very much want to say. I mostly react to other people's postings.
(So if you don't want me to react, don't post.)
>I have this belief that all songwriters discover they are really songwriters
>when they have one of those magical moments you described, where a song seems
>to write itself. Because you start to believe that maybe you have some sort
>of gift that allows this to happen, that the song selected *you* to write it.
>Maybe that sounds too melodramatic, but I'm hoping you'll sort of know what I
>mean.
>But the muse rarely works that way...at least for most writers I know. More
>often, it teases you; it plants this seed of an idea in your head that's like
>a mosquito bite or something...it just keeps itching and you find yourself
>scratching at it even when you don't want to.
Sounds more like the "I really need to write a usenet article about
thus & such" feeling than the "there's a poem coming on" feeling.
My ideal view of the singer-songwriter at work is this interview Terry Gross
did with Jimmy Dale Gilmour a few years ago where he says
"I just wrote a song today. I'm glad that happened. I didn't think I was ever
gonna write another one."
This is obviously not a songwriter who works too well on assignment.
[I kind of wish this had all been a private letter rather than a usenet
article, but the question was asked in a public article, so that's where
it should be answered.]
in...@webtv.net
In article <674et6$2...@necco.harvard.edu>,
The closest I ever came to having a song write itself, and I'm only an
amateur, is a song I just wrote recently from the first line which I got,
believe it or not staight from a dream! I could see the line all typed
out, and I did a mental click on it and then heard the melody,too! Woke
up at that instant and put it to tape, quick, and the rest was my own,
ala same old pencil scratching. Felt like plagarism but I had to earn
the rest of the song. One of my best, too, da.. it. Wish I could of
saved the URL of that dream site! Just imagine.... All I can tell you is
that the night before the dream, I had too much coffee and was on the web
half the night....click...click..clickin.
Tom
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Thomas Senor
In article <19971213104...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
pegbe...@aol.com (PegBertsch) wrote:
> I have this belief that all songwriters discover they are really songwriters
> when they have one of those magical moments you described, where a song seems
> to write itself. Because you start to believe that maybe you have some sort
> of gift that allows this to happen, that the song selected *you* to
write it.
> Maybe that sounds too melodramatic, but I'm hoping you'll sort of know what I
> mean.
>
> But the muse rarely works that way...at least for most writers I know. More
> often, it teases you; it plants this seed of an idea in your head that's like
> a mosquito bite or something...it just keeps itching and you find yourself
> scratching at it even when you don't want to.
>
> And that's where the 1 percent inspiration/99 percent perspiration theory of
> creativity comes in....
[snip]
> The trick, of course...and the one we all hope to master... is to learn to
> craft our songs in such a way that they never *sound* crafted, that they sound
> as if they *did* just out of the ether and through our pens and onto the page
> that way. IMO, that's the special ability that separates a great
songwriter
> from a good one.
>
> --peg
I've found this thread on inspiration/perspiration very interesting. I've
particularly liked Peg Bertsch's posts. As someone who is not a
songwriter and whose writing is strictly academic, so to speak, I can't
say I've ever had the experience of being touched by the muse. But I'm
sure it happens. Still, I can't help but think that it's not as frequent
as people like to believe it is, and that there is no substitution for the
hard work of crafting a song.
I once heard an interview on NPR with the lead singer/songwriter of the
Crash Test Dummies (whose name escapes me at the moment...Brad something
or other, I think). He talked about walking a fine line between taking
his art seriously but without forgetting at the end of the day that it is
only a three minute pop song. He said that he is surprised at how often a
songwriting friend will report a moment of inspiration (often taking place
in a dream) and then say proudly, "When I awoke, I sat down and wrote this
song in just ten minutes." The song is then played. Brad what's-his-name
said that usually when the last words have been sung he wants to say
something like "I don't have any trouble believing that a sleepy person
wrote that song quickly." He said that the editing and refining of songs
takes much longer than the initial writing done under the direct influence
of the muse.
I don't much care whether the song originates from a shining moment of
inspiration or just from an idea in the back of the writer's head. What I
care about is how the metaphor is worked out on the song, how things hang
together, what interesting turns of phrase or original descriptions there
may be. One of my favorite songs is Bill Morrissey's "Birches." I can't
think of a folk/pop song that is put together any better than this one
is. Yet it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Bill began with a simple
metaphor and carefully crafted a story around it, never feeling his pen
guided by anything other than the ideas in his head and the muscles in his
hand.
EdwardW355
>[I kind of wish this had all been a private letter rather than a
>usenet
article, but the question was asked in a public article, so that's
>where
it should be answered.]
Au contraire - As a non-performer/non-writer who's fascinated by the process -
I'm glad that you didn't.
ghost
Kind of the reason I wish it had been private is that Peg Bertisch's (sp?)
original question had a bit of a tone of
"don't comment on a process you don't understand"
(yeah that's a paraphrased Dylan ref) about it.
