Re: "No Good At Goodbyes"
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:07 pm
Maybe my metabolism is just quicker.
No Good At Goodbyes started out as a 3-1/2 minute song but I wanted to see if it gave the same feeling in short version. I found it worked fine so the cut stayed. What is it they say, brevity is the soul of poetry. Another thing is I'm all by myself on these tracks so there's not much more fun jamming for 5 min. than it is for two minutes. I do like to keep things concise given the absence of inspired solo musicians.
But this one, I wanted it to feel like something from the era. Check out the song lengths on the Beatles' first three or four albums. That's what I learned music from so it's easy for me to fall into that machine-gun, "leave 'em wanting more" mindset, especially on a sort of a tribute song like this.
No Good At Goodbyes started out as a 3-1/2 minute song but I wanted to see if it gave the same feeling in short version. I found it worked fine so the cut stayed. What is it they say, brevity is the soul of poetry. Another thing is I'm all by myself on these tracks so there's not much more fun jamming for 5 min. than it is for two minutes. I do like to keep things concise given the absence of inspired solo musicians.
But this one, I wanted it to feel like something from the era. Check out the song lengths on the Beatles' first three or four albums. That's what I learned music from so it's easy for me to fall into that machine-gun, "leave 'em wanting more" mindset, especially on a sort of a tribute song like this.
