>>64385017
It depends what type of music. Describe that maybe i'll help you

>>64385078
Well I'm pretty big on vocals and electronic experimentation but most of the stuff I've done doesn't blend really well/too individual and if I finished it now it would just be a shitty pop album.

>>64385017
A high p4k score

>>64385205
this, also obscurity but only so that normies don't know about it but my "hip" friends do.

>>64385144
Like Dan Deacon?

>>64385308
Besides ratings and popularity though. What really makes one good?

>>64385357
gotta stop worryin' about making something good and just make what feels right~~~ :)

if you can tell it's genuine
that the artist is confident that they're making something that can only come from them and actually does that.
and im really into noise the pretty kind

>>64385144
like broadcast?
unique sounds
having a voice that's identifiable.
especially if it's poppy, you want people to listen to one second of your vocal style and at least think, "oh, that's [insert name]"

>>64385352
>Dan Deacon
Not really on that level of electronic, it's a lot more simple. I was going for something with bare vocals and harmonies but really fueled by instrumentation. I'm terrible at explaining.
>>64385406
I know but I tried working with a couple other people and one is into kpop and the other into modern R&B. Also we don't communicate/hang out enough so I'm pretty much the one who does all the songwriting.
>>64385426
I definitely want it to be genuine but sometimes I make myself cringe. The subject matter often leans to relationships when I would love to write about anything else.
I love noise too but said peers aren't really into it and I feel like I keep screwing it up.
>>64385451
Well I guess my voice is identifiable (not too unique however imo). I like pop but not really modern pop (not trying to be a pleb). Unique sounds, I tried that but I keep finding that stripping it down makes it sound better. And I get carried away... like 47-tracks-for-one-song carried away.

>>64385537
really what you gotta do is keep making this until you like it a lot

>>64385686
*things

>>64385537
make songs as revenge at someone who pissed you off or to prove points you cant express. write a song about some primal shit that you feared growing up and those feelings. lyrics are just whatever words sound good with the rhythm and timbre of a track, the listener makes up ~90% of the meaning for themselves. the buildups and instrument tones and structure of the song usually are important things

>>64385686
I actually made 2 albums before this one. The first was boring and the second was messy. However, I wrote one particular song last summer which a lot of people think is really good (besides the shit lyrics) and think I kind of have a sound out of that but the trouble is I want to keep the sound consistent for the other songs. Looking at my phone right now, of the best ones, 3 are rock, 3 are vocal-heavy, 2 are piano-focused, and 3 are experimental. I kinda like all of them but the focus just isn't quite there yet.
>>64385763
That sounds pretty solid. One of the rock ones have pretty good angry lyrics but the rest are too soft for that atm. I don't want to overdo it though since I ended up with a couple crap ones from that.

>>64385842
writing crap songs is good cause it leads to future improved and better songs

>>64385874
as long as you are always writing songs and always practicing and always improving and jotting down lyrical ideas

>>64385874
That's a good way of thinking about it. One issue with me though is I haven't made anything really coherent in a while, just interesting portions that haven't connected up yet so it gets difficult trying to decide between continuing with a possibly bad song or building up a pile to put together something from the pieces.
>>64385911
Oh I have a LOT of lyrics. My notepad probably looks like it belongs to a lunatic. I showed them to my peers and they didn't get them at all since they're more like thoughts than speeches so most of it goes unused.
I don't practice actually although I should. Good advice.

A great album should be great but leave you wanting more

>>64385991
What specifically would make you want more?

>>64385965
i forgot to mention the point of writing lots of songs and lots of lyric ideas is to shorten them down to the absolute best bits. if you have a lot of your ideas to choose from, you'lll have better peaks, and will get more experience with the creative process. my best lyrics were like two stanzas whittled down from pages of notes. and look at Can's Tago Mago- it doesn't have to just mean having a lot of b-sides, it also means taking out whole sections of songs: how they created awesomely structured and building rock tracks by editing hour-long jams to the absolute best parts, and arranging them in a way that flowed and developed. that example kinda crosses over with post-production and editing, but you get the point!

>>64386073
It means I'm impressed and I want to see you make more stuff

>>64385965
edit together the best song fragments you have, to make one big song like SMiLE and good vibrations, or faust kinda stuff

>>64386073
not blowing your load and showing off all your tricks and strengths, so that you have room for development and wont just be repeating the same tricks over and over again

>>64386403
Yeah I get it, having a lot to choose from and narrowing it down. Also I didn't know Can did that I just assumed each piece was a short take of the song.
>>64386414
So impressionable. Got it.
>>64386418
I was thinking that too. Wanted the whole thing to flow as one track and still be good (which is quite the task). I'm very picky about structure so I like prog for similar reasons but with smaller pieces (like 6 seconds) it gets messy and I end up being unsure of what ideas should keep running.
>>64386429
Well I wanna get it right the first time but yeah I should hold back a little and not shove everything in (and of course I don't want it to get repetitive).

>>64386794
only show people your best and most thought-out ideas, while not blowing your load completely, like the other post said

i treasure the immersive experience.

An album is great if it leads to total loss of identity and eventually crying

>>64386878
oooh aesthetic relates to that- and not just artwork. recording style, production sounds textures, and mixing decisions, things that unify all the tracks, etc.... like recording every track on tape vs. an all digital album, or using modern high end compressors or old school gritty rock compressors. how drums are recorded, and what kind of production and what kind of production is done with vocals. like how the other post mentioned for pop-based music the singing style has to be instantly recognizable

>>64386952
all things to keep in mind. But also things like opening tracks that feel like it's leading you into something. or closing tracks that sound like finales

A bludgeoning obvious example is to JD's Closer.
>this is the way, step inside

There's no rules. That line would seem stupid from any other band/frontman. But it serves the purpose.

>>64386846
Sure I'll try working on it more. Maybe come up with a full song for once.
>>64386878
So aim to destroy souls. I like that.
But yeah this is pretty much the end goal for me and I hope I can make it work.
>>64386952
I get really deep into the production so that isn't really an issue but overall structure can be a bit tricky like avoiding 4 chords or verse/chorus/verse etc. Listening back to it I pretty much have the singing and catchiness down I think (if I can organize it).

>>64387077
For my opener I fidget around a lot. The only thing solid is a one-line melody, piano/organ, and backing harmonies.
The end is kinda split between a couple songs, the main focus one and the really strong closing one which I might plan on blending.
Well I'm nothing like Joy Division but I see the point.