forget verse/chorus/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/

  • Thread starter Thread starter WEBCYAN
  • Start date Start date
If you already havn't studied classical music, I suggest that you do.

Alot of times it's about themes and varieties of the themes, so to an extent... there is some repetition. It's how you get that effect of "knowing what's coming next". Sometimes I've noticed rock artists not having a consistant verse progression, where the chords vary more to match an inventive vocal.

It is pretty difficult to do what you are talking about and keep an audience. It's one reason why you don't hear that more often. Anyway, good luck with it. It's definately different from my "Ramones" approach to music, but I respect it.
 
Wreck of the Edmond Fitzgerald...G. Lightfoot..Is a story song..one long verse...


Don
 
Re: Then get out yer straight-jackets, boys...

Aaron Cheney said:
People have been writing songs with alternate forms for a long time. Roy Orbison and John Denver both have songs with no verses or choruses at all - they just go from beginning to end with no repeating sections. Or listen to Escape by Journey. How about Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen? Hundreds of examples.
Now if you're talking pop music, well that's a form of music that is based on a formula. Or take the blues for example: it's based on a IV, V, I progression. If you step outside that very far, it ain't the blues no mo'.
In fact, you could say there are only really two kinds of music: classical and ethnic. Classical is music in it's purest form, where one can draw from any scale or any form, and use any of our twelve notes at any time. All other music is ethnic, and must fall within certain parameters. Examples of ethnic music: Polka, Rock and Roll, Blues, Greek, Flamenco, etc etc etc.

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com

Actually, if your talking "classical" your probably not meaning to include "art music" which uses all twelve tones. Typically classical sticks very closely to its given scales, except in transition areas where it will moderate to another.

Classical, if your talking pre-beethoven, which is what most people mean by "classical" had a very rigid set of rules as well. After Beethoven kinda opened the doors for a more expressive form of classical, it diverged pretty quickly from what it was. Still alot of more modern composers stick to traditional rules.
 
Blackbuck, you have to realize that even some pre-Beethoven music would have more modulations in one piece than a modern band has on it's entire cd! And -altough I don't know when all this was introduced- Beethoven also used alot of altered chords, secondary dominants, Naepolitan sixths, diminished chords, pedals... Don't underestimate all these things, you can do pretty advanced things with them, even while still following the classical 'rules'.

Do an analysis of Beethoven's Moonlight, you'll be amazed what's in there, yet it sounds simple... Do that in popmusic and you don't have popmusic anymore.

I don't really know to which extent these things were used pre-beethoven. They were used, but you're partly right. I'm more of a after-1850 kinda 'classical' dude. Late romanticism and expressionism and furtheron... I still have alot to learn when it comes to composition though. On that matter I'm still pre-Beethoven...
 
Webcyan,

I agree with your point, but to clarify how I see it, there at least three general categories here -
- Music written for popular reception
- Music written for the writer, possibly lame in arrangement and lyric
- A midway point: not writing simply to make a hook-laden teenybopper hit, but to produce an original, powerful eclectic piece (whether in arrangement or in the melody etc itself), but keeping in sight at least one future listener, who does not want to suffer for your art!

i appreciate the same thing as you - emotionally powerful arrangements and lyrics, yet ones that arent so self-concerned they become a sonic detriment to the piece.

One artist who fits the bill for me is Lindsey Buckingham. His lyrics are usually only ABCB etc, but thats becuase he writes them last, and onlyto the point where they are useful sonically. He creates that unusal emotion (scariness - 'This is the Time', 'Come'), and hypnotic arrangemtns like Fleetwood Mac's 'Sara' (in my opinion the best arranged pop song - which im currently trying to recreate minus vocals, but am having IDF troubles - why wont anyone read the MIDI MANIA Board?? Dargh!).

What he does is recognize the power of a single note, and these single notes and shrill melodic guitar are what carry you away, while the rhythm and leads carry the song. But you have to be pretty brave to just stick in solitary notes and sounds all over the place - yet if youre good at it, it seems to pay off... Im thinking the melodic talent of the Beatles, FM, not-me, etc.
 
Roel said:
Blackbuck, you have to realize that even some pre-Beethoven music would have more modulations in one piece than a modern band has on it's entire cd! And -altough I don't know when all this was introduced- Beethoven also used alot of altered chords, secondary dominants, Naepolitan sixths, diminished chords, pedals... Don't underestimate all these things, you can do pretty advanced things with them, even while still following the classical 'rules'.

Do an analysis of Beethoven's Moonlight, you'll be amazed what's in there, yet it sounds simple... Do that in popmusic and you don't have popmusic anymore.

I don't really know to which extent these things were used pre-beethoven. They were used, but you're partly right. I'm more of a after-1850 kinda 'classical' dude. Late romanticism and expressionism and furtheron... I still have alot to learn when it comes to composition though. On that matter I'm still pre-Beethoven...

Heh, I'm more of a post-1850 type too. I didn't mean to say that modulations didn't happen before then, they did, but the rules were much more rigid, in terms of arrangement of the song, the harmonies, the melodies.....

