Originally Posted by: CSchlegelI think there are two primary reasons for that.

1. Good songwriting is a skill that requires an enormous amount of integration.

To write a song one has to create a melody that work well with some words. Lyrics are the result of a good series of phonetic linguistic sounds that work well with a series of notes, that sound good together in the first place.

This is why simple, banal, even nonsense lyrics can work perfectly, or even better in some cases than someone trying to force a well constructed sentence or even a poem into a series of notes.

The melody has to have a good harmonic foundation (chord changes, riff that matches the lyrics). And the various parts of the song have to match each other, not sounding too repetitious (or else how to tell the parts apart), but not sounding too varied (or how to tell if the parts work well together & belong in the same song together).

Aside from purely musical details, you have to consider the "story arc" of the song; it's dynamic flow. Should it go from soft to loud and back? Loud with a middle quiet section? Loud all the way through with changes in tempo for variety?

Songwriting requires enormous integration of many details into one auditory object.

2. Because songwriting requires the integration of so much info (melody, lyrics, harmony, rhythm, dovetailing parts, story arc, etc.), if you want to talk about songwriting, then to some degree you have to able to discuss music theory.

And in my experience, the last thing a beginning songwriter wants to do is to discuss music theory. They are too busy trying to express themselves with the limited knowledge they already have. :)

So, many people wind up learning how to write songs by imitating their favorite songwriters. This is a substitute for learning theory, because they are actually learning theoretical concepts, but don't have to explicitly name them. Instead, their mental process works like this:

My new song "starts simple" like "that one Beatles song". It has a chorus like that "other Stones song". I want to make a part after the solo where it will do that dramatic build up like "in that Prince song".

My suggestion is to learn some basic music theory. What is a key? What is a harmonic progression? How do chords work together? What is a melody? How does a melody suggest or interact with a chord progression?

At the same time, start analyzing your favorite songs. What are the parts, sections? What is the melody? What is the chord progression? Is the singer leaning on certain chord tones more than others? How does the melody fit with the phonetic sounds of the syllables of the words?

Write songs that mimic your favorite songs to get real-world practice at the skill. Then you have the best approach: theory & practice that supports each other like it is supposed to do.

I often work on many little parts over time. And then file them away mentally, score them on music paper in my idea notebooks, or record them. A certain melody that works well. A certain series of words that flows off the tongue easily and memorably.

Simultaneously, I work on big picture ideas. What an overall song or piece looks like from above, the overall sections, the story arc, dynamics, instrumentation that works together. Like a big algebra equation with a bunch of variables.

Gradually I work on filling in those blanks with the small details & pieces I already have worked out. Sometimes, I have a song or piece almost done, with one piece missing. So I have to explicitly work out that piece on the spot. Sometimes it works, sometimes not, and I have to try again the next day.

It helps to have a clear idea of what you are trying to do, what you are trying accomplish.

Hope this helps!

Great response. I do agree too. Like any skill, you still need the tools to be able to be successful at the art. While not specifically imperative to the art, since I assume that Blind Lemon Jefferson was not sitting down with his musical theory, I do think it just makes the ability to construct a song all that much easier still.

I think what is key to what you wrote is that it's not so much about the theory but that theory is a support to writing. Also that writing in and of itself is more about ideas.

One of the more key thing I think you said was:
"My suggestion is to learn some basic music theory. What is a key? What is a harmonic progression? How do chords work together? What is a melody? How does a melody suggest or interact with a chord progression?"

Kind of going back to the Blind Lemon Jefferson thing, while probably lacking in actual theory, understood the elements discussed above from being able to do some of the other things you mentioned. Being a student of an art form means, in this case, hearing the elements that comprise the form whether blues, jazz, classical, country etc. It's understanding the elements that make the forms unique.

The advantage here is that we are on the internet with a wealth of knowledge at our finger tips (..and cheap too!) and can actually fill our brains with that info. I don't need to spend a decade at the Dockery Plantation to understand the form, I can get the concepts in short order and spend the time working on them growing within my playing and becoming part of what I do.

In a manner of speaking, I think that's key. Some of it is just playing the form. Noodling of covers of songs and not only conceptually understanding but just being able to vibe through the changes others have created before you. It's like Muddy Waters from Son House, music is not created in a vacuum but as part of a continuum.

I think that's a bit of your point about writing in emulation of others. It develops those chops. In a way, in my previous post, that was somewhat my point. I've spent time such as in the 80's when I was 'serious' about it trying to be unbelievably original. Trying to chart my own path but all I did was write some very blah stuff. It's not until recently that I realize understanding the continuum of ideas is ok that I liked the vibe of stuff I was creating in my head.

So, I've rambled...