Well, I do understand it at least a *little*, but the version of it I
understand is not something you can or would *want* to turn into an
industry for yourself.
I've also had people tell me
"you don't know how hard it is to get up there & sing" & I think what
they're missing on is that its hard for them, & was hard for me the few
times I tried it, but its *not* hard for the showboats among us.
Theoretically, if there are going to be critical comments made about
anything, including songwriting & "folk"-singing, everybody should be judged
by "a jury of their peers", but that only works even slightly well in
athletic fields of endeavor where the judging peers are by their own admission
"past it", & aren't going to show up the next day as competition for the
people they're judging (though they might be envious of them). Ideally even
in sports contests the judges should be people who won't ever be in a position
to hire or fire the athletes, & most panels of judges wouldn't meet that
standard.
One of the things I'm worried about is that really bad songwriters, who
are only bad songwriters & not usually *complete* idiots (in fact they
have to be pretty savvy self-marketers to have gotten anywhere,
considering what bad songwriters they are), are going to be listening
to the good-songwriter interviews (or reading articles like those in
the discussion here) & picking up pointers on what to say so that they
can sound like they were as "inspired" as the people who's lines they're
stealing. I've already heard a little of that in radio interviews.
Mark Spittal
ghost wrote:
>
> I've also had people tell me
> "you don't know how hard it is to get up there & sing" & I think what
> they're missing on is that its hard for them, & was hard for me the few
> times I tried it, but its *not* hard for the showboats among us.
Just a small point. When I am on stage, it is easy, it is
comfortable..it is where iI am at home. The idea that one must be
scared to be on stage is not always true.
It is just music, not life or death.
Mark
--
________________________________________________
there can be hope in the trying to make the leap
past the anger we carry so deep
there can be hope in the singing of songs that rejoice
in the coming together of our voices
hope/mark spittal/seattle/copyright 1996
Acoustic Northwest -
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/mspittal/acoustic.html
Mark Spittal's homepage -
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/mspittal/wisdomtree.html
PegBertsch
>
>Kind of the reason I wish it had been private is that Peg Bertisch's (sp?)
>original question had a bit of a tone of
>"don't comment on a process you don't understand"
>(yeah that's a paraphrased Dylan ref) about it.
>
>
....but I honestly didn't mean it that way. And I was trying so hard to make
that clear..and I call myself a writer?!? sheesh!!! ;-)
The fact is, I just like discussing the process, and I like comparing views on
it. Getting some insight into what makes creative people tick is fascinating
to me. And from what I read of your last post (been a little busy these last
few days, just gettin' around to it), you sound like about 99% of the
songwriters I know -- always feeling like the song they just wrote may be the
last song they'll ever write, always worrying if that riff they came up with is
really original, or whether they heard it somewhere else and it just stuck in
their subconscious, wondering if they even have something worth saying...etc.
And the 1% of the songwriters I didn't include in that last statement are
usually the ones who think they have it all figured out and that everything
they write is perfect. Though I rarely agree with their assessment :-)
--peg
EdwardW355
In article <67egq8$8...@necco.harvard.edu>, j...@deas.harvard.edu ( ghost )
writes:
>One of the things I'm worried about is that really bad songwriters ...
> (snip)
>songwriters they are), are going to be listening to the good-songwriter
>interviews (or reading articles like those in the discussion here) & picking
>up pointers on what to say so that they can sound like they were as
>"inspired" as the people who's lines they're stealing.
Keeping something a secret only keeps it a secrete for a very short additional
time, particularly when a "public" process is involved.
>I've already heard a little of that in radio interviews.
See ! You're already too late.
Thieves will thieve regardless of what you do - that who'what they are. Most
of us can tell who they are. I'm not going to mis-appropriate - that's not
what _I_ do (thieve, write or perform) - I am/do something else. The process
of what _I_ do fascinatesd me - so the process of what you do (in another
world) is all the more interesting.
in...@webtv.net
It seems to me the gulf between artist and audience, if that is one of
the threads here is a complex topic, but very interesting. My original
reason for posting earlier (unexpressed) was more of an emotional
reaction based on being a fan of Dave Mallet's rather than making any
meaningful point, as a songwriter. I don't think it is necessarily true
that a reviewer must have actual knowledge or experience as a songwriter
to give an objective critique to the music. This might be more a
question of overall musical appreciation, journalistic skill, tact,
empathy, etc., and I'm speaking in general.
I have attended some festivals where the talent was lacking, IMHO as
a listener, but the audiences were mostly polite. Finding honest
feedback is not always easy. I only have Dave Mallet's "For A
Lifetime" album, but must admit that some of the later ones I sampled at
Music Boulevard don't seem of that caliber to me.
Tom Berson
Life is a journey, or sometimes a series of trips .