At first I thought the rules would make things unexpressive, but it's not necessarily true. Even doing my music now, I find myself refering to the "rules" for ideas and "filling" a song out. (And I do punk).

WEBCYAN, In my opinion this approach to music would be great, if you can make it sound spontaneous enough for people to be able to sing along or want to sing along immediately, as you felt like you could when you heard the classical on the radio. It will take alot of work though.
 
"but listen to Mozart, then listen to Speared Brittany...Which one will be listened to in another hundred years? "

Brittany sings? I'm sorry, I didnt notice......
But seriously, Im new at writting but I know what you all mean. I am going out on a limb and will just say that I do have some guilty pleasures in my musical tastes and one of them is sometimes I just want to hear...Top 40..even POP....yes, its terrible and I am embarrassed but alas, I am being true. In defense, my CD players all have Ani Difranco and Jackson Browne on them or never far away but there is something in the fromulas that make them catchy as someone said. And while I prefer music with messages and emotions, these formulas can bypass the conscience messages and just entertain me inside...You want true love? Check out "Sky Blue and Black" from Jackson, not "...I love you so...please dont go..." from any pop band. Still, I agree with you that its important to expand. As a new writter, my songs dont have set formulas because, often I have such economy with my words, I cant write enough to get through a set formula...some have one verse, maybe two and a chorus and most no bridge....Yet, perhaps if you can say what you need to say with little, why carry it on? And as a newbie, I am staying away from the books on songwritting and opting to just write and see where it takes me. There is a ballence though and I believe Ill find it.
 
Blackbuck, there's a great misunderstanding about those 'rules'. When composing, there really are no rules. Unless you choose a form that has rules, but these days you are pretty free. The rules that used to be are now considered guidelines. When studying harmony, there are 'rules'. And at first; they seem to limit you're creativity, that's when you have to keep studying untill your theory gets at the point that it helps you discovering new possibilities, and up to the point where you can be creative within those 'rules' and set them to your hand. Difference then is that you have better understanding of what you are doing and why you are doing it. I'm about halfway schoenberg's theory of harmony (don't follow the book, but I read it and just use it as a reference here...), and I don't feel limited even when playing jazz.

But you are very right about the classical harmony helping you. It even helps me to understand advanced jazz. Most of their reharmonizations etc are basic stuff to me. Most amateur jazz musicians know about II-V-I, but dont' know what it means, while I can go sit at the piano, just make up a progression, and we have a new song. Very fun to improvise too, I play some progression (like I VI IV II V I) and our singer just makes up funny lyrics about the most silly subjects... Hilarious.

The same for melodic lines. The use of motivs, themes, all these things. Can be very interesting. Don't really know what counterpoint can bring you since I'm just starting on that...
 
kiss

Keep It Simple Stupid. simple progression with a great melody, can't beat that. That's what the beatles and all the greats were made of
 
Well, either way works for me...

I've been thinking a lot about this matter, and I think it all comes down to tools.

You can use the v/c/v/c/bridge/v/c/c format if you want, or you can do your own thing.

It's just a format, or a tool, but not a rule.

I think of the best lyric writers I know of:

Leonard Cohen - Famous Blue Raincoat - very expressive, emotional song, that says a lot. He has a whole book that I think is on the same subject, or at least the guy in the song that he's talking about - Beautiful Losers. But the song has a chorus that I would kill for.

John Prine - Sam Stone. That song I think is the best vietnam war veteran song that I've ever heard, and deals with many issues that apply to any vet - and I work with senile old veterans on a daily basis, respectable pillars of the community who get their fix from a pharmacy rather than a dealer. That song also has a chorus that will break your heart with it's perfection.

Van Morrison - Inarticulate Speech of The Heart - no chorus, no verse, just two lines over and over again.

Richard Thompson - some songs in ABAB format, others free-form. Some musically complex, some simple, all with stunning musically rich guitar playing.

Either way works.
 
Songwriting formula

How many people on this board have written a hit song or even had one covered by an artist. If you have then you have the formula if not then you havent, it really is that simple.
FK
 
Re: Re: Then get out yer straight-jackets, boys...

blackbuck said:


Actually, if your talking "classical" your probably not meaning to include "art music" which uses all twelve tones. Typically classical sticks very closely to its given scales, except in transition areas where it will moderate to another.

Classical, if your talking pre-beethoven, which is what most people mean by "classical" had a very rigid set of rules as well. After Beethoven kinda opened the doors for a more expressive form of classical, it diverged pretty quickly from what it was. Still alot of more modern composers stick to traditional rules.

Yes, I guess I should have been more clear. When I said classical music, I meant to include all eras of classical music, i.e. Medieval Period, The Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, and Modern.
If you're speaking in terms of Baroque and Classical era (Bach, Handel, Vivaldi, Mozart, Beethoven), yes, those composers did stick to more rigid song forms and harmonic theory. About the time you get to the Romantic era (Debussy, Brahms, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky, Chopin ) , composers were starting to break away from many of those rules and freely use harmony to create emotion, rather than chords, per se.

