JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum PAYING FOR CRITIQUES

I’m of two minds about professional critiques.

I’d certainly turn to an experienced and qualified critic for input if I had a lyric/song that I felt was reaching a pitchable stage, but at the same time I wouldn’t depend entirely on that feedback, especially if it were contrary to overwhelming input from other objective sources as well as to one’s own gut feeling.

I recently had an interesting situation. As a NSAI member, I’m eligible for 12 “free”
professional evaluations a year. A couple of months ago I submitted a song that my co-writer and I felt was worth doing something with (as did the 30 or more other people who’d made suggestions and given valuable feedback). However, I first wanted to have what I perceived to be professional feedback, so I submitted the song (MP3 plus lyric) to NSAI.

Imagine our delight when the evaluation came back with “WOW”, “fantastic”, “beautiful”, “great hook”, “nice imagery”, etc. The evaluator then went on to say that if we did the following three things, he would have no hesitation about forwarding the song at the next NSAI publishers’ luncheon meeting.
1. Create a new bridge that (he felt) would tie in better to the verses;
2. Change one line in the chorus (I’d suggested an alternative, though didn’t like it as well as what I already had);
3. Reverse the order of verses 1 and 2.
He instructed me to submit the revision and address it to him specifically.

I immediately changed the line to what the evaluator wanted, and then spent 3 weeks sweating over – in the end – a much better bridge. I opted not to reverse the verse order, however, as my co-writer and I agreed it would have weakened the initial impact considerably. I wrote a cover letter explaining my decision.

In the next round, although there was the usual “great hook”, “beautiful music and vocals”, “WOW”, etc., the evaluator made no mention of the new bridge (which was clearly much better) or of the other change I’d made, which he’d requested (but which I didn’t like myself). Instead, he selected a couple of further areas that he wanted changed. There was no reference at all to the cover letter.

This was disappointing, of course, and I was hesitant to use up a third evaluation
on the same song if the evaluator was going to keep finding things that he felt needed changing, to the extent that the original lyric – that had so moved him initially – would be lost. Thus, I arranged to have a paid (my co-writer and I shared the cost) one-hour, one-to-one consultation with him via Skype. One of the first things I asked (pleasantly, of course ) was why, after first responding in such an encouraging and effusive manner, he found further fault with the lyric in the second evaluation, even though two main requested changes had been made. (He was apparently OK about the verse order remaining as it had been.) He said this was one of the problems with evalutions: Often you can hear a song and the impact is tremendous and you get carried away with how great it sounds and how it makes you feel but then if you look at it again and again there are things that will stick out that you’ll think should be changed. “We’re only human”, he said. He then pointed out even more areas that he thought should be revised.

By that time I’d lost confidence in his evaluative capacity. We finished the consultation by having a pleasant discussion about songwriting in general.

When I related the event to my co-writer, we decided the only further modification we’d make would be to put back the original line in the chorus that the evaluator had advised we change. We kept the new bridge, however, as it is better. (And I’m grateful the evaluator suggested I re-work the bridge.)

(Shortly afterwards, my co-writer submitted the song to a publisher for a certain artist. The publisher wrote back – amazing in itself – to say that although not ideal for that particular person, the song was lovely and he’d keep it on file for future reference. Not much, I know, but at least a response.)

I guess what I’m saying with all this is: Do the best you can; get as much objective and critical feedback as possible from songwriters’ forums; revise accordingly as necessary; and then see what a professional evaluator has to say. (I agree that their knowledge and expertise can be immensely valuable.) However, I consider that in the final analysis it’s important to go with one’s own feelings and instinct. I don’t mean simply attachment because it’s your own “baby” so to speak, but because you’ve striven carefully to incorporate as many of the elements as possible that contribute to making what you feel is a noteworthy lyric/song.

I have a twofold question, though, that perhaps Marc or Rand can answer.
1. Of what use is a one-off professional evaluation if in the course of the 20-45 minutes or so given to it an evaluator will fail to see the (perceived) flaws that might only be visible/audible after a second or third or even fourth reading/hearing? (I concede that evaluators are “only human”. )
2. In terms of whether a song can be deemed pitchworthy, how important is that first positive impact and a visceral response to a song?

Donna