作者：Francesco D’Andrea

我们都知道，强大的吸引力、可唱的旋律或稳定的韵律样式是形成值得回忆的歌曲或配音作品的必要条件，但结构在其中起到什么作用呢？

当我们处在制作音频的过程中，我们应当清空脑子，捕捉转瞬即逝的想法和灵感。这就意味着实验，不断写下自己的想法，无需担心作品的结构问题，通过歌曲以多种方法来发展主题。最终，到工作进程末期，我们会得到许多优秀和糟糕的“片段”，这些片段有着独立的价值，它们的拼接只有两种结果：好或不好的结果。而这就取决于结构。

在编写完所有的旋律、重奏、复调、副歌和主歌后，我们对取得的最终成果感到满意。我们认为自己已经得到了令人震惊的音乐作品，迫不及待地进入混合等最终步骤！

那么，为何我们不作品“休息”一天或数天呢？这对其最终质量的提升有很大的好处。

我们为已经完成的工作感到骄傲，我们为整个工作过程而疯狂，持续工作数天时间。于是，我们可能会很不耐烦，想永远“结束”这个过程，将其上传到网络上并发送给好友，不是吗？

但是，如果一两天之后，我们“忘记”了自己已经完成的歌曲，在倾听其他音乐时（游戏邦注：或者在自己的思维模拟中）我们发现自己之前完成的作品并不完美，如果对结构进行调整能够让音乐的质量提高1倍，那又如何呢？

我经常遇到这种情况：在某个时刻，将摇滚歌曲或管弦乐曲重复听上百遍之后，漫长的中间章节或主歌已经让我不胜其烦，而且我认为它就是最佳的结果，但是过几天后我又会发现其不足之处。

那么，当我们在进行最终的“剪切和粘贴”工作时，哪些因素能够帮助我们考虑需要做出的选择？

可以说，在音乐方面毫无规则可言，所以这里所说的只是我个人的经验之谈：

1、听众期望和个人期望

假设我们正在倾听一首麦当娜流行歌曲，或文艺复兴时期的经典曲目。

作为听众而不是作曲人，我们希望歌曲的结构尽可能简单和线性。但是，为什么会产生这种想法呢？这意味着什么呢？

我们偏爱线性、简单和高效结构的现代认知是两种因素导致的结果：逻辑和习惯。

逻辑：倾听音乐好比是倾听谈话。如果美国总统在电视上发表谈话解释税收增加的行为，那么他在没有任何逻辑连接的情况下忽然将话题跳转到自己的家庭，难道不会让你感到目瞪口呆？坐在电视机前的你可能会吓一跳，至少后悔自己将选票投给了这种毫无逻辑之人，不是吗？

在音乐中，同样会出现这种情况：如果你从由大提琴伴奏的长笛和小提琴的悦耳曲调转换成由钹和泰国打击乐器组成的金属音乐，你的听众可能会在此刻马上关掉音乐，同时屋中响彻他们的怒吼：“这都是些什么东西！”

作为作曲师，对此情况你可能会有以下两种回应：

（1）不好意思，在制作这个配乐时我相当疲劳，客户定下的交稿时间马上就要到了，或许我喝了过多的咖啡，不过我肯定会修改这个部分，它会显得更好更“线性化”。

（2）闭嘴！我知道，通常的音乐不会这么做，但是音乐方面本就没有规则，我是个艺术家，这是属于我的作品，我就想将它制作成这个样子！我想要让它显得与众不同！

这两种答案并没有明显的对错之分！如果你不是为满足客户目标，靠客户支付的薪水来维持生计，那么这两者或许都是有价值的选择。

然而，你得确保自己听了十多次后，还能够对此感觉良好。

2、接受批评

找些值得信任的人来倾听你的作品，记住他们的意见，用于将来的作品中：即便他们对某个作品发表的看法与你的想法不符，这些或许也会成为你制作下个作品的有用信息。

我经常让某些人来倾听我的作品，因为我信任他们判断、他们的耳朵，而且让他们感到满意是件很难的事情。我甚至会让他们试听正处在开发过程中的作品，从中得出自己的想法是否有效。

