Kutless, and other questionable Christian bands

[NewDimension]

Hey, I thought of an example of interesting, well-written Christian rock music that isn't afraid to state where it's coming from, beliefs wise, but that also does a lot in terms of phrasing things in their own special way. It's even a band that Kutless would appreciate, because the guys are friends from back in the day. Ever heard of Falling Up?

They aren't one of the "other questionable Christian bands" are they? That title is hilarious to me.
Of course I've heard of Falling Up. I've only heard about 4 or 5 of their songs though. I like "Broken Heart" and "Hotel Acquarium"....
Other songs I've heard, are just okay to me, but I haven't heard all their songs. God just hasn't touched my heart through their music as much yet. I'll check them out a little more.

Ponder. Not just restate. At the point I'm at in my life, I need it stated in a way that invigorates my thought process on the subject. I don't have time to waste on it if it doesn't, because I've already got a million and one similar sources.

There are times to restate it though.

I don't like talking in concerts at all. Maybe brief banter between songs, but I tend to to figure that if you're a musician, and especially if you're writing songs that explain your faith, those should be able to speak for themselves and not need you lengthy on-stage explanations. The fact that Kutless has to give such talks on-stage kind of signals to me that they don't know how to express it well through the music itself, and hints that perhaps there's another career path that would be better suited for those guys.

True, I don't think you should have to talk in concerts, your music and lyrical structure should be sufficient. I don't think encouraging people to have a personal relationship with God, and explaining what that means, necessarily falls into that criteria. Sure, you shouldn't have to if your music reflects what it is, but if it's a song that isn't intended to explain what that is, and the Spirit of God urges you to encourage others to take a step further towards Him, I don't think it's necessarily wrong, and a sign of bad lyricism. I don't think Kutless talks a lot at their concerts, sure on their acoustic tour, but that's kind of why they had it. If you listen/watch the "Kutless Live in Portland" cd/dvd, you'll see that's mostly all they talked about, and led up to.  I don't like talking in concerts, and sometimes I do like talking in concerts, it depends on what's being said, and how it fits into the songs being played, encouraging others to make a step closer towards Him, etc.... It depends...and if God tells you to say something, you should say it. Never limit the working of His Spirit, even if it is in a concert. Unlimited things can happen.
Maybe God does have something else for them to do career wise. I'm not sure if it's anytime soon though, but He knows. He always uses where we're at, to prepare us for greater things He has later on.

I'm glad that we can at least agree on this.

We'd probably agree on more than you'd surmize. When it comes to music, there is a huge diversity about what people like and don't like, which is one of the major causes for church division, people split because of the music.

Yes; sorry that I didn't make the subject of that sentence clear.

No worries, and I know how challenging song writing is, which is one reason why I haven't written songs as much as I use to.

It's largely due to how much banal filler there is in between the lines that refer to the very specific things that you can tell they want desperately for people to take to heart. It's one of their most specific songs, and they still muck it up with their vagueness and no-brainer lines like "It's alright, okay." Seriously, I cringe when I hear that song, more than almost any other Kutless song.

Yeah, I think they could have did without that line also...

I'm not gonna continue the discussion that breaks down every lyric from all of their other songs, because it's getting tedious.

It's getting tedious, really?

Suffice to say, many of them spurred your thought process in ways that they did not for me. I can understand and appreciate that effect, but most of those thoughts seem so basic that I have to wonder if any number of other artists couldn't have done a similar, if not better, job of having that effect on you.

Which is the truth, it laregly depends the perspective you look at the songs, and what/if God decides to reveal something to you through them, just like any other band/artist and song.
Those aren't all the thoughts they spurred. And sometimes, we need to be reminded of the basics again. And, of course God could have used any other artists to have a similar or better effect on me, it's just He hasn't. Yes, He's used others, but not as much or as often. Ask Him why, He uses them more than most in my life. He just does, and there's always a reason why He does, I just don't know all of the reasons why right now. 

The problem here is that the scope of these songs is too broad. Summing up everything you want to say within the bounds of a radio-friendly song is damn near impossible. I think good songwriters know this, and make attempts to avoid the broad, sweeping generalizations about everyone and everything. Good writing illustrates the details, the specific moments, the small scale. I can take what I've heard from your specific story and abstract it to the larger scale. I can see those life experiences that are similar to mine or those of someone else that I know. If you take your testimony and strip out the specificities, it's no longer really your testimony, it's the same "commercial for Jesus" I've heard from everyone else. How's you get from A to B? What are the insurmountable odds, the sins, the adversity from others, that you overcame, and what specific things did God put in your path that changed those?

I think you can write a really good song even about a miniscule fraction of the full story. Then you put another specific piece somewhere else. You give each piece room to breathe and explore. The sum of the parts will be greater than the whole, but often the attempt to sum up the whole in one grand statement will fall short, because there honestly just isn't time to do it justice.

Good thoughts.

I think the song is the seed; by itself it's not going to accomplish all of these things. It's only one side of the dialogue, obviously, and since you can't have a personal relationship with the vast majority of your fans, for the most part that's a dialogue that someone else is gonna have to continue on your behalf. I think we're afraid of this truth - we'd rather be the ones to do the work from end to end - plant the seed, water it, make sure it actually grows, care for the plant after it sprouts up from the ground, etc. But I think God brings many different influences in at various point in a soul's life to do those jobs. Realizing that has been a great freedom for me - I can plant a seed with something that I say or do and even if that seed doesn't fall on fertile soil right away, maybe someone else will soften the ground later and it'll take root, and maybe I'll never even know it happened. Or I might get used later in someone's life to be part of the ground softening process or the ongoing watering of the living plant. I need to let go if this perfectionist desire to be the one who does it all - if I try to bite off more than I can chew and force it before it's ready, I'm probably going to get a weak, anemic result for my efforts.

It is urgent - obviously the most urgent thing in an individual's life - that they hear the Gospel, understand the basis of its message, internalize it and confess belief in it in order to be saved. I would never deny that. The problem is that we too easily translate "urgent" or "important" to "immediate". I don't think a rational person's gonna go from the beginning of that process to wanting to say that salvation prayer within the scope of a four-minute song or conversation. (Not unless they're really gullible, in which case, I worry about what else they're going to let someone else lead them to believe in the future.) It generally takes time for a heart to change. If my four-minute song is the only thing a person will ever heard from me, or if our four-minute conversation is the only time I'll ever actually be in the same room with the person, I'd rather have a small but lasting effect and be part of that long process, rather than trying to speed the whole process along.

I believe that God is the very definition of love, and full of grace for His people whom He wants to save. If God's gonna use me as part of that process for somebody, I have to trust that God was working in that person's life before I showed up, and will follow through after I'm out of the picture. I'm not saying this to justify laziness, or to give myself an excuse to take the easy way out and not speak up, but I'm saying that the entirety of that process is not up to me. Even if I bungle my small role in that process, God will still follow through.

What are some things you definetely think you should avoid in writing that type of a song?

If I just met somebody, and three minutes later they're trying to get me to change my entire way of thinking about the world, then personally I would get the hell out of there as quickly as possible. Maybe some hearts are more open, but again, I'm a bit wary about the intelligence level of such individuals. I would rather use that time to show grace and love to the person, to make them want to wonder why. I'd rather show than tell. If I get the time to do both, awesome, but honestly, I don't expect anyone who met me to know that I'm any more trustworthy than your average used car salesman. Trust has to be earned.

True.  Also, I believe it depends on what God's leading you to say/do at the moment with each individual.

It'll be construed as negative. And even if they were willing to listen (which I'd have absolutely no expectations for), they'd probably ask the same questions as you, "OK, what do you think we should fix and how?" And then I'd be placed in a position of having to give instructions and looking like I was just trying to get them to do things my way.

They'd probably ask more intelligent questions than me.

Well, you know how the Spirit works; you can't explain how you know these things, you just "know". 

Yes, I know to the measure He's allowed me to know.... and I think how He works so awesome!!!

So who exactly are these "other questionable Christian bands"?

[murlough23]

They aren't one of the "other questionable Christian bands" are they?

Oh, absolutely not! I have a lot of respect for Falling Up's lyrics. I wouldn't say they're a perfect example, but they have a unique way of phrasing things that is honestly expected for a band that is labelmates with the "big radio acts" like Jeremy Camp (who has an amazing testimony, but whose music and lyrics are bland beyond belief) and Kutless.

That title is hilarious to me.

Whoever came up with it probably did so because the initial discussion was about Fireflight, not Kutless. Whenever Kutless gets brought up, they tend to dominate the discussion since they've pretty much cornered the market on sucking. Fireflight only sort of sucks.

Of course I've heard of Falling Up. I've only heard about 4 or 5 of their songs though. I like "Broken Heart" and "Hotel Acquarium"....

I would highly recommend their latest album Captiva - there are some very straightforward songs and some very baffling ones on that album. Good balance, both lyrically and stylistically. However, given your tastes, you might want to start with their first album Crashings, which is no less well done, but the musical style might work better as a bridge for you. (Kutless's lead singer actually guests on one of the tracks... though it's one of the sillier ones.)

True, I don't think you should have to talk in concerts, your music and lyrical structure should be sufficient. I don't think encouraging people to have a personal relationship with God, and explaining what that means, necessarily falls into that criteria. Sure, you shouldn't have to if your music reflects what it is, but if it's a song that isn't intended to explain what that is, and the Spirit of God urges you to encourage others to take a step further towards Him, I don't think it's necessarily wrong, and a sign of bad lyricism.

I don't think there should be a rule saying you can't talk... I just think it's frustrating when it starts to infringe on your time to play your songs, which is what people paid to get in the door for. Sure, ministry has more eternal significance than entertainment, but people can go to church and be ministered to for free, so I think there's a certain expectation to give the performance that was expected when somebody plunked down money for your concert. (Yeah, there are free concerts, but I'm increasingly starting to avoid those because they're often some church's ill-conceived plan to rope in a captive audience and talk to them as if they were fourth graders for upwards of 45 minutes.)

Actually, I don't recall Kutless taking that much time to talk on their live CD. These things tend to get pared down on live recordings because they break up the flow of the music. I don't know what it's actually like at a Kutless concert and I honestly have no desire to find out.

If you listen/watch the "Kutless Live in Portland" cd/dvd

HEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL no.

Maybe God does have something else for them to do career wise. I'm not sure if it's anytime soon though, but He knows. He always uses where we're at, to prepare us for greater things He has later on.

We need to be careful here. Not everything we do is God using us.

When it comes to music, there is a huge diversity about what people like and don't like, which is one of the major causes for church division, people split because of the music.

Agreed. I haven't stopped being friends with people because I found out they were Kutless fans or anything.

No worries, and I know how challenging song writing is, which is one reason why I haven't written songs as much as I use to.

It's certainly not something everyone can do. I think we have a major amount of confusion in Christian music, between preacher/leader types and artists. Sure, the two can sometimes be one and the same. But not everybody who can put pen together and make lyrics rhyme and wield an instrument onstage should be looked up to as a spiritual leader (the wiser ones will often go to great lengths to show they're just like us). And not everybody who can preach has the creative mind of an artist. I think we're all too willing to hang on a person's words and put them on a pedestal just because they display artistic talent, or to figure their art must be good art simply because their theology is sound when they talk.

It's getting tedious, really?

Yes - as you noticed I tend to go to great lengths to explain how I feel about something and why, and we're starting to split hairs over very specific words, so I'm kind of arriving at the point where I have to concede that we need to agree to disagree on some of that stuff. I can argue until I'm blue in the face if I don't think to stop myself. It's exhausting.

Which is the truth, it laregly depends the perspective you look at the songs, and what/if God decides to reveal something to you through them, just like any other band/artist and song.