If you listen to Debussy, holy crap you'll hear some weird tonal movement! It's almost jazz! Listen to Romeo and Juliet by Tchaikovsky, and you will hear dissonants all over the place, and no reapeating form, and tons of dynamics ( a lost art in these days of ultra-compressed pop tunes!)

Now I'm rambling...

Aaron
http://www.aaroncheney.com
 
Re: Re: Re: Then get out yer straight-jackets, boys...

Aaron Cheney said:
If you listen to Debussy, holy crap you'll hear some weird tonal movement!

Debussy is mostly impressionism. Alot of works can maybe also be categorized as late-romantic. His works aren't all tonal either. Alot of it is modal! (This is what is so confussing when listening to impressionism. You cannot say what key it is in, because it's not in a minor or major key...)
 
Somebody said " Form Follows Function" I can't remember who said it just now, I'm having a "senior moment" but I think it applies here. A songwriter is expressing some kind of human experience in his/her writing and the more knowledge they have(read: the more different kinds of music they have listened to and tried to understand) the more choices they can make to convey their intent. Compare Bob Seeger to Sting. Both very gifted writers with very different musical concepts writing from VERY different perspectives about VERY VERY different subjects. Throw in Steely Dan and you will hear stuff that goes way beyond explanation or theoretical justification if you are bound by Bach's rules of 4 part harmony. Listen to everything you can. Go to the library and check out the composers that have been discussed in this thread. Use everything...steal from everybody....if it helps you convey something about human experience and shines a new or different light on it , so much the better. But start with Bach's rules of 4 part harmony.
writeon...chazba

ps: I think it was Marshall Macluen (sp?)
 
fkeefee - "Hey web Ever thought about writing songs with dodgy spelling I think you could write a number1 hit your a natural"


haha, good stuff. WebCyan - I think you have a cool idea....but, it kind of sounds like a bit of a power trip. It isn't like no one has tried this stuff before - you just probably havn't heard of them ;).

I think the real answer for "important pop/rock" music is maybe a blend of both. Like, the Beatles...had plenty of verse chorus verse songs that were BRILLIANT. then they had some strange stuff as well.

I really like AB songs. that repeat nothing, but are also very short and to the point. One verse, one hook. end.

I think The Strokes have some of the best songwriting of the year with "Is This It". not to mention the music and the melody - they do a good job of changing things up a lot.

The most aggrivating thing to me about verse chorus verse are the NEW songs. for example, gin blossoms, michelle branch, umm...sister hazel...matchbox 20..any pop rock you can think of. Thing that kills me is ok ok..the single is ALRIGHT...but could I stand owning a WHOLE CD where I know every song follows the same pattern?? It just isn't good song writing.

A band that inspired me a lot actually I found on this forum...they are called 'figures from here' - really different songwriting...I listen to it and it is hooky...but, it doesn't seem predictable at all.

Anyways Web - good luck. hope your the next big thing.
 
This is an interesting topic. I think it really depends on what you ant to accomplish. Paul Stanley of KISS once said that the problem with a lot of begining songwriter is they start at A and end up at Z. KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid!!!

If you want your album to have a potential hit, I think you have to have a song with some repetition and familiarity within itself.
Hendrix said repetition is what locks the listener into a trance.

But, anything get's boring and stale if done too much. Who wants an album containing a slew of songs based on "formula's"??? A song that starts at A and ends at Z will probably never be a radio hit, but it may become a source of study in a theory class. Ask yourself what the motive for writing it is and proceed from there....

I think an album should feature a cross-section of music. Not a compilation album of hit 45's singles that consists entirely
of AABA. That gets boring real fast and usually becomes last week's cool haircut.

Anyone ever listened to "The Pro's and Con's of Hitchiking" by Roger Waters??? what kind of formula's is he using? he's a musical mad scientist!!

I dunno.....I just write what comes out. Sometimes simplicity, a verse, chorus and catchy hook......and sometimes it's a Dave Mustaine-ish metal piece that starts here and winds up way the hell over there, but at least you went somewhere with it...

Just my opinion,
Ace.
 
""Hey web Ever thought about writing songs with dodgy spelling I think you could write a number1 hit your a natural""

:(

tis troo. I kant spel wurdz varee gud.
 
let it happen

i haven't been following the whole thread, so i don't know if it has been mentioned, but i just kinda let what ever comes out come out. Usually it comes out as something different, but if it happens to be ABABAB, i let it.
 
WEBCYAN said:
""Hey web Ever thought about writing songs with dodgy spelling I think you could write a number1 hit your a natural""

:(

tis troo. I kant spel wurdz varee gud.

That's okay, webbie me boyo, since the critique also has a flaw ("your" should be "you're" — as in "you are"). :D

Sorry, fkeefe, I couldn't resist; anyway, it's all in fun :p. It's the curse of English majors the world over to proofread everything, I suppose. I gotta get a life. :rolleyes:
 
This is supposed to be a sonwriters' board and someone is giving John Denver credit(or blame) for writing "Country Roads'? Wasn't it written by Bill & Taffy Danoff?
 
Back
Top