Isn't it terrible that Taylor Swift is more famous than you?

Well, no. And before I tear into my soliloquy I should probably throw out a few qualifiers:

One, I had never actually listened to any Taylor Swift songs or albums. That wasn't for any particular reason other than I can't imagine being in her target audience when she began as a young country Ingenue in 2006, or as she progressed toward being the megastar she is now in popular music. But, as a service to those who will read this, I did go to Spotify, now that she's back, and listened to 2 songs per album as well as the new song that was released last week, You Made Me Do It. 

Two, for those of us not in the business of being both a celebrity and an actual producer/creator-immaterial from we or others may think of your work-it is a kind of macabre fascination into everything that seems to go into being a pop star nowadays.

So is it terrible that I'm not as well known as Taylor Swift? Yes, it's terrible, but...

As a go it alone, work at my own pace, do what I want kind of artist, it is more to my suiting. How? For starters, I don't have a small army dependent on my success to maintain their financial well-being. Of course, they may work for any number of performers, but since Ms. Swift is at the top of the pile, I assume she comes first, and being at the top of the pile requires a whole other level of commitment because...

You're only one dismal record or song or controversy from becoming a B-list celebrity/performer/creator to then finding yourself on the nostalgia circuit or Dancing With The Stars!

That's not necessarily a bad thing, times change, you have to adapt. And she is an attractive woman who I imagine could easily transition in to TV/film, etc.

Sounds like more work than I'm up for (which the snarks would point out is why I'm living in nowheresville, man!).

BUT...the one thing I find most fascinating about Taylor Swift is the feuds, the bad boyfriends, the snark, the victimhood-manufactured or otherwise-it is evidently part and parcel to fame these days. Whatever it is works because everyone is talking and writing about it.

That's the point right? In this age of all that's out there, you have to rise above the noise (sadly that might include me) and be heard. I would think that just by being Taylor Swift whatever your next project would automatically be news in and of itself because you're Taylor Swift? Like the Beatles, right? It's the music, man!

I could be wrong.

The other question is whether this is par for the course when it come to women entertainers of a certain level? Maybe not Adele, but I don't know that for a fact, mainly because I don't care even if some think I should. Instead, I'm the type who thinks the work is what's most important and we know what happens to those types-think noise.

It seems though that to pierce through the fog or shine that bright light is a requirement that I don't think I'm up to even if I had the look, the hook, and the story compelling enough to warrant the scrutiny or interest.

That, however, would require a completely separate post.

More on The Popular Tune

The myth of the hit single is the idea that it can happen to anyone who has a great song. This is not true. Yes, having a great tune is a good thing, but it may have no actual connection to the song's probability of becoming a hit single.

That, as it has always been, requires the right people with the right connections. This is true nationally and locally, although one wonders in this day and age if there is anything intrinsically local anymore that can then be moved nationally.

For instance:

Were I to produce a fabulous recording that all the world had to hear, just how would I go about getting them to hear it? Radio? Well who exactly controls what is heard on the radio? The big radio conglomerates, like the big record labels, are interested in that which will sell and make them money. Do I fit within the categorical imperatives they would require in order for them to promote the song? And without promotion, the song goes nowhere, period.

Simple facts of the game.

And the song is merely a component of the product which is the entertainer. Songwriters are a dime a dozen, and if it takes a dozen, along with as many producers and engineers to create the songs to project an up and coming entertainer into the mainstream stratosphere above the rest of the grasping masses, then if the bet is a good one; the bet is made.

If, on the other hand, you do not meet the necessary demographic, or cultural, or aesthetic (read physical) appeal that research tells us that a song, let's say the song you have written and recorded, will be targeted to, then it is highly likely, no matter how wonderful the song, that anyone will care-beyond telling you, assuming they even took a moment to listen to it, you're not a god fit.

Is this discouraging? It sure is.

And it gets worse! On the very off chance that hard work and perseverance, as well as the fact that you are photogenic and young (this is far more important than you might think for reasons you might not-think contracts), a hit must then be followed by more and any and all appearances must promote the brand in order to justify the burgeoning support foundation you will need to succeed- and those people don't work for free. In fact, most are failed performers who came to the realization that there is good money to be made in the industry behind the camera, if you will, than struggling to be in front.

You have to be able to maintain that infrastructure. many don't.

All for a hit song.

That's not the same as finding your audience. Or your musical calling. It is why I demure when offered unsolicited advice on what I need to do to write a hit song. It may all be good advice, and it may help you write a better song; it may...but a hit single?