Yes, but just because it spurred a thought in your mind that was only kinda sorta related doesn't mean that they should get a pass for shoddy songwriting. I know you're thinking that if it had a positive effect on someone, then it can't be bad songwriting because God used it... but we've established that God can use very imperfect things to get His point across. And it's not like those songs wouldn't have affected you if they were better written. Kutless has nothing to lose by improving artistically, but their current popularity and everybody telling them they're right on the money gives them a considerable amount of inertia.

Those aren't all the thoughts they spurred. And sometimes, we need to be reminded of the basics again. And, of course God could have used any other artists to have a similar or better effect on me, it's just He hasn't. Yes, He's used others, but not as much or as often. Ask Him why, He uses them more than most in my life. He just does, and there's always a reason why He does, I just don't know all of the reasons why right now.

He works in mysterious ways. I realize that. I still don't think it's an excuse for throwing creativity out the window.

What are some things you definetely think you should avoid in writing that type of a song?

Just ask yourself when writing a phrase or coming with with a musical passage, "Have I heard this before? Am I simply borrowing from my influences, or am I combining them in ways that color outside the lines? How can I express this in a way that gets the point across while being unique to my perspective, my personal testimony?" If you can't answer those fundamental questions for yourself, then in my opinion, you're in no place to be making art and selling it.

So who exactly are these "other questionable Christian bands"?

Well, my short list of favorite Critical Whipping Boys includes the following:

FFH
Building 429
12 Stones
Casting Crowns (though their latest showed marked improvement)
SonicFlood (the post-Jeff Deyo lineup)
Jump5
Krystal Meyers

If you're curious as to why, I found a nifty little tool on my Epinions account that sort all my reviews with the lowest ratings first, so click on some of the 1- and 2-star rated ones.

http://www.epinions.com/user-divad23/show_~content/pp_~1/sort_~prdrt/sort_dir_~asc/sec_~public_profile_opinion_list

[NewDimension]

Oh, absolutely not! I have a lot of respect for Falling Up's lyrics. I wouldn't say they're a perfect example, but they have a unique way of phrasing things that is honestly expected for a band that is labelmates with the "big radio acts" like Jeremy Camp (who has an amazing testimony, but whose music and lyrics are bland beyond belief) and Kutless.

I don't think there's ever going to be a perfect example.

I would highly recommend their latest album Captiva - there are some very straightforward songs and some very baffling ones on that album. Good balance, both lyrically and stylistically. However, given your tastes, you might want to start with their first album Crashings, which is no less well done, but the musical style might work better as a bridge for you. (Kutless's lead singer actually guests on one of the tracks... though it's one of the sillier ones.)

You do realize Kutless isn't the only band I like...?

Actually, I don't recall Kutless taking that much time to talk on their live CD. These things tend to get pared down on live recordings because they break up the flow of the music. I don't know what it's actually like at a Kutless concert and I honestly have no desire to find out.

No they didn't talk much at all, only twice for a few minutes, and it was the full-length concert.

We need to be careful here. Not everything we do is God using us.

No kidding, but inspite of what we do, He can and does use us. And, you must know this Scripture by now (since it's one of the most common) that says: "And we know that all things work together for good, to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." Rom. 8:28 That states it all right there.

Agreed. I haven't stopped being friends with people because I found out they were Kutless fans or anything.

That wouldn't be right. Do have any friends who are currently Kutless fans?

It's certainly not something everyone can do. I think we have a major amount of confusion in Christian music, between preacher/leader types and artists. Sure, the two can sometimes be one and the same. But not everybody who can put pen together and make lyrics rhyme and wield an instrument onstage should be looked up to as a spiritual leader (the wiser ones will often go to great lengths to show they're just like us). And not everybody who can preach has the creative mind of an artist. I think we're all too willing to hang on a person's words and put them on a pedestal just because they display artistic talent, or to figure their art must be good art simply because their theology is sound when they talk.

True.

Yes - as you noticed I tend to go to great lengths to explain how I feel about something and why, and we're starting to split hairs over very specific words, so I'm kind of arriving at the point where I have to concede that we need to agree to disagree on some of that stuff. I can argue until I'm blue in the face if I don't think to stop myself. It's exhausting.

That's really sad about arguing til your face turns blue. Have you ever done that? I never knew displaying your opinions was necessarily arguing; discussing sounds more like the word to me. Be careful not to argue, because it can become exceedingly exhausting, especially when the other person isn't even trying to argue.

Yes, but just because it spurred a thought in your mind that was only kinda sorta related doesn't mean that they should get a pass for shoddy songwriting.

No it doesn't, they could greatly improve their songwriting. When I think of it, they don't repeat the same terms in songs nearly as much as other artists/bands I've heard. And, they usually start off sentences with different words and terms. The only thing you usually hear repetitiously from them is the "better way" type of lyrics.

I know you're thinking that if it had a positive effect on someone, then it can't be bad songwriting because God used it... but we've established that God can use very imperfect things to get His point across.

Be very careful with your assumptions. It's cleary apparent, you don't know what I think. I don't think because God uses a song in someone's life that the song is necessarily written good and that the song writing can't be horrific. It could be atrocious, but if God uses it to touch your life in some way, I don't think it's absurd to like the song, even though it might be stated poorly or/and could be considerably improved. Just because I like the music of Kutless doesn't mean I'm completely oblivious if somethings bad songwriting or not. I don't think generalizing things is necessarily bad songwriting; sure, being specific showcases your attempts at it massively, but I think a diversity in it is good, unless God wants you to solely write one way (and I'm not implying that He wants Kutless to write in any specific way, or even at all, I'm generalizing).

And it's not like those songs wouldn't have affected you if they were better written. Kutless has nothing to lose by improving artistically, but their current popularity and everybody telling them they're right on the money gives them a considerable amount of inertia.

Once again, the songs in themselves DON't affect me, God does through the songs. And it's true, it doesn't hurt at all to improve your writing skills, every songwriter should constantly look for ways to perfect how they write songs--though no song is ever completely, perfectly written. I'd love to hear Kutless mature more in their songwriting, along with most other Christian artists and bands that are out there.

He works in mysterious ways. I realize that. I still don't think it's an excuse for throwing creativity out the window.

Yes He does work in mysterious ways. It's even more mysterious to me than it probably is to you, because after all I didn't like their music much, nor did I ever think I would. I guess it's just another sign to me that, it's not because they are some great band that I like them now, but rather because God does draw me to their music; and that is probably the reason I like their music as much as I do. Because it's NOT about them with me, it's about HIM. Just because God works, that doesn't excuse throwing creativity out the window. It should be a reason to use it more often.

Just ask yourself when writing a phrase or coming with with a musical passage, "Have I heard this before? Am I simply borrowing from my influences, or am I combining them in ways that color outside the lines? How can I express this in a way that gets the point across while being unique to my perspective, my personal testimony?" If you can't answer those fundamental questions for yourself, then in my opinion, you're in no place to be making art and selling it.

Good thoughts.

Well, my short list of favorite Critical Whipping Boys includes the following:

FFH
Building 429
12 Stones
Casting Crowns (though their latest showed marked improvement)
SonicFlood (the post-Jeff Deyo lineup)
Jump5
Krystal Meyers

If you're curious as to why, I found a nifty little tool on my Epinions account that sort all my reviews with the lowest ratings first, so click on some of the 1- and 2-star rated ones.

http://www.epinions.com/user-divad23/show_~content/pp_~1/sort_~prdrt/sort_dir_~asc/sec_~public_profile_opinion_list

That is a short list.
I actually thought you might like some of the song-writing from Casting Crowns, it's not really surprizing though. I can mostly  agree with the list, though I like some songs from a couple of the artists, (mainly depending on the cd) and a few song exceptions here and there with the rest.

[murlough23]

I don't think there's ever going to be a perfect example.

Well, no, but I figured it prudent to give that little disclaimer, because you are going to see some instances of this band that I'm recommending doing a few of the things that I criticize other bands for. Nobody's immune. Even my favorite band (Jars of Clay) falls prey to the cliche machine at times.

You do realize Kutless isn't the only band I like...?

Most people don't just like one band. Since you haven't really named any others, though, that was all I had to go on.

No kidding, but inspite of what we do, He can and does use us. And, you must know this Scripture by now (since it's one of the most common) that says: "And we know that all things work together for good, to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." Rom. 8:28 That states it all right there.

Right, so if we mess up, God still works it for good, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying to get it right.

That wouldn't be right. Do have any friends who are currently Kutless fans?

LOL, it's the fault of one of my best friends that I ever got on Kutless's case in the first place. Back when I first met her in 2002, we were exchanging musical interests, and she loaned me three CD's that she thought I'd like, one of which was Kutless's debut. And my first question after listening to it was, "Uh, you have heard of Creed, right? Because this CD totally rips them off." We still get along quite well and have plenty of musical interests in common (as well as many other, more important things), but I've never let her live the Kutless thing down. It's friendly teasing. She knows it.

That's really sad about arguing til your face turns blue. Have you ever done that?

Figure of speech, obviously.

I never knew displaying your opinions was necessarily arguing; discussing sounds more like the word to me.

"Debating" is the word I like to use, but really, it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I can usually tell when I've crossed the line between a spirited, academic debate on a subject and a personal vendetta, where I have to win at all costs and do whatever I can think of to discredit the other person... and it's ugly when I let myself go there, so that's why I have to stop myself from time to time. basically this is a weakness that I'm admitting to, and I'm trying not to waste my breath on subjects where I've already explained myself, and continuing to reiterate the same points is only going to annoy me and everyone else because it'll get very repetitive, and when I get annoyed, I let my guard down and I don't fight fair. We're making plenty of headway in other parts of this discussion, so I'm allocating my time to those.

Be careful not to argue, because it can become exceedingly exhausting, especially when the other person isn't even trying to argue.

No, it can't.

No it doesn't, they could greatly improve their songwriting. When I think of it, they don't repeat the same terms in songs nearly as much as other artists/bands I've heard. And, they usually start off sentences with different words and terms.

So they move the words around a bit. That doesn't really impress me. I'm still hearing very commonplace phrases and ideas that have been expressed much better elsewhere. It's not a matter of them repeating themselves (though one can only do so much with 12 power chords!) as it is a matter of repeating what others have stated more eloquently.

Be very careful with your assumptions. It's cleary apparent, you don't know what I think. I don't think because God uses a song in someone's life that the song is necessarily written good and that the song writing can't be horrific.

The very crux of your argument at the beginning seemed to hinge on the fact that God used those songs in your life. If that wasn't meant to serve as a defense of those songs, then why bring it up?

It could be atrocious, but if God uses it to touch your life in some way, I don't think it's absurd to like the song, even though it might be stated poorly or/and could be considerably improved.

I like plenty of things that could be better, so I agree with you here. But it begs the question of why we bother making the "God used it" excuse on the band's behalf. That's my point. If God can use the most ineloquent losers on the planet (I'm not saying the guys in Kutless are those losers, I'm just saying that if God can use the worst for the best), then it really isn't saying much on a person's behalf to cite that defense.

Just because I like the music of Kutless doesn't mean I'm completely oblivious if somethings bad songwriting or not.

The way you're responding to - and often still not understanding - my reasons for criticizing their songs does seem to indicate that you're new to the concept.

I don't think generalizing things is necessarily bad songwriting; sure, being specific showcases your attempts at it massively, but I think a diversity in it is good, unless God wants you to solely write one way (and I'm not implying that He wants Kutless to write in any specific way, or even at all, I'm generalizing).

I don't think there's one specific way that God wants all songwriters to write. I can only surmise that a God who gave us brains and told us to honor Him with all of our minds might be a bit offended when we fall drastically short of the mental capacity he's giving us. That's not to say that the brainiest, wordiest songwriters are the most God-honoring ones - but I think there's a big difference between whether you tried to express something unique, or you just followed the crowd.