让他人为你提出批评意见，这对你在音乐上的成长至关重要。理解人们喜欢或不喜欢某种设计的原因是很有用的，如果你不气馁，他们能够帮助你站稳脚跟，让你记住自己是个有才华的音乐师，总有一天能做出更好的作品。

但是，要记住他们的作用是提出观点和展开讨论，不要让他们的意见成为你的音乐。你是作曲人，你要吸取合适的意见，摒弃不良意见。

3、旋律变得越来越复杂

我经常犯这个错误。我会不断给作品添加新的想法，如果我的想法丰富的话，有时添加的想法就会显得过多，这些想法相互交叉，我最终得到的是没有足够间歇的作品！

这个问题要怎么解决呢？我们都知道，有时候少即是多。确实，这并非通用法则，你有时可能会不同意这种看法，比如在你希望制作复杂音乐时。我们必须承认，有时候复杂的音乐作品也同样迷人。

但是从另一方面来看，除了让其变得复杂以及在音乐中安排大量元素外，我们可以让音乐自行发展。

我们在制作一首冒险主题音乐，经过悦耳和漫长的引子部分后，接下来就是主歌部分！要表达出恰当的主题！我们给它留下至少8个节拍来表达内容，不是吗？有时候4个节拍还不够，我们需要将其扩展到8个节拍，然后用不同的管弦乐来填充另外8个节拍的内容，不是吗？

我的意思是：你可以让音乐拥有许多不同风格的组成部分，但是要给予他们足够的表达时间。否则，你会同时失去曲调的强大之处和正确结构，使音乐质量大打折扣，无论你在音乐中添加的想法有多高明！

4、是否采用进展性/添加性结构

作为音乐用户和听众，我注意到多数时候，摇滚、管弦、古典、爵士、电子乐以及所有其他音乐都有个进展性和添加性结构。

这指的是什么呢？以迈克尔·杰克逊的《Billie Jean》为例。

我们可以听到4/4的击鼓，然后我们添加令人印象深刻的声线，随后添加合成和按键，最后才是迈克尔的声音。这是个流行、简单且有效的范例，可以解释如果通过乐器添加来产生较好的效果。过一段时间，我们就添加些许内容。现在，在多数音乐作品的制作中，我们已经习惯于这么做，听众期望作曲人采用这种方法，因而我们也就乐于听到这种音乐。这种方法也包含了一定的重复性方法。虽然加入了其他乐器的内容，但我们听到的首个乐器声音依然存在，我们已经习惯它的声音，无论这种声音是简单、优秀、糟糕、诡异、创新还是普通。

这是种不错的方法，因为多数情况下这是我们的本能行为，使音乐制作变得简单。当我们作曲时，多数情况下是从单个想法开始，然后是什么呢？我们会产生其他想法，如果它能够同我们的首个想法兼容，那么我们便会选用这个新想法。这便是添加的内容，以进展性的方法来制作音乐。

我们需要遵从这种设计方法吗？当然，这全凭设计师的个人喜好。

每个人都知道，音乐制作没有特定的规则。如果我们有足够的音乐本能和天赋，这绝对能够起到作用。因为，这是种编写内容的线性化方法。

不过，我们也无需拘泥于这种方法，我们并没有被强迫从单一元素开始，然后不断添加新元素来让音乐成长。如果你自认为是个经典的“添加性、线性化作曲师”，你可以尝试利用自己的天赋，找到新的可能性和方法，撇开这种方法，看看用新方法能得出何种结果。

你或许会发现，使用新战略来连接各部分和乐器，有可能得到很令人反感的作品，也有可能让你耳目一新。给你自己留下尝试新方法的机会，理解不同方法能够产生的结果，然后在完全自由的情况下做出属于自己的选择。

《Billie Jean》是个很棒的作品，令人记忆深刻。另一方面，霍尔斯特、贝多芬、威廉姆斯和亨德里克斯等作曲家不使用添加性方法也制作出了绝妙的作品。

5、注意音乐的波形

我最喜爱的作家和诗人Charles Bukowski曾经说过：“他们都相信自己能够成为优秀的作家，他们围在我的桌前，手上拿着自己的诗集，但是当我看到这些写在纸张上的东西时，觉得它们显得乏味无趣，它们没有华丽的外表和十足的底气。”

