|
| quote: | Originally posted by Rodri Santos
i have to say that i have had some tracks rejected on labels because their structure was very different to what people are used too.
Sadly 90% of the tracks are what the OP wrote but i made a track which as they said was "Like 5 tracks in one" i understand that i went too far in my innovation so well, you can have 2 breakdowns, even 3 if you manage but there are some guidelines that you must respect. |
Yeah, I've been there also. It seems listeners get lost easily if the song doesn't progress logically or differes greatly from what they're used to hear. I think many non-musician listeners can't actually tell (in musical terms) what's wrong in a song that doesnt follow the common progress, but they sure can hear and feel if it's not working.
And in dance music particulary, you also have to consider that DJ needs to have tha intro and outro to be able to mix your song with other tracks.
Also, if you listen some popular pop-songs (rock, r'n'b, whatever genre that top-40 radios play), there's only very little variation on the actual song structure. Mostly the pop-songs goes like this:
[intro]->[verse]->[chorus]->[verse]->[chorus]->[bridge]->[chorus]->[outro]
And it seems to work for the masses.
But what really makes them differ from each other is the sounds, melodies, effects, instruments, vocalists, lyrics.
So I guess it's hard to make something creative that is working for the masses by altering the actual song structure.
|