Perhaps you have a difference of opinion here, and it's not that you're oblivious to bad songwriting, you just have different ideas about what it is and why. What, in your estimation, makes a song by a Christian songwriter good or bad? I'm asking this because a lot of other Christians seem to assume that if it's a clearly Christian song, it can't possibly be a bad one. (Unless they think the music is weird or don't understand the lyrics or something. Then apparently it's demonic.)

Once again, the songs in themselves DON't affect me, God does through the songs.

I was using one as shorthand for the other; sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I'd love to hear Kutless mature more in their songwriting, along with most other Christian artists and bands that are out there.

So would I. But do you think most of their fans give a rip one way or the other?

It's even more mysterious to me than it probably is to you, because after all I didn't like their music much, nor did I ever think I would. I guess it's just another sign to me that, it's not because they are some great band that I like them now, but rather because God does draw me to their music; and that is probably the reason I like their music as much as I do. Because it's NOT about them with me, it's about HIM.

If you're acknowledging this, then I can't really understand why you still listen to Kutless and bother to spend so much effort defending them, if all they really were was the thing that God used to get the job done when you desperately needed an encouraging word.

Let's make an analogy. Let's say you're a bum, and you're starving, and you find somebody's McDonald's leftovers in a garbage bin. You eat them, and because you haven't had solid food in days, it tastes pretty good to you. Eating that food sustains your energy and keeps you alive, and after some unspecified period of time that you spent living in the streets and scavenging for other people's leftovers, you finally find a way to get yourself cleaned up, get a job, and move into an apartment. Now you can buy your own food and you don't need to settle for unsanitary leftovers dug out of the garbage. You'll always remember that those McDonald's leftovers gave you what you needed when you were in dire straits, but you're not going to go down to the alley by your apartment to dig out more, now that you have the means to get healthier food (or at least food you bought for yourself).

To bring this full circle, even if mediocre music met your needs during a time in your life when you needed to be reminded of the basics, now that you have a grasp on those basics, why not seek out something deeper and more fulfilling in your listening choices?

That is a short list.

There are other artists that I've been very critical of, but in more of a sense that they're rather "meh" - average, don't do much to stand out from the crowd, etc. Those aren't as fun to harp on, because I'm just kind "whatever" about most of 'em. The ones I listed above have somehow managed to excel at being really bad, to the point where I'm actually impressed at how much they suck. (Most of them do have a song or to that I'd admit to liking, or at least I would if you held a gun to my head.)

I actually thought you might like some of the song-writing from Casting Crowns, it's not really surprizing though.

To some extent, I think they've got genuine conviction, and aren't afraid to express that in a way that causes believers to really stop and think, and I admire that. The problem is that they're still figuring out how to do that creatively instead of just making it sound like you're getting lectured by your youth pastor. (No offense intended to any youth pastors present. But you're not in a band.) I think they also cast the blame on scapegoats far too easily - I still haven't gotten over the line where Mark Hall yelled at me for asking Oprah what to do, or the whole song where he told me that actually making money would cause me to ignore my wife and kids. (Just like with the Kutless songs I pointed out, I know he didn't mean it that way, but that's the way it comes across - it's easy to point fingers at superficial targets like those and get the Christian crowd cheering, because gee, I don't watch Oprah and I'm not rich, so yeah, those other people are evildoers!)

I can mostly  agree with the list, though I like some songs from a couple of the artists, (mainly depending on the cd) and a few song exceptions here and there with the rest.

We all have different hitlists. There may be some of my favorites that are on your personal hitlist, for all I know.

[NewDimension]

Well, no, but I figured it prudent to give that little disclaimer, because you are going to see some instances of this band that I'm recommending doing a few of the things that I criticize other bands for. Nobody's immune. Even my favorite band (Jars of Clay) falls prey to the cliche machine at times.

So if nobody's immune, what have been some of your cliches?

Right, so if we mess up, God still works it for good, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying to get it right.

Exactly.

LOL, it's the fault of one of my best friends that I ever got on Kutless's case in the first place. Back when I first met her in 2002, we were exchanging musical interests, and she loaned me three CD's that she thought I'd like, one of which was Kutless's debut. And my first question after listening to it was, "Uh, you have heard of Creed, right? Because this CD totally rips them off." We still get along quite well and have plenty of musical interests in common (as well as many other, more important things), but I've never let her live the Kutless thing down. It's friendly teasing. She knows it.

So is it friendly teasing to say, you absolutely LOVE Kutless?

So they move the words around a bit. That doesn't really impress me. I'm still hearing very commonplace phrases and ideas that have been expressed much better elsewhere. It's not a matter of them repeating themselves (though one can only do so much with 12 power chords!) as it is a matter of repeating what others have stated more eloquently.

What are those power chords? You can do a lot of different combinations with 12 chords.

The very crux of your argument at the beginning seemed to hinge on the fact that God used those songs in your life. If that wasn't meant to serve as a defense of those songs, then why bring it up?

If look back at my first post on this thread, you will see that I was asking why you guys didn't like them. I asked if it was okay to constantly criticise someone God used to impact people's lives for His glory. (Can't you tell, I love asking questions and finding out the answers?) Then "Ian" said that my claim of God using them to impact people was questionable. I wasn't intending on bringing that up, but God has impacted my life for His glory through them, that's undeniable to me. That's the main reason why it got brought up in the first place.

I like plenty of things that could be better, so I agree with you here. But it begs the question of why we bother making the "God used it" excuse on the band's behalf. That's my point. If God can use the most ineloquent losers on the planet (I'm not saying the guys in Kutless are those losers, I'm just saying that if God can use the worst for the best), then it really isn't saying much on a person's behalf to cite that defense.

Sure saying "God used it" isn't saying much on their behalf, except God did use them which I think absolutely great. I think it's great that they are the indirect object in a sentence where God is the direct object; I think that's the best position any band/artist will ever be in to me.  No one can fully explain or defend why they write and compose things the way they do except for them. I'd be lying to say they're the greatest song writers (I don't know of anyone who really is) and I'd be lying to say I think they're bad and terrible at songwriting.
So what do you think needs to be defended?

The way you're responding to - and often still not understanding - my reasons for criticizing their songs does seem to indicate that you're new to the concept.

It depends what perspective you view the song from.

I don't think there's one specific way that God wants all songwriters to write. I can only surmise that a God who gave us brains and told us to honor Him with all of our minds might be a bit offended when we fall drastically short of the mental capacity he's giving us. That's not to say that the brainiest, wordiest songwriters are the most God-honoring ones - but I think there's a big difference between whether you tried to express something unique, or you just followed the crowd.

Exactly.

Perhaps you have a difference of opinion here, and it's not that you're oblivious to bad songwriting, you just have different ideas about what it is and why. What, in your estimation, makes a song by a Christian songwriter good or bad? I'm asking this because a lot of other Christians seem to assume that if it's a clearly Christian song, it can't possibly be a bad one. (Unless they think the music is weird or don't understand the lyrics or something. Then apparently it's demonic.)

Well, there is a difference between bad songwriting, good songwriting, and mediocre songwriting which I think is one of the biggest keys to the song. The vocals, music, and arrangment definetly play a major part as well on whether it's a good or bad song. I don't think just because it's a Christian song that it's necessarily good in all of these musical and songwriting elements, it's good that it's a Christian song....I guess. And just because the music is weird or you don't understand the lyrics, doesn't make it demonic.
There is a difference between what makes a song good or bad and if you actually like the song or not. There's many songs that could be pretty good say, in songwriting sturcture and everything, that I totally don't dig at all. I think in order for you to like something, there has to be fairly reasonable amount of each of these fundamental elements that you think are good in a song. A song can be good, but not something I like and want to listen to.

A good Christian song: (not necessarily something I like)

The songwriting-  There should be a certian amount of clarity in the song so you know what it's basically about . The themes should tie together. I don't think it's always good when lyrics are repetitive in songs.
 A few questions that should be asked when writing a song: Is there a conclusion to the song? What type of conclusion? What is the message you want others to take away from the song? Is it specified to Christians or non-Christians? Can you communitcate it in a way that would be understandable to both and even if you could do you want to? Is the message your trying to convey being uniquely expressed? How will Christians view it? How will non-Christians view it?
I think you can write good songs generalizing or specifing certain details in the song. It depends what's being generalized, I think certain things should be specified, but you don't necessarly have to specify everything. In songs with more specific detail, I think you have to watch that the song doesn't sound like a run-on or something that people can't get the meaning of no matter how hard they try.
Rhymes are good in songs, but sometimes overused depending on what type of rhyme it is; and other times underused. Rhymes can add a lot to a song, and other times really depleat from it.
Good songs are creatively catchy; stating something you don't hear often; or stating something in a way you don't hear it often. Good songs can be simplistic also and just as catchy; sometimes songs are overly complicated and don't need to be long and try to have creative attempts to stir up a subject. If it's still a good song this will show.
I hate it when songwriters force lyrics with no inspiration or creativity at the time. Instead, they should wait to complete the song and not force it when there's nothing really coming to their minds for it, at the time.  There is a difference between forcing it and putting thought into it. Put all the thought you can into it, but when no thoughts are coming or their just repetitve, old, or someone else's words, stop writing and wait for a more opportune time. Speaking of thoughts, no more are coming to my mind about this.....I'm probably forgetting to add a lot more than I could.

The vocals- The vocals are extremely vital to the song. I think the singer should echo the words so people can understand what's being sung/screamed/rapped/etc, otherwise there's no point in writing a song, all you'd have to do is make up words as you go along. There's a lot more to this, but everyone likes different sounds.

The music and arrangment- The music is really important as well. You could have the best lyrics and singer, and have terrible music which spoils the whole thing. Everyone has their own opinion of good sounding music like everything else. The music should flow together, and be diversely composed.

That's just the general overview of a good Christian song to me. Once again, a good song can be something I don't particularly like. If you want to know more about what I like in a song, just ask me more specific questions.

So would I. But do you think most of their fans give a rip one way or the other?

 A lot of their fans are really intelligent, but I don't think most of them scrutinize lyrical structures that much, or try to view a song from both the Christian persepective and the non-Christian perspectives, so I don't think the majority would care either way. If they did analyze the songs that way, I think a good share of them would care, sure some wouldn't at all, but I think a good share would anyway.

If you're acknowledging this, then I can't really understand why you still listen to Kutless and bother to spend so much effort defending them, if all they really were was the thing that God used to get the job done when you desperately needed an encouraging word.

You may never understand why, unless you have a similar experience yourself. And precisely why I like their music is because God does use it in my life.....not just did use it. There are other reasons also....

To bring this full circle, even if mediocre music met your needs during a time in your life when you needed to be reminded of the basics, now that you have a grasp on those basics, why not seek out something deeper and more fulfilling in your listening choices?

To start, everytime I do listen to their music, I get a deeper revelation and learn something new. There is nothing I really think is as fulfilling than being in the presence of God, in that special place in His presence where you feel Him and hear Him, and He fills you again, and manifests His glory to you, and just knowing that He's there----God---is there. That is the most fulfilling thing to me in music, when God inhabits the praises of His people....when He is there in the midst, when He demonstrates His power....when He touches your heart. I can't really keep talking about how awesome this is....it's too awesome to describe. What can be deeper and more fulfilling than that? That is what happens when I listen to their music. If only you could experience that.
What is your definition of something deeper and more fulfilling?
And I love listening to a lot of other music, and finding new music.

(Most of them do have a song or to that I'd admit to liking, or at least I would if you held a gun to my head.)

That would be interesting. I'd like to see a movie like that. Which song would fit perfect in that scenario?

