Static volume and how it can stay interesting

[Armageddan]

Hey guys, I know I haven't been around for a while, but I thought I had something to discuss and couldn't think of a better place to bring it up.

One of the many things I learned in band was that the volume of a song had to be dynamic or it was sure to get boring. Yet when I listen to Spellbound by Doves, one of my more recent favorite bands, I can't help but be mesmerized by it, even though it maintains a steady forte throughout the song and doesn't vary its verses a whole lot.

If I may, I can post a link to it on Youtube, but if that's not allowed for copyright reasons, perhaps someone else could post one of their own songs that they feel is particularly interesting despite a rather static volume or other unvarying variables.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFheSCZfAKs -Admin.

[Blitz Lunar]

by all means link to youtube.

most radio-friendly music for the last 20 years or more has not entertained wide dynamics (especially in the last decade), there's not usually any large discrepancy between the volumes of sections, and if there are big dynamic variations like that then they get compressed (probably a separate issue.) it's only really the jazz and classical spheres where dynamic range is employed compositionally - the funny part is most people call those idioms boring! anyway, my point is, if dynamic range were a crucial component of engaging music, the vast majority of commercial music would be boring. which, ha-ha, might be true for some - but not for that reason alone I don't think!

i guess the most simple answer is that dynamics are just one of the many building blocks of musical composition, as is rhythm, timbre, structure, harmony, etc. so a lack of dynamics (or indeed any other musical trait) at either macro or micro level isn't necessarily a deal breaker... it all depends on the music in question. in fact, I think when musicians purposefully limit themselves in some capacity, some interesting and fun music can come of it. the different types and proportions of musical elements are what results in the wide range of genres we have. so, i think whatever you learned in band is questionable... possibly applicable to your band situation, but certainly not universally applicable.

on another note, i bought the Doves "The Last Broadcast" about 7 years ago, which is a pretty nice album with some good songs. what i like about them is their use of harmony. this song is pretty typical of them... it's pretty nice. as you say, no massive variation in dynamics but there's plenty of other interesting stuff going on... harmonies as mentioned, textural stuff (kind of a post-rock trait), etc.

[Armageddan]

You bring up some good points. Maybe it's my own tastes then... Some of my other favorite bands include Muse and Hurt, both of whom employ very noticeable transitions in the majority of their songs, going from subtle and intricate to loud and grandiose in a matter of seconds.

"Spellbound," on the other hand doesn't change volume, rhythm, or nearly anything else I could think to listen for, and yet I find myself completely engaged listening to it. I suppose I might be trying to complicate the issue... It's certainly not the only song on my playlist without dynamic ranges, but I'm trying to put my finger on what it IS about the song I like so much. Probably has to do with the layering.

PS. Ah, you've listened to them as well. The only one I've heard off that album was The Pounding, a fantastic song. My fav of theirs has to go to Kingdom of Rust for its epic-ness.