Bukowski先生谈到的是“看到这些写在纸上的东西”，他甚至还没有真正阅读诗歌的内容。

如果他是个音乐家，他会怎么说呢？他可能会说：“它们的波形没有华丽的外表和十足的底气”，不是吗？

波形有时显得乏味无趣，有时它们同音乐一样出众。

虽然这不应当成为批判曲目质量的主要方法，但研究波形可以得出些有用的结论。

多亏了soundcloud我才注意到这点，众所周知，它可以展示歌曲的波形。

在你最喜欢的DAW中查看作品的波形，这可能会让你产生某些想法（游戏邦注：也可能不会产生想法，这取决于作曲人的个人敏感度和品位）：

或许作品缺乏动态感？为什么有些音乐作品会被描述成缺乏底气？这对你意味着什么？你是否关心这个方面？

依我个人观点，我们应当避免制作出徒有其表而没有灵魂的作品。也就是说，旋律确实很动听，但是却显得平淡无奇，冲击、音量、拍子和管弦内容方面在整个音乐播放过程中丝毫没有变化。

或许，你自己编写的上一首歌曲中就出现了这个问题。这样的作品称不上差，只是缺乏足够的动态。在歌曲中添加痛苦的片段和片刻的宁静，这也算是较好的做法，尤其是在很长的音乐作品中。

反之，你或许也会注意到，经过片刻的宁静后，如果不使用引入而直接呈现快节奏的内容，会完全打破之前营造的气氛。

波形能够帮助你注意到这些东西。

6、Blues定理

Bluesmen采取的做法是：他们找到一个不错的旋律，能够添加到他们的作品中，那他们就会坚持使用。我认为，他们的做法是对的。

你也可以采用相同的做法。无论你编写的是何种题材的音乐，如果你找到些令人印象深刻的东西，就可以不断将其改造并用于自己的作品中。如果你拥有某些吸引点，也同样可以选择和运用。这会帮助听众喜欢上音乐中的某些元素。或许我之前说过许多类似的内容，但是我还想再重复一遍，这是成功的关键！

7、长度

1分钟的时间可能会显得过长，也可能不会。

3分钟46秒也可能显得不够，1小时41分钟可能会……

我想你已经明白了：要注意作品的长度。

有时我编写出某些作品，我非常喜欢，我为自己的作品感到自豪，我的脸上整天都挂满笑容。这种情况确实经常发生，因为我是个音乐人，我喜欢自己玩弄的这些东西。当我做出很棒的东西时，喜悦感只会持续一小段时间。但是，当我感觉自己做出了一个糟糕的作品时，我就会对它的完成感到恐惧。有时，我甚至会害怕继续制作下去。

何时才是结束的恰当时机呢？是否存在既让听众满意又让作曲人满足的完美长度呢？

这样的问题没有答案。

严肃地说，我有时并不能及时发现问题。所以，我有时会打开自己两年前认为已经完成的项目，对其重新加工，因为我忽然意识到当年自己认为是完整歌曲的作品，实际上只是一小部分而已！

我想要不断制作和加工实际上已经完成的作品，或许只是因为偷懒的心理，但是我内心的真实感觉是这个作品仍有待完善！

但是，在这种情况下，在断定曲目“完成”、“过长”或“过短”之时，先让自己休息片刻。当你真正忘掉歌曲的内容时，再回过头来听一遍。你的看法或许又会发生改变。

8、不要拘泥于我的意见

如果你有机会倾听我的作品（游戏邦注：可访问网址http://francescodandrea.bandcamp.com/），而且你很喜欢它们甚至觉得它们让你产生灵感，那么可以无视上述的意见，因为以上只是我总结的自己曾经犯过的错误，而且有时我还是会犯下同样的错误。我努力在音乐人和作曲人的道路上获得成长，而上述提到的有些问题仍不时给我带来麻烦！我开始注意到自己歌曲编写时的不足之处，我仍将努力克服，以更好的方法表达自己的音乐想法。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Writing Music: The Structure of a Song

Francesco D’Andrea

We all know that having a strong hook, a singable melody or a solid rhythmical pattern is essential to forge a memorable song or soundtrack piece, but what about structure?