To some extent, I think they've got genuine conviction, and aren't afraid to express that in a way that causes believers to really stop and think, and I admire that. The problem is that they're still figuring out how to do that creatively instead of just making it sound like you're getting lectured by your youth pastor. (No offense intended to any youth pastors present. But you're not in a band.) I think they also cast the blame on scapegoats far too easily - I still haven't gotten over the line where Mark Hall yelled at me for asking Oprah what to do, or the whole song where he told me that actually making money would cause me to ignore my wife and kids. (Just like with the Kutless songs I pointed out, I know he didn't mean it that way, but that's the way it comes across - it's easy to point fingers at superficial targets like those and get the Christian crowd cheering, because gee, I don't watch Oprah and I'm not rich, so yeah, those other people are evildoers!)

Which song is that? (shows how much I know their music)
The only songs I really like from what I've heard from them is: "Set Me Free" "If We Are The Body" and "East to West"

We all have different hitlists. There may be some of my favorites that are on your personal hitlist, for all I know.

The thing is I don't have a hitlist. If I don't particularly like a certain artist/band's sound or songwriting, I try to forget about them (except to pray for them).
What are some of your favorites?

[murlough23]

So if nobody's immune, what have been some of your cliches?

Mine, personally? You mean in my songwriting? I wrote stuff in college that makes me cringe now, but I don't have it in front of me at the moment, so I can't give examples.

So is it friendly teasing to say, you absolutely LOVE Kutless?

No, that'd just be factually inaccurate. Teasing is usually witty.

What are those power chords?

Um, let's see... I'm not a music theory expert, but I'm gonna guess A flat, A, B flat, B, C, C sharp, D, E flat, E, F, F sharp, and G? Essentially it's the easiest way to play each of those chords, by taking the same chord shape formed with your fingers and moving it up and down the neck of the guitar, which is why it's so heavily used in rock music, and why it gets so boring to hear all the time.

You can do a lot of different combinations with 12 chords.

Sure, but when you have a band who follows the rules about sticking with the key of the song 9 times out of 10 and not doing anything melodically tricky, that whittles it down to about the same 4 chords in nearly every song. (Maybe they'll change keys between songs, but you've still got the whole root-fourth-fifth thing going on, with maybe a minor version of the fourth or fifth here and there.)

Listen to bands who have more notably talented guitarists - they will pick individual notes, play interesting solos, find ways to bend or otherwise distort the sound, or use different types of guitars to suit the different songs. Sure, I realize that every now and then Kutless whips out an acoustic guitar, but by and large, most of their electric guitar work is rather homogenous. The amazing thing to me is that Kutless has two guitarists, and yet I don't ever hear that enough work's being done to justify actually having two people doing it. Usually a two-guitar setup means that someone's playing lead and someone's playing rhythm - with Kutless, it's nearly all rhythm guitar.

If look back at my first post on this thread, you will see that I was asking why you guys didn't like them. I asked if it was okay to constantly criticise someone God used to impact people's lives for His glory.

Fine. The answer's "yes". Let's move on.

(Can't you tell, I love asking questions and finding out the answers?)

And nitpicking them.

Then "Ian" said that my claim of God using them to impact people was questionable. I wasn't intending on bringing that up, but God has impacted my life for His glory through them, that's undeniable to me. That's the main reason why it got brought up in the first place.

The claim of God using them to impact people was brought up before the criticism of that claim, but just to be clear, I never questioned that claim.

Sure saying "God used it" isn't saying much on their behalf, except God did use them which I think absolutely great. I think it's great that they are the indirect object in a sentence where God is the direct object; I think that's the best position any band/artist will ever be in to me.  No one can fully explain or defend why they write and compose things the way they do except for them. I'd be lying to say they're the greatest song writers (I don't know of anyone who really is) and I'd be lying to say I think they're bad and terrible at songwriting.

Eh. You will once you're exposed to a lot of good songwriting. Give it time.

So what do you think needs to be defended?

Nothing, but then, I'm not the one arguing on their behalf.

There is a difference between what makes a song good or bad and if you actually like the song or not. There's many songs that could be pretty good say, in songwriting sturcture and everything, that I totally don't dig at all. I think in order for you to like something, there has to be fairly reasonable amount of each of these fundamental elements that you think are good in a song. A song can be good, but not something I like and want to listen to.

I agree; there's music that I respect but don't really enjoy listening to. Kutless, unfortunately, meets neither requirement.

A few questions that should be asked when writing a song: Is there a conclusion to the song? What type of conclusion? What is the message you want others to take away from the song?

This is where I think certain songwriters get misunderstood - some prefer to tell a story and leave it to the listener to connect the dots regarding the moral of it. I get rather annoyed, frankly, when it feels like there's always the requirement to wrap things up in a neat, tidy bow within for minutes, because life isn't that way. There's a right and wrong, but sometimes you have to wrestle with a moral dilemma for a while, or you go on oblivious to your sin, etc. There's a myriad of ways that these things could play out. The job of songwriting is not necessarily to teach right and wrong; it's to illustrate the experience in a way that gets the listener to ponder how they feel about it.

In songs with more specific detail, I think you have to watch that the song doesn't sound like a run-on or something that people can't get the meaning of no matter how hard they try.

What if what you're writing isn't intended to clearly communicate a specific message to begin with? What if it's just a poetic exploration of something that is beautiful? Or something that is ugly? Can you convey that feeling without having to spell everything out for the listener? (Obviously, you can, but the CCM audience has typically shown very little patience for this.)

I'm not saying that songwriting should be amoral, or that we should stop making clear declarations of what we believe to be right and wrong. The thing is, you're writing to either an audience who likely already agrees with you about the right and wrong (fellow Christians), or to one who isn't likely to change their views on right and wrong just because you said so (non-Christians). So what are you really accomplishing if your only aim is clear-cut teaching? That's when preaching might be a better venue for you than the arts.

Rhymes are good in songs, but sometimes overused depending on what type of rhyme it is; and other times underused. Rhymes can add a lot to a song, and other times really depleat from it.

Rhymes have a certain way of satisfying the ear - I particularly appreciate them when they're clever, though sometimes clever rhymes can be a bit contrived. I'm not a big hip-hop fan, but certain rappers who can come up with complex rhyme schemes (several words or phrases rhyming within a few short lines, not necessarily at the end of each line) really get my respect for their ability to play with words. It's when a songwriter adheres so strictly to the notion that EVERYTHING MUST RHYME! that I start to get annoyed, because that's usually when they fall back on the old standbys.

My usual criteria for this is that if I can predict how nearly every line of your song is going to be followed up with a particular rhyme, then you're not trying hard enough. If you sing about having great sorrow, I'm immediately going to put a lot of focus on that next line. "Oh, no, they'd better not drop the 'tomorrow' anvil on me... wait for it... DOH!"

Good songs are creatively catchy; stating something you don't hear often; or stating something in a way you don't hear it often. Good songs can be simplistic also and just as catchy; sometimes songs are overly complicated and don't need to be long and try to have creative attempts to stir up a subject. If it's still a good song this will show.

I just reviewed Thrice's latest album - they're a mainstream rock band but their lead singer is a Christian. Some of the lyrics on their latest album are very simple and easy to follow, particularly their song "Come All You Weary". A Christian who is familiar with Jesus speaking that phrase can probably figure out what that song's all about just from the title. What makes it work is their attention to detail in the recording process, and the way that the songwriter took a very simple concept and rephrased it just enough to show that he had thought personally about what it meant to him. It's still a very general song that goes against my usual rule of "be more specific!", but it works.

(Go listen to it on their MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/thrice)

The vocals- The vocals are extremely vital to the song. I think the singer should echo the words so people can understand what's being sung/screamed/rapped/etc, otherwise there's no point in writing a song, all you'd have to do is make up words as you go along. There's a lot more to this, but everyone likes different sounds.

While I'm not a big fan of the vocals being obscured to the point where you can't understand what words are being sung or spoken, I don't feel that you should need to repeat something a lot just for it to be understood. Obviously most songs have choruses, and that's the part of the song that you really want to sum things up and drive your point home, but this is where a lot of bands fail. Here's the problem - you're going to repeat the same lines of lyrics after the first verse as you are at the end of the song. Since they'll be the last thing people hear (in most songs, anyway), they bear the burden of being the song's conclusion, its main thesis. If your song describes a troubled individual or situation, the problem is that the happy ending comes to soon, and your second verse feels a bit out of place, or there's no conflict or tension in it. You run the risk of sounding trite because you jump to your conclusion too quickly. I think good songwriters know how to avoid that pitfall by writing a memorable chorus that doesn't give everything away - you can leave your conclusion or moral or whatever for the bridge or the coda.

A lot of their fans are really intelligent, but I don't think most of them scrutinize lyrical structures that much, or try to view a song from both the Christian persepective and the non-Christian perspectives, so I don't think the majority would care either way. If they did analyze the songs that way, I think a good share of them would care, sure some wouldn't at all, but I think a good share would anyway.

I think it never hurts to pay more than just superficial attention to whatever you're listening to. We need more CCM that holds up to the scrutiny, instead of just being generally pleasant at first glance. Doesn't mean it can't be simple, or happy. It just means that it needs to try harder to make that connection with the listener.

I can't really keep talking about how awesome this is....it's too awesome to describe. What can be deeper and more fulfilling than that? That is what happens when I listen to their music. If only you could experience that.

The thing is that I've experienced that through the work of other artists who have tried much, much harder and given me something far more creative to ponder. There's simply no going back at this point.

What is your definition of something deeper and more fulfilling?

Something that makes me think, that challenges me.

That would be interesting. I'd like to see a movie like that. Which song would fit perfect in that scenario?

I'm sorry; why are we talking about movies?

Which song is that? (shows how much I know their music)

"What If His People Prayed" and "American Dream" from their debut album are the ones I'm thinking of.

The only songs I really like from what I've heard from them is: "Set Me Free" "If We Are The Body" and "East to West"

None of those are that bad. "Set Me Free" is a little obvious, but it's at least dramatic. "If We Are the Body" has something genuinely convicting to say; it's a bit of a lecture/guilt trip in its approach, but at least there's a "we" instead of a "you" where the finger's being pointed. "East to West" shows a good grasp of what that phrase really means, of being separated that far from our sin. Mark Hall can write good songs when he really tries.

The thing is I don't have a hitlist. If I don't particularly like a certain artist/band's sound or songwriting, I try to forget about them (except to pray for them).

Wow. That is so Mary Sue-ish that it's not even funny.

What are some of your favorites?

Jars of Clay would be my all-time favorite. The rest of the list includes, but is not limited to:

(Christian artists - not necessarily CCM)
Anathallo
Anberlin
Burlap to Cashmere
Caedmon's Call
David Crowder Band
dc Talk
Deas Vail
Delirious?
Eisley
Future of Forestry
Iona
Jennifer Knapp
Kevin Max
The Listening
Mae
Michelle Tumes
Mute Math
Out of the Grey
Over the Rhine
Relient K
Sixpence None the Richer
Skillet
Sleeping at Last
Steven Delopoulos
Sufjan Stevens
Switchfoot
U2

(mainstream artists)
Barenaked Ladies
Björk
Incubus
Iron & Wine
Matchbox Twenty
Nickel Creek
Radiohead
Vienna Teng

[murlough23]

By the way, since we're getting into the subject of songwriting dos and don'ts, I thought I'd list a few of my other pet peeves:

Yoda-isms. You know, the type of phrase where the subject and predicate are flipped - "When at Your feet I fall" or "Until the day Your face I see" are good examples. It can sometimes be valid when the entire songwriting style is meant to be more poetic and loose with the language, but it really bugs when songwriters who generally communicate in very direct terms do this just for the sake of a contrived rhyme. It bothers me less in future tense (e.g. "At the feet of Jesus we will bow") than it does in present tense, for some strange reason.

