Better composed?

It seems to me that people think that good song composition means two different things. Some seem to believe that when bands write music with little repetition and lots of flowing ideas and moods with an unusual structure and often long songs the composition isn't good because people say it goes nowhere. However, there are other people that say that with bands like Yes and Dream Theater even though they have extended sections and lots of ideas thrown in that the composition is too basic because there are a couple standard verses and choruses.

Both are good. I like music that flows through various themes, like "Suppers Ready" but I like krautrock too. 

Well neither necessarily makes for a better composition. A good composition has more to do with how the parts relate to each other than the form of the structure, although it helps. Personally, I prefer music which breaks the typical ABABCAB form. Honestly most I the time I think it's just downright lazy to use this structure that has been used to death. Never understood why so many people feel that its the most effective way to convey a message...

Endless Wire wrote: Well neither necessarily makes for a better composition. A good composition has more to do with how the parts relate to each other than the form of the structure, although it helps. Personally, I prefer music which breaks the typical ABABCAB form. Honestly most I the time I think it's just downright lazy to use this structure that has been used to death. Never understood why so many people feel that its the most effective way to convey a message... Sorry for the side rant.

Various forms take over at various times because they're effective and well-liked. Obviously ABABCAB is simpler than, say, the sonata form, but it's no more lazy for artists to use ABABCAB than it was lazy for basically all composers at a certain time to use the sonata form.

I would say something that contains flowing themes and many sections is better composed. It would seem to me that writing a song that has those qualities would be harder to pull off successfully than say a minimalism piece or a basic pop/rock structure. (Not to discount minimalism...in fact I'm a fan. I'm a fan of repitition as well, just its easy to overuse. I also probably prefer music that is constantly shifting from one place to another.)

topofsm wrote: I purposely tried to make each option as appealing as the other. The second obviously refers to ABABCAB form. I've felt that a lot of the people here say that they prefer when the song structure breaks out from the form, yet I also see a lot of people say that compositions by, say, Behold... The Arctopus, Between the Buried and Me, and Maudlin of the Well should have music that is more concise. Of course, the three of them could turn people off for elements other than that, but I've seen a lot of comments I've seen (most often other internet places, but even here) that suggest that they should make more basic song structures.   Of course, there is almost always endless praise for great classical works, which except for minimalism only repeat ideas a few times, and instead the melodies flow naturally and lots of different melodies occur over a short period of time.   While it is unfair to compare popular music like prog to artistic music like classical, as a musical genre that attempts to make music as sophisticated as artistic music shouldn't the structure be one of the most important aspects?

I think this is a misunderstanding of the classical works. actually it was just the other way round: a main theme is being introduced and then varied, then maybe a side theme will be introduced and varied too (though not necessarily). these variations may be very complex and sometimes unrecognizable for someone without deep musical knowledge (would you recognize a theme if it is played backwards, upside down (meaning falling when the original theme rises and vice versa) and in half the speed? but that's exactly what Bach does in many of his compositions, and that's just one of his tricks. and he is by far not the only one.
it is rather the opposite: your meandering kind of music was actually chaffed at for a long time; there were very strict rules for composition. Beethoven broke with many of the forms and tore free of these restrictions. later composers of course went even farther, and in the late 20th century there was a kind of "anything goes" mentality among composers which carries on until today.
on the other hand many artists in here play very freestyle, without any form at all. just listen to some early Kraut

When you combine both it creates one heck of a song, like... Man-Erg by Van Der Graff! It has two verses that almost repeat each other but then goes off in a totally unexpected direction with a weird instrumental section and then back to a couple verses but not sounding anything like the first two. Thats music! (I think I said that right)

J-Man wrote: Take a guess what's going to win on a progressive rock site!!! This is a pretty pointless poll, and that's why Choice One is wining 12 to 1.

Edited by floydispink - August 23 2009 at 13:11

BaldJean wrote: topofsm wrote: I purposely tried to make each option as appealing as the other. The second obviously refers to ABABCAB form. I've felt that a lot of the people here say that they prefer when the song structure breaks out from the form, yet I also see a lot of people say that compositions by, say, Behold... The Arctopus, Between the Buried and Me, and Maudlin of the Well should have music that is more concise. Of course, the three of them could turn people off for elements other than that, but I've seen a lot of comments I've seen (most often other internet places, but even here) that suggest that they should make more basic song structures.   Of course, there is almost always endless praise for great classical works, which except for minimalism only repeat ideas a few times, and instead the melodies flow naturally and lots of different melodies occur over a short period of time.   While it is unfair to compare popular music like prog to artistic music like classical, as a musical genre that attempts to make music as sophisticated as artistic music shouldn't the structure be one of the most important aspects? I think this is a misunderstanding of the classical works. actually it was just the other way round: a main theme is being introduced and then varied, then maybe a side theme will be introduced and varied too (though not necessarily). these variations may be very complex and sometimes unrecognizable for someone without deep musical knowledge (would you recognize a theme if it is played backwards, upside down (meaning falling when the original theme rises and vice versa) and in half the speed? but that's exactly what Bach does in many of his compositions, and that's just one of his tricks. and he is by far not the only one. it is rather the opposite: your meandering kind of music was actually chaffed at for a long time; there were very strict rules for composition. Beethoven broke with many of the forms and tore free of these restrictions. later composers of course went even farther, and in the late 20th century there was a kind of "anything goes" mentality among composers which carries on until today. on the other hand many artists in here play very freestyle, without any form at all. just listen to some early Kraut

I still wouldn't consider Beethoven's first movement of his 5th symphony repetitive. Although it could be considered within the first couple of sections, it eventually bursts out and the melody develops into beautiful enveloping melodies that while still containing the main motif to different extents changes and flows into many different musical moods.