As we’re in the process of making a track, we should set our mind free and unleash ideas fresh as they come out of our minds. This means experiment, write down ideas without having to worry to much about the piece structure, develop the theme across the song in several ways to enforce it, but subsequently this may cause a scenario in which, at the end of the work process, we’ll have a bunch of good and bad “parts”, or maybe only good ones, which independently from their single value may stick together and follow each other in two ways: in a good one, or badly. And that depends on structure.

After writing all the stuff, all the melodies, riffs, counterpoint, choruses and verses, and even once we’re satisfied with the final result – and we think we’ve got an astonishing piece of music – we should not rush towards the final steps of mix and mastering!

Before to get through these conclusive steps, why don’t we let the piece “rest” for a day or a couple? It could be extremely beneficial to its final quality.

We’re proud of the work we’ve done, we went mad about panning, orchestration, arrangements, EQ, and worked and re-worked it for days…so we’re probably impatient to “close” this track forever in its definitive version, upload it on soundcloud or bandcamp and post it to our friends, right?

But what if, one or two days later, after “forgetting” that song and listening to other music (or not listening to anything at all for our ears’ sake!) we’ll discover that what we did is freaking good, but with a (more or less) simple change of structure could be 200% better??

It happens to me all times, well….not all the times, but often: at a certain point, listening again for the 100th time to a rock ballad or an orchestral piece I did and I was proud of, there’s something annoying in that toooo looong bridge passage or that chorus that repeats for the 20th time, or that interlude which is good in itself, but completely out from the rest of the composition’s timber, mood or tempo?I

So, what are factors that could help us to consider choises to make when doing the final “cut and paste” work?

In music, we’d say, there are no rules, so what follows is just some considerations deriving from my sweat, modest experience:

1 – What listeners expect – VS – What you want

Let’s say that we’re listening to a Madonna pop song. Or to a renaissance classical piece.

We, as listeners rather than as composers, would expect a structure which is the most simple and linear as possible. But why is that? What does it mean?

Our modern cognition of a linear, simple and effective structure is the result of at least two components: logic, and habits.

Logic: listening to music can be compared to listening to a talk. If President of United States of America speaks in tv about taxes increase due to crisis, then he skips talking about her mother’s boobs without making a logical connection, wouldn’t you be scared a little bit, or surprised? You would choke with your hamburger sitting in front of TV, or at least you would regret that vote you gave to him, maybe?

Well, in music it could be translated as: if you move from a sweet part of flute and violins with pizzicato cellos to a punching metal riff played in sixteenths on cymbals and thai percussions, your next listener will probably close your track in that point while gladly filling the air in his room with the words “WHATTA MOTHERFUK!!”.

Well, you as composer may reply in two ways:

1 – Sorry man, I was really tired when doing that soundtrack, and I was already near close to my client’s deadline, maybe I had too much coffee, but I’ll change that part, be sure, it will be better and more “linear”.

2 – Shut the fuck up man! I know usually songs don’t do that, but there’s no rules, I’m an artist and this is my piece, and I want it to sound in this damn way! I want to sound different!

There’s no correct or wrong answer! Both may be valuable choises, unless you’re doing a work for a client and have to fulfill his/her guidelines because his/her is fulfilling your pickpocket.

But generally speaking, make sure that after a tenth listening, the structure is good enough at least to your ears.

2 – Accept criticisms

Have some trusted ears to listen your stuff and remember other’s observations for the future: even if they suck compared to what you think now, they could be useful informations to use for next works.

I use to have some people to listen to my works because I trust their judgments, their ears, and because they’re hard to please. I even let them listen to the work in progress as they’re developing, if I think they can focus on the ideas I propose on the run, and not to the actual “non definitive” sound achieved.