Rhyming a word with itself. Or with a homonym of itself. This is less of a big deal when you've got a song where many lines end in the same word intentionally, but when you've got a typical A/B/A/B rhyme scheme, it bugs me when the A's are different words and the B's are the same word. If your intent is to rhyme different words, don't get lazy about it. Example (and this is actually from a song that I think is otherwise pretty awesome) - rhyming "the big birds sharpen their claws" with "You wouldn't play Santa Claus" in the Newsboys' "Lost the Plot".

Stock characters. Individual people introduced with only a name or sometimes just a gender, on whom just a few short lines are spent to establish that they're hurting or feeling some general emotion, merely used as props to lead into a very general chorus about pretty much everybody. my feeling is, don't introduce characters if you don't have any real story to tell about them. If you want to sing about everybody, then just sing about everybody (though this also puts you in danger of writing a very generic song, but some bands pull it off reasonably well - see Casting Crowns' "Every Man").

Placing emphasis on articles, conjunctions, or other parts of speech not normally emphasized. If your chorus melody is written in such a way that the big soaring note falls on "a", "an", "the", "with", etc., then you probably need to rephrase it. I also hate it when a phrase from a song is repeated, but cut off abruptly at a word such as "the", where it's not even a complete thought. Usually that's done because the songwriter or performer isn't sure how to lead from a chorus back into a verse, or vice versa. In general, if singing leads you to emphasize a lot of syllables that aren't where the accents fall in everyday speech, it's gonna sound awkward.

Incorrect use of Ye Olde English, or mixing it with Modern English. "Thou" means you. "Thee" also means you, but when something's being done or said or directed to you. For example, it would sound really awkward to sing "How Great Thee Art" or "I Exalt Thou". Also, "Thy" and "Thine" mean "Your" or "Yours". Basically, avoid these altogether if you don't know how to use them correctly. And don't use "You" and "Thou" or "Thee" in the same song. That's just laziness to make a rhyme work. ("As the Deer" is a really beautiful worship song, but the line "You alone are my heart's desire, and I long to worship Thee" really messes me up.)

Anyone else got some good examples?

NP: "Walken", Wilco

[bloop]

"You alone are my heart's desire, and I long to worship Thee"

Churches I've attended in the past have often sang "you" in both locations.  It's just another worship song I've gotten sick of, though.  I just reject the idea that I need to sing the same idea 20 times to get it, so I really don't like modern worship songs much.  Seriously, put a period on it and let it be.

[murlough23]

Churches I've attended in the past have often sang "you" in both locations.  It's just another worship song I've gotten sick of, though.  I just reject the idea that I need to sing the same idea 20 times to get it, so I really don't like modern worship songs much.  Seriously, put a period on it and let it be.

I think you can overuse just about anything, and that doesn't necessarily make the material bad, it just reflects a lack of new ideas.

It's probably a whole other thread topic, but what do you think "worship" in church services would look like if approached more intelligently? I agree that "modern worship" the way we typically understand it as a musical genre is growing stale and needs a shot in the arm. But any new spin on it is still going to be "modern" (we could call is post-modern or some other such nonsense, but that's all just semantics). So how do we truly escape the rut?

I sometimes question whether we need songs that everyone can sing along to in order to set the right mood on Sunday mornings. Or whether worship has to always be presented as music in the first place. I suppose it's an easily identifiable way to get people to participate... but it does run the risk of alienating the people who are paying the most attention to the details, and who listen to a lot of music on their own. What's step 1 toward solving that problem?

NP: "Ten Feet High", Andrea Corr

[bloop]

Well, I guess I just favor hymns.  Different verses each time through the melody helps a lot, and the choruses are only sung about the same number of times as the number of verses (and we don't repeat the last line until I want to shoot the worship leader).  Some profound ideas there as well, lyrically. 

If modern worship followed a similar template, possibly updating to a more modern vernacular, I could probably get on board.

Oh, and let's get the organ back in the picture.  There's nary a more powerful musical instrument I know.

[spacebrat311]

"I sometimes question whether we need songs that everyone can sing along to in order to set the right mood on Sunday mornings. Or whether worship has to always be presented as music in the first place."

That's so where I am right now. I really want to start a new type of "worship service" with the group of friends I do house-church with whenever I'm home for the summers, but I'm at a place where I've been figuring out a lot of what I don't want but haven't yet gotten to what I do want. Matter of time, I hope.

[murlough23]

Well, I guess I just favor hymns.  Different verses each time through the melody helps a lot, and the choruses are only sung about the same number of times as the number of verses (and we don't repeat the last line until I want to shoot the worship leader).  Some profound ideas there as well, lyrically.

If modern worship followed a similar template, possibly updating to a more modern vernacular, I could probably get on board.

I'm all for more literate songwriting - hymns prove that people can follow even when the lyrics are more verbose. I think it's possible to move forward while respecting and learning from past traditions.

Oh, and let's get the organ back in the picture.  There's nary a more powerful musical instrument I know.

Though certainly not as portable. One basically has to be built into your church, doesn't it? Though I suppose ths ound could be easily simulated with modern technology, but there's no beating the real thing.

Regardless of what tactics we use, though, repeating any of it too much is gonna be new wine in old wineskins, so to speak.

[NewDimension]

Mine, personally? You mean in my songwriting? I wrote stuff in college that makes me cringe now, but I don't have it in front of me at the moment, so I can't give examples.

Yes, yours. It doesn't have to be secluded to songwriting either.

No, that'd just be factually inaccurate. Teasing is usually witty.

I thought friendly teasing could be inaccurate.

Um, let's see... I'm not a music theory expert, but I'm gonna guess A flat, A, B flat, B, C, C sharp, D, E flat, E, F, F sharp, and G? Essentially it's the easiest way to play each of those chords, by taking the same chord shape formed with your fingers and moving it up and down the neck of the guitar, which is why it's so heavily used in rock music, and why it gets so boring to hear all the time.

So what chords do you think are tricky?

Listen to bands who have more notably talented guitarists - they will pick individual notes, play interesting solos, find ways to bend or otherwise distort the sound, or use different types of guitars to suit the different songs. Sure, I realize that every now and then Kutless whips out an acoustic guitar, but by and large, most of their electric guitar work is rather homogenous. The amazing thing to me is that Kutless has two guitarists, and yet I don't ever hear that enough work's being done to justify actually having two people doing it. Usually a two-guitar setup means that someone's playing lead and someone's playing rhythm - with Kutless, it's nearly all rhythm guitar.

Well they have another new guitarist, and we'll see what they do on the new record.

And nitpicking them.

Like how?

Eh. You will once you're exposed to a lot of good songwriting. Give it time.

I'm not so sure of that. And plus, their songwriting skills are subject to change. I don't know if I'll ever hear a LOT of good songwriting.

I agree; there's music that I respect but don't really enjoy listening to. Kutless, unfortunately, meets neither requirement.

They might someday.

This is where I think certain songwriters get misunderstood - some prefer to tell a story and leave it to the listener to connect the dots regarding the moral of it.

Wouldn't some of Kutless's songs fall under that then?

I get rather annoyed, frankly, when it feels like there's always the requirement to wrap things up in a neat, tidy bow within for minutes, because life isn't that way. There's a right and wrong, but sometimes you have to wrestle with a moral dilemma for a while, or you go on oblivious to your sin, etc. There's a myriad of ways that these things could play out. The job of songwriting is not necessarily to teach right and wrong; it's to illustrate the experience in a way that gets the listener to ponder how they feel about it.

I don't believe you have to necessarily teach right and wrong in songs. What I ment by conclusion, is some songs just don't make sense at all. You can write songs and not explain what happens next, and it can be a good song. It depends on the song. And exactly, songwriting is to illustrate an experience. Different experiences engage different people.

What if what you're writing isn't intended to clearly communicate a specific message to begin with? What if it's just a poetic exploration of something that is beautiful? Or something that is ugly? Can you convey that feeling without having to spell everything out for the listener? (Obviously, you can, but the CCM audience has typically shown very little patience for this.)

Those songs can be written good. It depends on the song.

I'm not saying that songwriting should be amoral, or that we should stop making clear declarations of what we believe to be right and wrong. The thing is, you're writing to either an audience who likely already agrees with you about the right and wrong (fellow Christians), or to one who isn't likely to change their views on right and wrong just because you said so (non-Christians). So what are you really accomplishing if your only aim is clear-cut teaching? That's when preaching might be a better venue for you than the arts.

Who's talking soley about songwriting that illustrates teaching here?

Rhymes have a certain way of satisfying the ear - I particularly appreciate them when they're clever, though sometimes clever rhymes can be a bit contrived. I'm not a big hip-hop fan, but certain rappers who can come up with complex rhyme schemes (several words or phrases rhyming within a few short lines, not necessarily at the end of each line) really get my respect for their ability to play with words. It's when a songwriter adheres so strictly to the notion that EVERYTHING MUST RHYME! that I start to get annoyed, because that's usually when they fall back on the old standbys.

Exactly.

My usual criteria for this is that if I can predict how nearly every line of your song is going to be followed up with a particular rhyme, then you're not trying hard enough. If you sing about having great sorrow, I'm immediately going to put a lot of focus on that next line. "Oh, no, they'd better not drop the 'tomorrow' anvil on me... wait for it... DOH!"

I think people who write songs and/or like studying their structure have the tendancy to know what rhyme is coming next, more than just your average audience.

I just reviewed Thrice's latest album - they're a mainstream rock band but their lead singer is a Christian. Some of the lyrics on their latest album are very simple and easy to follow, particularly their song "Come All You Weary". A Christian who is familiar with Jesus speaking that phrase can probably figure out what that song's all about just from the title. What makes it work is their attention to detail in the recording process, and the way that the songwriter took a very simple concept and rephrased it just enough to show that he had thought personally about what it meant to him. It's still a very general song that goes against my usual rule of "be more specific!", but it works.

(Go listen to it on their MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/thrice)

I'll listen to it more thoroughly later.

While I'm not a big fan of the vocals being obscured to the point where you can't understand what words are being sung or spoken, I don't feel that you should need to repeat something a lot just for it to be understood.

Exactly.

The thing is that I've experienced that through the work of other artists who have tried much, much harder and given me something far more creative to ponder. There's simply no going back at this point.

God works in different ways with different people.

Something that makes me think, that challenges me.

I like those types of songs a lot also.

I'm sorry; why are we talking about movies?

Because what you said would make a great movie.

Wow. That is so Mary Sue-ish that it's not even funny.

That's cause it's not funny.

Jars of Clay would be my all-time favorite. The rest of the list includes, but is not limited to:

(Christian artists - not necessarily CCM)
Anathallo
Anberlin
Burlap to Cashmere
Caedmon's Call
David Crowder Band
dc Talk
Deas Vail
Delirious?
Eisley
Future of Forestry
Iona
Jennifer Knapp
Kevin Max
The Listening
Mae
Michelle Tumes
Mute Math
Out of the Grey
Over the Rhine
Relient K
Sixpence None the Richer
Skillet
Sleeping at Last
Steven Delopoulos
Sufjan Stevens
Switchfoot
U2

(mainstream artists)
Barenaked Ladies
Björk
Incubus
Iron & Wine
Matchbox Twenty
Nickel Creek
Radiohead
Vienna Teng

I like some songs from some of those bands.