Hit, Hits, Hits!

It's got to be the hits, man!

Ok, I get that, but in truth, hits, or hit songs, are for the vast majority of songwriters, out of reach. The basics require a lot of legwork, networking; preferably in the hometown of the genre, think Nashville or LA, and, foremost, songs that are being looked for. Music publishers, agents, and the like, are the gatekeepers between you and your targeted star and the thrill of hearing or watching said star playing your song. And no matter how brilliant, fun, hauntingly beautiful your song may be, if it's not what they're looking for, it's just another song in a sea of millions.

But take heart, there's a beavy of folks out there ready willing and able, for a small fee, to get you to the golden land. I know, I get they're emails all the time. And I don't begrudge them for taking a moment of my time, but I went through this years ago.

At some point you have to decide what you want and how far you're willing to go to get it, and, and this is a big and which a lot of people don't like to own up to, are you or do you have the esthetics, which is a fancy term for the look, to present to your target audience wha they expect to see?

That's big.

And it buries a lot of performers and bands.

But we're talking about the hits! Bands without hits go nowhere, no matter the talent level. Every town has talent, players who will take you to the cleaners; that's life, but their bands never made it or only made it to a certain level, say local versus national. Some may have been one hit wonders. I remember that back in the 80's, the guitarist playing with Jill Sobule had been the guitarist for Sugarloaf (Green Eyed Lady), Bob Webber. And that's not a knock on Bob, he's had far more success than most of us ever will, but anyone who has been in this business knows, life turns quick and you do something different.

In my case I just wanted to make my music without a lot of direction, change, and most of all, a lot of debt. I did it my way and because of that, and a lot of obstinacy, I am an unknown, but I'm ok with that. And I don't mind writing songs for people and I try to give them what they want, but what they get is a Mr Primitive tune...something not too many others have (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).

Looks like I went off-track

As everyone will tell you; don't try to write a hit. Write what you write and go from there.
You never know.

So, what kind of music do you make?

One of the incredibly delightful parts of getting back into the music biz is describing and defining your sound; what kind of music do you make?

Well, what is my Sound?

Not that long ago I'd of just said Rock music, and those who grew up in the age of Rock would probably understand because Rock was a fairly expansive category in popular music, and it was popular. And at the time that's what it was. Now it still is, but not like it was and it now needs further categorization. Is it soft rock, or hard rock, or heavy metal, which in this day and age; assuming you listen to metal at all, is an archaic term, or is it something else?

Hmmm, something else...

When I listen to the albums I've produced, pre-release, and go over the many sub-genres available to label these older albums, all of which were recorded in the early to mid-80's, I inevitably slam into the same wall because to me it's just Rock music. Not Southern Rock, a term that started with the Allman Brother's Band, (who, incidentally, didn't care for the label, it was, as they stated many times just rock n roll), or progressive Rock, or glam, or Rockabilly, or...you get the drift.

Perhaps Rock was the wrong term to begin with, but I don't exactly know. To me, it's simply modern music based on the popular esthetic I was brought up with. But at the time I was growing up all kinds of music was waffling through the air, Rock, Pop, Swing, Jazz, Classical, Country; mostly on their own stations, but quite often there were crossover hits and on TV, back in the three network universe, you were exposed to any number of different acts; just check out the old Ed Sullivan or Dean Martin variety shows of the 60's to see what I mean. All of these influences infused my music. As did the fact that I was in bands, mostly school bands and orchestras, for all of my formative years. I listened to and played a lot of different music.

So how does that answer the question? It doesn't, but I think it aids anyone listening to what I've produced over the years, and this is more true of the music I'm producing now. Once I got into my own little groove and my own little DIY world, the music I've made is basically popular music driven by whatever influence the song found in me, be it Rock or Jazz or Country, whatever. And the albums themselves began taking on themes through which the songs worked. The idea and focus was that the music was a journey, basically 45 minutes long-the product of the limitations of what you could legitimately put on a vinyl record-and meant to be listened to from beginning to end. The time limit has ben amended given what digital recording affords, but I've stuck to that premise whether that's how people listen to it or not.

Did I answer the question? Probably not. Here's my evasive answer; it's just music. And to be fair, I don't really label or categorize the music I listen to beyond basic genres; it's either pop, or rock, or jazz, or country or classical, and I'll stick with that even if it's a bit blurry.

If you still need a better definition, here it is: Mood music flavored with the stylings of pop-rock-country-jazz.

Works for me.