Having someone to criticise you can be an important constant in your musical growth. It’s also useful to understand why people like a certain thing or not, and if you have an indomitable self-exteem, they could help you to keep your feet on the ground and remember yourself that while you’re a brilliant musician, you may do better sometimes.

Anyway, just remember that they’re there to propose and discuss, don’t let their advices become your music. You’re the writer, you’ll discern bad observations from good ones!

3 – Does that melody passage enroll itself enough?

I do that mistake continuously. I’m caught in the process of delivering new ideas to the track, and sometimes they’re so many, if I’m prolific, that those ideas cross their legs one over the other, and what I have in the end is a track that doesn’t breathe enough!

What to do? We all know that less is more sometimes. And yes, this is not paramount, you can disagree with this sometimes, or if you want intricate, complex arrangements. Which is, we have to say, fascinating nonetheless, sometimes.

But another thing, other than being complex and make crowded arrangements, is to let a music sentence develops itself.

We’re scoring an adventure theme, and after a beautiful, quite long intro….here it comes! The main theme! We want to give it at least 8 bars to let “him” express and say what he should say, right? 4 bars could be not enough, some other times we just need to extend it to 8 bars, and then develop it in other 8 with different orchestration and flavour, right?

What I mean is: let the track have as many different parts you want, but give them all their needed time to express. Otherwise, you’ll miss both tunes’ strength, proper structure, and will weaken your song, no matter how many good ideas you throw in it!

4 – Progressive/additive structure or not?

As a music consumer and listener, I notice that the most of times, rock, orchestral, classical, funk, electronic music, whatever….have a progressive and additive structure.

What is it? Listen to “Billie Jean” by Michael Jackson as an example.

We have a 4/4 drum beat, then we add the memorable bass line, then synth/keys are added, then finally comes, Michael’s voice. That’s a popular, simple and effective example on how adding instruments on a pair count basis works well. Each few pair beats, we add something. And nowadays, in most of cases, we’re used to that, we expect that, and thus we’re pleased to hear that. This approach, also, helps to have a repetitive approach. While other instruments come over, the first one we heard is still there and keeps playing since some bars, and we’re already getting used to it, we are helped to acquaint ourselves to that musical bite, it doesn’t matter how simple, good, bad, weird, innovative or common it is.

This is a good approach because it’s, in most of cases, instinctive. Like music is: when we compose, we start from a single idea in most of cases, and then what? We’ll have another idea that we will choose because it is overlapping the first one in a way that it works. And here we have additions, in a progressive way.

Do we have to follow this approach? Yes, and no. Of course.

Everybody knows that there’s not a rule. If we’re running out of musical instinct and genius, it can be an help. Because it’s a linear, organized way to write down stuff.

Otherwise, we don’t have, we’re not forced to start from one item, and then grow with more and more items added. If you believe you’re a classic example of “additive, linear composer”, you may, if you like, experiment with your talent and new possibilities, and try to move away from this approach, for a while, just to see what happens.

You may find that a more unpredictable strategy to link parts and instruments could be annoying, or refreshing to your ears. Give yourself the chance to experiment new ways just to have the possibility to understand the difference, and then make your choice in complete freedom.

Billie Jean is a great, insane, memorable track. Hands down. On the other side, we have Holst, Beethoven, Williams, or Hendrix that certainly didn’t embrace the additive approach for all that they wrote. Sometimes you just unleash yourself starting a track with 7 instruments playing in octave, and then want a solo instrument to break that crowded ensamble just few seconds after, and then “grow back” to a super-multi-ensamble section for a soundshake galore!

5 – Watch your Wawe-form!

Charles Bukowski, my favourite writer and poet, drunk character of this century, testosterone-driven artist, often presumptuous and insecure at the same time, once said (I’ll try to quote by heart): “They all believe to be good writers, they crowd my desk will all their poetry collections, but when I just watch them on the paper, they look boring, they don’t have bravery, and they don’t have boldness”

Mr Bukowski talks about “watching at the paper” before even to read the poem.

What if he was a musician? He would have probably said: “Their waveforms are lacking bravery, they don’t have boldness” ?