[NewDimension]

By the way, since we're getting into the subject of songwriting dos and don'ts, I thought I'd list a few of my other pet peeves:

Yoda-isms. You know, the type of phrase where the subject and predicate are flipped - "When at Your feet I fall" or "Until the day Your face I see" are good examples. It can sometimes be valid when the entire songwriting style is meant to be more poetic and loose with the language, but it really bugs when songwriters who generally communicate in very direct terms do this just for the sake of a contrived rhyme. It bothers me less in future tense (e.g. "At the feet of Jesus we will bow") than it does in present tense, for some strange reason.

Rhyming a word with itself. Or with a homonym of itself. This is less of a big deal when you've got a song where many lines end in the same word intentionally, but when you've got a typical A/B/A/B rhyme scheme, it bugs me when the A's are different words and the B's are the same word. If your intent is to rhyme different words, don't get lazy about it. Example (and this is actually from a song that I think is otherwise pretty awesome) - rhyming "the big birds sharpen their claws" with "You wouldn't play Santa Claus" in the Newsboys' "Lost the Plot".

Stock characters. Individual people introduced with only a name or sometimes just a gender, on whom just a few short lines are spent to establish that they're hurting or feeling some general emotion, merely used as props to lead into a very general chorus about pretty much everybody. my feeling is, don't introduce characters if you don't have any real story to tell about them. If you want to sing about everybody, then just sing about everybody (though this also puts you in danger of writing a very generic song, but some bands pull it off reasonably well - see Casting Crowns' "Every Man").

Placing emphasis on articles, conjunctions, or other parts of speech not normally emphasized. If your chorus melody is written in such a way that the big soaring note falls on "a", "an", "the", "with", etc., then you probably need to rephrase it. I also hate it when a phrase from a song is repeated, but cut off abruptly at a word such as "the", where it's not even a complete thought. Usually that's done because the songwriter or performer isn't sure how to lead from a chorus back into a verse, or vice versa. In general, if singing leads you to emphasize a lot of syllables that aren't where the accents fall in everyday speech, it's gonna sound awkward.

Incorrect use of Ye Olde English, or mixing it with Modern English. "Thou" means you. "Thee" also means you, but when something's being done or said or directed to you. For example, it would sound really awkward to sing "How Great Thee Art" or "I Exalt Thou". Also, "Thy" and "Thine" mean "Your" or "Yours". Basically, avoid these altogether if you don't know how to use them correctly. And don't use "You" and "Thou" or "Thee" in the same song. That's just laziness to make a rhyme work. ("As the Deer" is a really beautiful worship song, but the line "You alone are my heart's desire, and I long to worship Thee" really messes me up.)

Anyone else got some good examples?

NP: "Walken", Wilco

Totally agreed. No examples coming to mind at the moment, you listed all the major ones. I think the most annoying one on the list is the 'Rhyming a word with itsself' one.

[NewDimension]

It's probably a whole other thread topic, but what do you think "worship" in church services would look like if approached more intelligently? I agree that "modern worship" the way we typically understand it as a musical genre is growing stale and needs a shot in the arm. But any new spin on it is still going to be "modern" (we could call is post-modern or some other such nonsense, but that's all just semantics). So how do we truly escape the rut?

Yeah, now we're talking about worship!!!! I absolutely love worship....

Like how do you mean what would worship look like if approached more intelligently? Do you mean the type of music/singing and the song styles? Do you mean the peoples's reactions? Can you elaborate a little more on exactly what you mean.

I sometimes question whether we need songs that everyone can sing along to in order to set the right mood on Sunday mornings.

Do you mean songs that are well-known throughout churches? What other songs are you talking about? Explain what you mean.

I don't think at all you need to have a certain type of song in order to set the mood for church services. In order to set the mood right, you have to set your heart toward God. Prayer and really seeking Him with all that you have, fixing your eyes on Him, letting Him guide you, making you and the service available for everything God wants to do, asking that His presence arrives, is what creates a true atmosphere for His glory to invade the place and fill the hearts of the people. You don't need music, you need the Holy Spirit. Unfortunetely a lot of churches adopt these cute little methods (modern or traditional it doesn't matter) rather than waiting on the Holy Spirit for what's said and done. This whole thing, reminds me of the song "Heart of Worship". The first line in the song says: "When the music fades and all is stripped away, and I simply come......" We need to get to the point that we just come to God, and we can come to Him with our music, but what He wants the most, is us to come to Him wholeheartedly. That is how to set the mood.
I often times think the American church in particular has a skewed perspective on what a "worship leader" is. A worship leader isn't just someone who can play an instrument, sing, and encourage others to. A real worship leader is someone who can lead someone into the presence of God. You can be the world's worst singer/musician/etc.... and still be a worship leader. You can not be a true worship leader, and lead people into the presence of the Lord, if you haven't been in the presence of the Lord yourself. And the deeper, more intimate worship you want to have, it depends on how much further you decide you want to engage in the presence of God. You can experience Him to the level you want. How far do you want to go? What are you doing to get there?

Or whether worship has to always be presented as music in the first place.

I really, really, really, don't believe you have to have music to worship. You can certainly worship with music, and God does meet with you in special ways when music is involved, but  true worship is a matter of the heart, that's why we should worship God with our life, everyday and in all that we do. When worship becomes merely an outward performance, it's no longer worship because it's not something your completely directing toward God, and God wants our full attention. The plain definition of worship is: to love unquestioningly and uncritically; to show devotion to; to show reverance, adoration, praise, exaltion, fear......... and that's not even a theological definition. Now music does have special parts in worship, for instance where they "prophesy with harps, stringed instruments, and cymbals....." 1 Cor. 25:1  and ".....when the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one sound to be heard in praising and thanking the Lord, and when they lifted up their voice with the trumpets and cymbals and instruments of music, and praised the Lord, saying: 'For He is good, for His mercy endures forever.' that the house, the house of the Lord, was filled with a cloud, so that the priests could not continue ministering because of the cloudl for the glory of the Lord filled the house of God." 2 Cor. 5:13-14  and there's so many other instances when music engaged God in another level of worship, and I can tell you, that level of worship is another awesome level!

I suppose it's an easily identifiable way to get people to participate... but it does run the risk of alienating the people who are paying the most attention to the details, and who listen to a lot of music on their own. What's step 1 toward solving that problem?

Identifiable songs can encourage more people to participate, because if you go to a church and you don't know hardly any songs, it can be just something you view from the sideline and watch others do. If you sing songs unidentifiable to most churches, it can be really good for those who go to that church often and are sick of the same routine. I think there should be a good mixture of each.  Always ask God what He wants you to do in that situation.

I need to know more about what the whole problem is.

[murlough23]

Yes, yours. It doesn't have to be secluded to songwriting either.

I'm not sure what other sources there are to draw from, since songwriting is the only form of "creative" writing that I do any more. I used to write short stories... and trust me, you don't want to read any of those.

I thought friendly teasing could be inaccurate.

Yes, but it's supposed to actually be funny.

So what chords do you think are tricky?

You are so missing the point here. My point was that there are many different ways of approaching the guitar and getting different sounds and textures out of it; a lot of modern rock music is limited to what's easiest to play.

Well they have another new guitarist, and we'll see what they do on the new record.

I'm not holding my breath.

I'm not so sure of that. And plus, their songwriting skills are subject to change. I don't know if I'll ever hear a LOT of good songwriting.

Anyone could change, but after four albums, I think they've got a certain amount of inertia. But that's part of the reason I keep bothering to listen, because you never know, they might eventually get something right.

They might someday.
 

Wouldn't some of Kutless's songs fall under that then?

Absolutely not. They don't seem to trust the listener to figure out squat. Their songs are written as if everything needs to make sense to the dumbest of the dumb.

I don't believe you have to necessarily teach right and wrong in songs. What I ment by conclusion, is some songs just don't make sense at all.

And I don't always think that's a bad thing. That's my point.

But if you're trying to make sense and still not making sense (i.e. you're using everyday language and your thought still aren't connecting well to one another), then there might be a problem.

Who's talking soley about songwriting that illustrates teaching here?

I don't know; it just seems to be something that the typical CCM audience seems to latch onto, to the point where they have a hard time accepting songwriting that is more interpretive or cryptic.

I think people who write songs and/or like studying their structure have the tendancy to know what rhyme is coming next, more than just your average audience.

So if you wrote for the people in the audience who paid closer attention, do you think you'd necessarily lose the rest of the audience? If most folks don't know good songwriting from mediocre songwriting, what are they gonna care?

Because what you said would make a great movie.

What, someone holding a gun to my head?

That's cause it's not funny.

Sorry, I just have little patience for the Goodie-Two-Shoes act.

[Aaron]

I pray for Kutless that they stop sucking.

[murlough23]

Yeah, now we're talking about worship!!!! I absolutely love worship....

Or that which is labeled "worship music", more accurately.

Like how do you mean what would worship look like if approached more intelligently? Do you mean the type of music/singing and the song styles? Do you mean the peoples's reactions? Can you elaborate a little more on exactly what you mean.

I think that it's hard to define what I'm talking about here to one who hasn't yet had the experience of the same old thing beginning to grow stale and tiresome. Give it time.
 

Do you mean songs that are well-known throughout churches? What other songs are you talking about? Explain what you mean.

I mean what I said. Do we need to necessarily always have songs that are easy to pick up and sing along to? What about "presentational" material that presents thoughts or ideas for people to meditate on? What about instrumental material? I don't know if these things will work at all; I'm just trying to think outside of the box, because I grow weary of singing along to the same old choruses, and even a lot of the new songs my church has been introducing lately, I haven't really been feeling 'em. There is the possibility that it's just me, but I do think that we happen to have a very musically talented worship team at the church I go to; I just question whether the song selection is really a matter of relevance and provoking the congregation to ponder more deeply what the words mean, or whether it's a matter of technical capability. I suppose both need to be in play, but I swear, if I hear that happy-go-lucky "I am a friend of God!" song one more time, I'm gonna barf.

I don't think at all you need to have a certain type of song in order to set the mood for church services. In order to set the mood right, you have to set your heart toward God. Prayer and really seeking Him with all that you have, fixing your eyes on Him, letting Him guide you, making you and the service available for everything God wants to do, asking that His presence arrives, is what creates a true atmosphere for His glory to invade the place and fill the hearts of the people. You don't need music, you need the Holy Spirit.

Yes, thank you for all the platitudes and such, but how does that play out in terms of practical things that people can actually do?

Unfortunetely a lot of churches adopt these cute little methods (modern or traditional it doesn't matter) rather than waiting on the Holy Spirit for what's said and done. This whole thing, reminds me of the song "Heart of Worship". The first line in the song says: "When the music fades and all is stripped away, and I simply come......"

Yeah, it's ironic how we've overused that one to the point where it becomes the very thing that the songwriter was disgusted with when he wrote it.

We need to get to the point that we just come to God, and we can come to Him with our music, but what He wants the most, is us to come to Him wholeheartedly. That is how to set the mood.

I'm not sure how rote repetition of the same old "worship hits" figures into this, honestly.

I often times think the American church in particular has a skewed perspective on what a "worship leader" is. A worship leader isn't just someone who can play an instrument, sing, and encourage others to. A real worship leader is someone who can lead someone into the presence of God.

God's already present regardless.

You can be the world's worst singer/musician/etc.... and still be a worship leader.

No, no, no, absolutely not. I think your worship would still be genuine, but you need to know what you're doing from a technical standpoint as well; otherwise I think it's very distracting for the very people for whom you're trying to facilitate an atmosphere of worship. it's a fine line to walk, because one can get so caught up in the technical aspects and the "performance" that one loses the heart of the whole thing. But both aspects need to be present.

You can not be a true worship leader, and lead people into the presence of the Lord, if you haven't been in the presence of the Lord yourself.

"Presence of the Lord" is a B.S. phrase as far as I'm concerned. God is omnipresent. Nobody summons God and makes Him present. This a classic example of a "Christian-ese catch-phrase" that means absolutely nothing, but that we like to throw around to describe a general aura of feeling good.

