General Music Chat

Lately I've been writing all of my rock and roll songs within the short, verse-chorus-verse framework. In the past, those kinds of songs had to be less than three minutes long to fit radio-format or they wouldn't be played. I actually find it more difficult/challenging to portray a complete idea (structure, chords, melody, harmonies, other accompaniment, etc.) in such a short period of time - especially growing up with Alternative music where the songs are about four minutes on average. Somehow, I feel a great sense of accomplishment when I can get a song done in under two minutes (though much shorter would feel a bit incomplete). Does anybody else try writing short, concise songs or do you enjoy more freedom of time and space when you're writing?

ADDITION:

Apparently I should have specified that this has nothing to do with what gets played on the radio... I was just saying that in the past songs had to be under three minutes (like 5 decades ago)... simple as that - it has nothing to do with writing concise songs today...

(I only think that groups with limited ability should follow a format of some kind just because they don't have the ability to write compellingly. There's nothing worse than a 10 minute epic that could have been done in 2 minutes!)

personally, I wouldn't even give it a thought. Bohemian rapsody is more than 3min but they give it play. Every roy orbison song ever written dosn't fit the verse chorus verse format and he got played.
An analogy: don't fit your minds' eye painting into a standard sized canvas or you may end up ruining an otherwise bright idea. It's art.

If it's really that good and it still needs to fit the format you can always throw out what ya don't need later as it is easier to chop off than to build.

Hey SDavis22,
I do a little writing myself and I have to agree with the above response.
In my opinion, as artists we are almost...REQUIRED (if you will), to not only get out of the box, but LEAP from it! What you do as an individual is exactly that...individual, and an attempt to CREATE by the pre-established standards set by others is hardly the work of an artist...let-alone a GREAT artist.
It might be in our best interest to think less about publication and production, and think more about being the individual artists that we are.
P.S. Great topic!

Thanks for letting me listen.

Szymanowsky's Stabat Mater is something like 28 minutes long. And I wouldn't want a second cut from it.

I agree,just write and if its cool then its cool.Weather it is 2 seconds long or 2 hours!

then again, if you are an artist who finds inspiration in limits... (some do I suppose) -go for it. I would personally feel it could stomp on my creativity and distract from the vision I have... but it may work for ya. No shame in trying too hard either. (of course I am not now nor have I ever been on the radio... but some say there is no one better on my couch!).

Szymanowsky's Stabat Mater is something like 28 minutes long. And I wouldn't want a second cut from it.

John Coltrane's free-jazz implosion 'Ascension' is 40 minutes long and I wouldn't cut a second from it either! Just imagine korn or somebody writing that long... it would be so bad (not to mention monotonous, boring, etc.)!

and that would be unlike the rest of korns stuff how?
-ouch - sorry korn lovers...