Waweforms can be boring, and sometimes they’re just like music.

Given that this shouldn’t be the primary way of judgement of a composition, it could be useful nonetheless to make some conclusions.

I noticed this also thanks to soundcloud, which notoriously shows you waveforms of the songs.

Looking at your track’s waveform in your favourite DAW may lead you to some conclusions (or not, that depends on your sensibility and personal taste):

Maybe the track lacks of dynamics? What could be described as lack of courage, in a track, it it means something to you, if you care about it?

One thing we should avoid, in my opinion, is to have a beautiful track which is all beauty and no heart. This translates in a pleasant melody, but with an overall flat sound. No change in “punchness” and “played volume”, or tempo, or timbers and orchestration.

Maybe you encountered this same problem in the last song you wrote. It is good, but there’s not enough crescendo parts, or dynamics, or for example, that part of the song would be better if played without a compressor, because it is moving continuously from a calm to a more angry king of playing? It is also good, expecially in longer compositions, to have raging sections, and moments of rest.

Contrariwise: you may notice that after so much calm, it’s a bit annoying to have that sudden strings and brass sections rips to break that atmosphere without something to introduce them.

Well, waveform could be just an additional help to notice these big and little things. Bukowski would thank us for being so “interesting at first glance”!

6 – The Blues Theorema

Bluesmen they do this all the time: they find a riff, something good, that works: and they stick with it. And I mean, they are right.

You may do the same. Regardless of your musical genre, if you found something memorable, keep going with it until you’re sure that the identified, precious pearl inside your composition stands out against the crowd of notes. If you have many hooks, make a choice and give more space to the best one. This will help listeners to endear to something, which may be better than leaving him/her with the doubt of what to care for, in a song. Okay, this is something similar to what I said before, but repetition, that’s a key of success!

7 – Length

One minute may be too much, or not.

Three minutes and 46 seconds could be not enough. One hour and 41 minutes could…

Okay, you got it: Take care of the track length.

Sometimes I write something, and I like it so much, and I’m so proud about it that I’ll have a smile on my face for all that blessed day. It does happen often, because I am a music kid and I like my toys (read: instruments, real ones or VST). Even if I do really good things, it happens just once in a while. But when I’m feeling that I’m doing a badass track, I tend to be afraid to finish it too early. Or sometimes I am afraid to continue it, because I don’t want to screw what is, in my opinion, so good so far.

What should be the right moment of conclusion? The perfect length that leaves you satisfied as a listener, and well fed up as a composer?

There’s no answer to this! Gne gne gne!

Seriously: I just discover it when it’s too late, sometimes. So, I would find myself to open an old Cubase project which I thought I finished 2 years before, just to rework it, because I realized that what I thought to be a song, it was actually only the first part!

Shame on me, maybe that’s just because I wanted to keep producing and working on a track that was actually already complete, but hey, that’s what I felt!

But also in this case. Before to say “it’s finished”, or “it’s too long”, or “too short”, take some pause. Take a walk, hang out with friends, make sex or go to the catholic camp meeting (?!) and when you really start to forget how your track is precisely, get back to listen to it. You may find out that it’s too short, or incredibly long and boring as a musical rendition of Fedor Dostoevskij’s “Crime and Punishment”.

8 – Don’t listen to what I said

If you had chance to listen some of my works (http://francescodandrea.bandcamp.com/) and you liked them a lot, or even find them a source of some inspiration, well, forget a good part of what I said, because all I did here was to write a sum up of all mistakes that I did, and I still do sometimes. I’m trying to grow as a musician and composer, like you’re probably doing, and some of this issues mentioned are still bothering me! I became aware of certain limits or weaknesses in my songwriting, but I’m still trying to overcome them and translate my musical ideas in a better way.

If you’re reading this line after all the previous, thanks a lot! Woke up this morning with a need to write something, so I hope you found this useful in some way.

This “article” or whatever it is, could be even more useful if you share your ideas, if you’re a songwriter, a composer, or even just a listener. We do need also their advices, as they’re the ones we’re supposed to delight with what we do! (Source: Gamasutra)