And the deeper, more intimate worship you want to have, it depends on how much further you decide you want to engage in the presence of God. You can experience Him to the level you want. How far do you want to go? What are you doing to get there?

You're still speaking in the same generalities that so many of these bad songwriters do. Think specifically and practically here.

Please don't take this question as condescending, but I think it might be helpful to place some of what you're saying in context... at what age did you become a Christian, and how long have you been one?

[Aaron]

Or that which is labeled "worship music", more accurately.

Exactly.  New Dimension, you can worship God anytime, and especially without trite, uncreative "praise and worship" music.  It sickens me when people say "I love worship music".  Hell, I can worship with Five Iron Frenzy, Ben Harper, Mutemath, Anberlin, Sufjan Stevens, Over The Rhine, Dispatch, and others.  It doesn't have to be Chris Tomlin, Lincoln Brewster, and others, especially Kutless' terrible attempt or great attempt rather at selling out to the "worship trend".

[murlough23]

Exactly.  New Dimension, you can worship God anytime, and especially without trite, uncreative "praise and worship" music.

I hold that a lot of that stuff would seem to trite and uncreative to us if there wasn't so much of it. I can remember simplistic, congregational worship-oriented records from before the "worship trend" really broke big that I genuinely enjoyed and still do. A good example is the Exodus album that Michael W. Smith put together in 1998. Some pretty big-name collaborators on that one (dc Talk, Jars of Clay, Sixpence, Third Day, Cindy Morgan, etc.), but pretty much everyone stamped their own individual style on the album and put a good amount of thought into it. Had that same album been released 10 years later, I'd have probably been really "whatever" about it, but at the time, it was very refreshing.

I think there's still some life in the genre, but we need to see artists willing to put some real thought into it, like Jars of Clay did with their hymns album, and we also need to see the death of this really bad assumption that making quote-on-quote "worship music" is somehow a holier pursuit than just making good, solid Christian rock music (or pop, or folk, or rap, or whatever the artist's preferred style is). I essentially agree with everything you said - music made with the intent of honoring God and expressing truth is an act of worship. Obviously, most of it doesn't work for singing along on Sunday mornings, and I get the need to have something that a group can easily participate in. But for personal use, I don't know that "worship" needs to be limited to stuff that can be sung congregationally.

I had someone on the Iona discussion group tell me recently that they were inspired to worship more by the band's instrumental passages than any of their (or anyone else's) songs with lyrics. Make of that what you will.

NP: "Mr. Richards", R.E.M.

[NewDimension]

Yes, but it's supposed to actually be funny.

It was funny to me....oh well, forget it.

You are so missing the point here. My point was that there are many different ways of approaching the guitar and getting different sounds and textures out of it; a lot of modern rock music is limited to what's easiest to play.

I'm not missing the point, I really like to know challenging chords.

I'm not holding my breath.

Neither am I, and I'm not expecting you to.

But if you're trying to make sense and still not making sense (i.e. you're using everyday language and your thought still aren't connecting well to one another), then there might be a problem.

Of courses there might.

I don't know; it just seems to be something that the typical CCM audience seems to latch onto, to the point where they have a hard time accepting songwriting that is more interpretive or cryptic.

Surmise what you wish, but I like some songwriting that is more interpretive or cryptic.....it depends what the song is all about and how it's written.

So if you wrote for the people in the audience who paid closer attention, do you think you'd necessarily lose the rest of the audience?

Not necessarily.

If most folks don't know good songwriting from mediocre songwriting, what are they gonna care?

Most of them wouldn't necessarily care.

What, someone holding a gun to my head?

Not that part; the part about you admiting to liking a song you don't like, at that point, is pretty hilarious...but forget it.

Sorry, I just have little patience for the Goodie-Two-Shoes act.

There's a difference between trying to be Goodie-Two-Shoes, and doing something God tells you to do, and He has told me to pray for bands I don't particularly like at all.

[NewDimension]

I pray for Kutless that they stop sucking.

Than what you're really praying for them, is that they improve their abilities.

[NewDimension]

Or that which is labeled "worship music", more accurately.

No, there is so much "worship music" I absolutely strongly dislike altogether. I ment what I said, I love worship. And I described what worship was, worship is a lifestlye of love and adoration toward God in all that you do. Do I love worship in the music form? Absolutely. I'm just as sick of the "worship trend" if not more, than you are.

I think that it's hard to define what I'm talking about here to one who hasn't yet had the experience of the same old thing beginning to grow stale and tiresome. Give it time.

I've had that experience too often. I use to dread going to church and hearing the same old routine over and over, the same songs, (saying in my mind, 'not this song again') the same everything, and honestly I tried liking it.....but that really didn't happen at all. And that's how I know, it wasn't just something I didn't like it, because I tried liking it; something needed to change.
 

I mean what I said. Do we need to necessarily always have songs that are easy to pick up and sing along to?

No. Not by any means.

What about "presentational" material that presents thoughts or ideas for people to meditate on? What about instrumental material? I don't know if these things will work at all; I'm just trying to think outside of the box, because I grow weary of singing along to the same old choruses, and even a lot of the new songs my church has been introducing lately, I haven't really been feeling 'em. There is the possibility that it's just me, but I do think that we happen to have a very musically talented worship team at the church I go to; I just question whether the song selection is really a matter of relevance and provoking the congregation to ponder more deeply what the words mean, or whether it's a matter of technical capability. I suppose both need to be in play, but I swear, if I hear that happy-go-lucky "I am a friend of God!" song one more time, I'm gonna barf.

New ideas can be really great. I get tired of the same things a lot, especially when it's not going anyplace.

Yes, thank you for all the platitudes and such, but how does that play out in terms of practical things that people can actually do?

Praying, seeking God, and making sure your heart is in the right place, is the first thing you should actually do. I know I don't want to be in a "worship service" where that is lacking and it's merely an outward performance. The rest of the practical stuff depends on the church, the attitudes and abilities of the leaders/ people/worship team/etc concerning the matter, and whether or not they'll accept any good and new ideas. I think moderation in how often you play a song is good. And we should always be open and experiment with new ideas about how to format the services.

Yeah, it's ironic how we've overused that one to the point where it becomes the very thing that the songwriter was disgusted with when he wrote it.

I know. Fortunetly, they haven't played that song that much at churches I've been to....I actually would have liked to hear it more....but you get that dose on regular "Christian radio". I still love that song.

I'm not sure how rote repetition of the same old "worship hits" figures into this, honestly.

I was defining what real worship was, and not having real worship is probably one of many reasons why there is so much song repitition in churches.

God's already present regardless.

Of course He is, but when we worship Him "in spirit and truth" and we enter the Holy of Holies and come before Him, that's when He inhabits our praise. 

No, no, no, absolutely not. I think your worship would still be genuine, but you need to know what you're doing from a technical standpoint as well; otherwise I think it's very distracting for the very people for whom you're trying to facilitate an atmosphere of worship. it's a fine line to walk, because one can get so caught up in the technical aspects and the "performance" that one loses the heart of the whole thing. But both aspects need to be present.

Due to my lack of clarity, I have created confusion. This is what I mean about how I think people have a skewed perspective of what a real "worship leader" is. God can use anyone whose heart is devoted to Him, to be a worship leader. The definiton of "worship leader" is someone who simply leads people in worship, since worship is a lifestyle and not just something we do at church services when we "sing" or "play music". Make sense? Now most people perceive "worship leaders" as people who play music and sing on stage at churches, and I can understand that concept, because when you use music to lead people into worship, it's very special.  Sometimes I don't think people are being [/b]led into worship[/b], sometimes their just being led into an outward expression not something from the heart. Now do I think people who sing/play instruments terrible even though they can lead people into worship should be what most of us refer to as "worship leaders" and lead people into worship with music on stage? NO, absolutely NOT......I think people who lead worship with music, should be really skilled musicians and singers who try to be the most excellant at what they do to contribute to the worship mood. If they play or sing bad, it can be utterly distracting even if their heart is in the right place. They should be optimally good at what they do and seek to get even better. I don't think just everyone who is skillful at playing and singing music who is a Christian is necessarily leading people into true worship. "Worhship leaders" should be skillful but still focused on the core of the matter, and "why" they're really doing it. I don't think they should get to the point where they are so concerned about how they sound or how they look, that it distracts them to take their eyes off God and the real heart of worship. This is why not everyone who can lead people into worship, or those who can play instruments and/or sing Christian songs, should be what we know as "worship leaders".

"Presence of the Lord" is a B.S. phrase as far as I'm concerned. God is omnipresent. Nobody summons God and makes Him present. This a classic example of a "Christian-ese catch-phrase" that means absolutely nothing, but that we like to throw around to describe a general aura of feeling good.

Okay if 'Presence of the Lord" sounds like a Christian catchphrase, I think "entering the Holy of Holies" would probably be a little more, if not a lot more descriptive, plus it's probably more Scriptual to the experience. When I mean "Presence of the Lord", I'm not just referring to a good feeling, you don't have to necessarily be 'feeling good' at all,  and I know God is omnipresent and of course no one can summon Him; I mean when we go into the Holy of Holies and He "inhabits our praise" and sensitizes our soul so we can feel His presence....(and of course we don't go by how we feel by any means about anything, because He's always here with us, but it can't be denied that sometimes and very often, you can feel His presence and that He does speak to your heart, when you are worshiping Him.) I'd like to thank you, now I can say: no one can lead people to the Holy of Holies, if they have not been in the Holy of Holies themselves! Isn't it exciting? You can lead people to the Holy of Holies, but you can't lead them into it, that is their decision. What is the Holy of Holies? The place where God meets with you and talks to you. And you only can enter it through the blood of the Lamb that was slain, which provides atonement for your iniquity, so you can come before Him without being destroyed. And now, "having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith....." Heb. 19-21 Everyone should redefine what they mean by "Presence of the Lord" now! You know what song I'm going to listen to now don't you?!?!?! "Take Me In" by your best guess....Kutless

You're still speaking in the same generalities that so many of these bad songwriters do. Think specifically and practically here.

You can't always think or speak or type specifically and practically when it comes to the Holy Spirit. He's beyond our mind. I think that's another thing some churches are scared of: letting the Holy Spirit manifest Himself freely, because they won't know how to explain Him or what He does in natural terms. I'll try to clarify what I mean a more. I always love knowing what needs to be clarified.

Please don't take this question as condescending, but I think it might be helpful to place some of what you're saying in context... at what age did you become a Christian, and how long have you been one?

I'd tell you, but I want to know how it would be helpful? Because, I can see where this is going.
What age did you become a Christian, and how long have you been one?

[NewDimension]

Exactly.  New Dimension, you can worship God anytime, and especially without trite, uncreative "praise and worship" music.  It sickens me when people say "I love worship music".  Hell, I can worship with Five Iron Frenzy, Ben Harper, Mutemath, Anberlin, Sufjan Stevens, Over The Rhine, Dispatch, and others.  It doesn't have to be Chris Tomlin, Lincoln Brewster, and others, especially Kutless' terrible attempt or great attempt rather at selling out to the "worship trend".

Of course you can worship God anytime doing anything, that's another thing I love about worship. You don't have to be any certain place with any certain individual doing any certain thing, except giving God your whole heart and thanking Him for being who He is. It's awesome! I never said "I love worship music", I said I love worship  (a lifestyle of adoration and unquestioning love to God in everything you say and do), and I do love worship. And some "praise and worship" songs and music most definetely gets on my nerves. And you can enter a "worship experience" if you want to call it that, listening to any particular style of music whether it's rock, rap, jazz, pop, country, hip-hop, etc....whatever....it's a matter of the heart, and I do worship God listening to stuff, people wouldn't really consider "worship" music.

[Ian]

I've only read the first page, but this thread might be a good read and tie into the discussion.  Maybe not.

[NinjaRob17]

QC's forum is full of indie music snobs?! Color me surprised.

[murlough23]

This is getting exhausting, and frankly it's not that interesting of a discussion any more. I'm out.

[NewDimension]

This is getting exhausting, and frankly it's not that interesting of a discussion any more. I'm out.

That's sad. Maybe it's not that interesting anymore because you can't really disagree with much of what I've said lately. Since your out, I guess......I'll ask everyone here..... what do you guys think of Sanctus Real, Skillet, Disciple, Seventh Day Slumber, Switchfoot, and T-Bone? I would love to know what you all think and why.

[murlough23]

That's sad. Maybe it's not that interesting anymore because you can't really disagree with much of what I've said lately.

I can disagree with much of it and I certainly do. My issue is not that I've run out of points to argue, and therefore must concede that you are right. My issue is that I explain something in response to one of your question, and often get asked essentially the same question in response to that. I can certainly think of many ways to re-explain myself, but it gets tiring to type all that, and there are 24 hours in a day, and posting is something I only do for fun, and right now it isn't particularly fun.

Since your out, I guess......I'll ask everyone here..... what do you guys think of Sanctus Real, Skillet, Disciple, Seventh Day Slumber, Switchfoot, and T-Bone? I would love to know what you all think and why.

Switchfoot is one of my favorites. Skillet once was, and I still like them somewhat, but not as much as I used to. Sanctus Real is decent. Seventh Day Slumber is among the worst of the worst - probably even worse than Kutless. That's all I've got. And no, don't ask me to explain that, because I'm not going to.

[spacebrat311]

I'm a cautious fan of Switchfoot. I feel like when they get things right, they can get things really right, but they have their fall-on-their-face moments as well. Favorite disc of theirs would probably be Legend of Chin still. I haven't really payed much attention to Sanctus Real or Seventh Day Slumber. I think Skillet is on average pretty horrendous, with occasionally enjoyable songs, although to be fair, the last Skillet CD I bought was probably in Jr. High or really early high school. I've never heard T-Bone.

[Aaron]

That's sad. Maybe it's not that interesting anymore because you can't really disagree with much of what I've said lately. Since your out, I guess......I'll ask everyone here..... what do you guys think of Sanctus Real, Skillet, Disciple, Seventh Day Slumber, Switchfoot, and T-Bone? I would love to know what you all think and why.

Sanctus Real - new album is good but they've been inconsistent throughout their career

Skillet - Have had some good moments and horrid moments (Alien Youth, I'm looking at you).  They do a good job reaching the youth group demographic.

Seventh Day Slumber - Cliche-riddled songwriting.  Lack of creativity in the music.  Beating the guy's life story into the ground.  Get new song ideas.

Switchfoot - Overall a very good band.  Have had a couple disappointments (the recent 2 albums) but a talented band who is doing things the right way.

T-Bone - One of the worst rappers I've ever heard.  An embarrassment to Christian rap everywhere.  He's totally sold out to the prosperity gospel and flaunts his riches and bling every chance he gets. He's become stale, irrelevant, and less talented over the years.  I just wish him and KJ-52 would go away so they'd stop hogging the attention from the hip-hop artists who truly deserve to be recognized. 

[valleycat]

I loved, loved Skillet in high school. I still think there is a passion to their older music that made for some really amazing songs, as well as some really terrible ones.  I kind of like(d) them for that though.  Comatose is their move into corporate rock crapdom though.  The passion is gone.

I don't like Switchfoot.  I find their singles usually annoying.

[Aaron]

I loved, loved Skillet in high school. I still think there is a passion to their older music that made for some really amazing songs, as well as some really terrible ones.  I kind of like(d) them for that though.  Comatose is their move into corporate rock crapdom though.  The passion is gone.

Alien Youth was the first step..then they got smart again and made Collide.  Somehow they got off track again and made Comatose.

[murlough23]

Re: Switchfoot - Even at their most rocking moments, they do tend to go for a very grabby, almost spastic approach to making melodies and so forth. I really like it, but I see how it could annoy some people.

Re: Skillet - I tend to find a number of "keeper" songs even on their least memorable albums (for me, those would be their self-titled and Comatose - I'm ignoring the live worship album, because, YAWN). I think that their songwriting has suffered since Ken Steorts left the band, but that Collide was their best album musically, because they totally went for the throat and weren't at all self-conscious about it. Comatose has some solid rockers and a few new musical ideas, but for the most part it feels like they were apologizing for being too hard on their previous album. Cooper's writing style tends to lean towards the extremes, lyrically speaking, so it's when he tries to be more middle-of-the-road that it really doesn't work.

And yeah, there's some embarrassing stuff on Alien Youth that trumps any of the worst songs on their other albums, but there are also some really kick-ass tracks like "Vapor" and "Thirst Is Taking Over". If you can get over the cheesiness of the Alien Youth/Earth Invasion theme, I actually think the first seven songs on that album are pretty darn solid, and it's just the back half that suffers from being all over the place.

Re: Seventh Day Slumber - Now that I'm less grumpy, I suppose I should explain myself about these guys. They're on my "hitlist" of Critical Whipping Boys, but I failed to list them because I've never actually written a review of one of their albums. Their music is actually not remarkably terrible enough to really warrant me spending my time on a review (their songwriting doesn't seem as bad as Kutless, but their overall sound and approach is about as generic as post-grunge constipation rock gets, kind of like 12 Stones with no personality instead of an obnoxious one). It's their live show that really gets my dander up, because they spend more time on the talking and the never-ending altar call than they do on the actual music, and they make it look like some sort of a spontaneous "go with the Spirit" sort of decision - saying that they were gonna play more songs, but forget that, because this is more important - even though it's a calculated part of every show. I just really, really hate CCM musicians who go so far as to showboat their own "holy behavior" at the expense of the actual performance that people came to see. I have nothing against talking about your beliefs from stage and hoping that people are affected by that and want to become Christians - but if you don't have the integrity to do it in such a way as to not compromise the presentation of your actual music, and to do it within the time allotted before the next band takes the stage (they were absolutely egregious about this when I saw them open for Skillet last May, rambling on for over an hour and leaving the main act with a very truncated set, leading John Cooper to promise the audience that he wouldn't ramble on the way he usually does), then I don't respect you at all, regardless of how many people come forward to "get saved". I can tell the difference between an altar call and a "magic show" where you predict that someone in the audience has a drug problem or is considering suicide, etc. With an audience that size from the kind of demographic that will generally come to a free rock show, chances are you'll find someone present with those kinds of problems just due to sheer probability. And I think it's really cheap and disrespectful to turn the power of the Holy Spirit into cheap sorcery.

NP: "Bearing Witness", Collective Soul

[NewDimension]

I can disagree with much of it and I certainly do. My issue is not that I've run out of points to argue, and therefore must concede that you are right. My issue is that I explain something in response to one of your question, and often get asked essentially the same question in response to that. I can certainly think of many ways to re-explain myself, but it gets tiring to type all that, and there are 24 hours in a day, and posting is something I only do for fun, and right now it isn't particularly fun.

Well, I love hearing your points, I love learning new things. Maybe the reason you seem to get essentially the same question in response, is because your response is beyond my thinking at the moment. Maybe you can explan things a little easier to understand the first time so my ever-expanding mind can grasp your intricate explanations.

[murlough23]

Well, I love hearing your points, I love learning new things. Maybe the reason you seem to get essentially the same question in response, is because your response is beyond my thinking at the moment. Maybe you can explan things a little easier to understand the first time so my ever-expanding mind can grasp your intricate explanations.

I'm honestly doing it the best I know how. Sometimes others are more talented about taking something which is difficult to explain and distilling it into simpler terms.

[NewDimension]

T-Bone - One of the worst rappers I've ever heard.  An embarrassment to Christian rap everywhere.  He's totally sold out to the prosperity gospel and flaunts his riches and bling every chance he gets. He's become stale, irrelevant, and less talented over the years.  I just wish him and KJ-52 would go away so they'd stop hogging the attention from the hip-hop artists who truly deserve to be recognized. 

What is this prosperity gospel you speak of Wanderer?

[NewDimension]

I'm honestly doing it the best I know how. Sometimes others are more talented about taking something which is difficult to explain and distilling it into simpler terms.

Possibly, but I still like to hear your thoughts.

[murlough23]

What is this prosperity gospel you speak of Wanderer?

I would assume it's the fallacious belief that being rich is proof that God loves/has blessed you.

[NewDimension]

Re: Skillet - I tend to find a number of "keeper" songs even on their least memorable albums (for me, those would be their self-titled and Comatose - I'm ignoring the live worship album, because, YAWN). I think that their songwriting has suffered since Ken Steorts left the band, but that Collide was their best album musically, because they totally went for the throat and weren't at all self-conscious about it. Comatose has some solid rockers and a few new musical ideas, but for the most part it feels like they were apologizing for being too hard on their previous album. Cooper's writing style tends to lean towards the extremes, lyrically speaking, so it's when he tries to be more middle-of-the-road that it really doesn't work.

I heard John Cooper talk about his writing before, and it was quite interesting.

Re: Seventh Day Slumber - Now that I'm less grumpy, I suppose I should explain myself about these guys. They're on my "hitlist" of Critical Whipping Boys, but I failed to list them because I've never actually written a review of one of their albums. Their music is actually not remarkably terrible enough to really warrant me spending my time on a review (their songwriting doesn't seem as bad as Kutless, but their overall sound and approach is about as generic as post-grunge constipation rock gets, kind of like 12 Stones with no personality instead of an obnoxious one). It's their live show that really gets my dander up, because they spend more time on the talking and the never-ending altar call than they do on the actual music, and they make it look like some sort of a spontaneous "go with the Spirit" sort of decision - saying that they were gonna play more songs, but forget that, because this is more important - even though it's a calculated part of every show. I just really, really hate CCM musicians who go so far as to showboat their own "holy behavior" at the expense of the actual performance that people came to see. I have nothing against talking about your beliefs from stage and hoping that people are affected by that and want to become Christians - but if you don't have the integrity to do it in such a way as to not compromise the presentation of your actual music, and to do it within the time allotted before the next band takes the stage (they were absolutely egregious about this when I saw them open for Skillet last May, rambling on for over an hour and leaving the main act with a very truncated set, leading John Cooper to promise the audience that he wouldn't ramble on the way he usually does), then I don't respect you at all, regardless of how many people come forward to "get saved". I can tell the difference between an altar call and a "magic show" where you predict that someone in the audience has a drug problem or is considering suicide, etc. With an audience that size from the kind of demographic that will generally come to a free rock show, chances are you'll find someone present with those kinds of problems just due to sheer probability. And I think it's really cheap and disrespectful to turn the power of the Holy Spirit into cheap sorcery.

NP: "Bearing Witness", Collective Soul

It's not good to interrupt someone else's show. I'm not so sure you should just call something a "magic show" or "cheap sorcery," when God is touching lives through those people during those moments. Sure, there is a sheer probability that you will find someone who has a drug problem and is considering suicide at any rock show, but how many people do actually take the time and show that they care about those people specifically at a rock show? You never know what one word of hope and encouragement can do for those people, and how that can have an impact on their lives forever. And plus, it's not like they know them individually so how can we say for sure that the Holy Spirit isn't guiding the events? Now I don't believe it's good to talk through much of a concert, it is centering on the music. That's why a good message in the music it great. I also don't believe we shouldn't be led by the Spirit in what we do, and restrict Him, because sometimes He just does interrupt our circumstances, but at the same time we need to know it's Him and not us acting out of how we feel or what we think we should or want to do.