Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2020 July 29
| Entertainment desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < July 28 | << Jun | July | Aug >> | July 30 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
July 29[edit]
Chord progressions[edit]
Is there a musicological term for a song who's chord progression doesn't sound like the song and you lose almost all the song's essence if you hear only the chord progression notes and an opposite term a song who's progression has an unusually similar flavor? Like Coldplay Clocks, I was a kid with no idea what a chord progression was and I intuitively felt that muting the not most important notes would make the one and only Cliffs Notes Clocks, a song within a song. And I taught myself which piano keys to press to excrete it through trial and error: Clocks Abridged. And eventually the unabridged riff too but off topic.
Sometimes songs are just a short melody repeated over and over except the repeats are transposed around slightly in a short pattern that repeats when the chord progression repeats, thus the chord progression has a tiny range and is boring and short but the song isn't (it could be funky) that's not what I mean by "doesn't have a similar flavor". What I mean is I've seen a chord progression that looks like it has a mistake or two even though many sites repeat it and I'm scratching my head at how the up down or same pattern of the chords could be so different from what I'd expect since the emphasized notes are obvious and rhythm is simple. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
- In a chord progression, the most important note is the root note, which defines how the chord is built. This is usually the lowest (bass) note, except in chord inversion, where the another note (usually the third or fifth) is in the bass. If you're playing the chord progression in its "essential form" you're probably keying in on the root notes. Over the top of progressions, there are lots of options for building melodies; the main melody is often written with notes that are in the key but often choosing notes not in the chords themselves so as to make the melody stand out against the progression, often using chord extensions mixing in things like 9ths, 11ths, and 13ths to build the melody out of, even "spicy" intervals like minor seconds, major sevenths, and the extra spicy "tritone". Most modern, western music is usually analyzed in terms of functional harmony, which is the basic theory behind how chord progressions are built. Some music, especially things like the modal jazz of Miles Davis and Bill Evans or the atonal classical music of Arnold Schoenberg, eschews such theory in favor of other sorts of organization. A short repeating musical concept can be called an ostinato (especially in the context of classical music) or a riff (especially in rock music) or a vamp (especially in jazz music). --Jayron32 14:03, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
- And an unfortunate fact of chord charts on the internets is that errors get propagated while corrections don't. So if you've found many sites repeating what you think is a mistake, it very well may be a mistake, just copied from site to site. When I'm looking for the chords for a particular song (I run a ukulele club, and also play bass in a duo) I'll sometimes shell out the money to a site like Musicnotes to see what the published editions say -- even though there are often errors in published editions, too. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 21:18, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
- You see an analogous problem with lyric sites. I sometimes wonder if the people posting those lyrics actually have eardrums. --Khajidha (talk) 15:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- At least sometimes this is because the lyric transcriptions are created by non-English speakers. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 16:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- You see an analogous problem with lyric sites. I sometimes wonder if the people posting those lyrics actually have eardrums. --Khajidha (talk) 15:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- I remember a YouTube video showing how to play Gangnam Style and the notes that "sound extra high-def" are quadruple-decker third intervals instead of triple. Slightly more dissonant if every note was like that I think cause the seventh is essentially a second interval but when kept it reserve for a few choice spots it sounds cool. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- Whatever do you mean by "quadruple decker third intervals"? Dominant or major seventh chords? And, no, a seventh is not essentially a second, any more than a fifth is essentially a fourth or a third a sixth. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 16:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- 4-note polyphony on 4 consecutive lines or spaces with no sharp symbols if the notes are amongst the 7 out of 12 semitones that are part of the key the music is written and played in. A subset of which is anything made by pressing every other white key with 4 fingers touching the piano. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- Those are called "chords". Every-other white key 4-finger chords can be C major 7, D dominant 7, E minor 7, F maj 7, G dominant 7, A minor 7, or B "half diminished" 7. Gangnam Style has none of those chords; it's entirely major and minor triads. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 18:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- I knew chords can have more than 3 notes. I looked up a video and it's not quite what I remember (0:16), there's 4 notes at once by the same instrument but it's GBGB on adjacent octaves and first note change after that is to a EACC#AC#AC# chord on 3 different octaves which is 4 of 12 possible vanilla notes of the octave but no single instrument plays 4 of the 12 at once. So it's the wide pitch range of manyish simultaneous notes that's responsible for those parts sounding "extra high def" and not seventh chords of 3 consecutive third intervals. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:56, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Chords don't change their character by adding octaves in the same instrument; the addition of octaves can change the chord voicing but does not alter its fundamental nature or function in a composition. This is because of something known as octave equivalence: Because two notes an octave apart share the exact same overtone series, when you play them together, your brain treats the higher pitch like a slight modification on the lower pitch, and perceives the two notes together as essentially one note with a slightly different timbre. This is an important compositional technique, mind you, but should not be treated like playing two notes of a different pitch class together. When analyzing a chord, the only things you need to know, usually, are 1) which of the twelve notes are in the chord 2) which note is the root and 3) which note is in the bass if it isn't the root note. That's it. Thus, your first chord is just a G-B diad, which isn't really a chord, it's a major third interval, even with the octave doubling, you'd still analyze it as a major third interval and not as a 4 note chord. Your second chord is really just E A C C# (actually, technically it should be notated something like E A B# C# because you only get one note of each letter in a chord, you can't put C and C# on the same chord in standard notation, but that's a minor point) and using a simple tool like this, I get a number of possible chord names, none of them are pretty. The simplest is A(add #9)/E (assuming E is in the bass); since A - C# - E is an A major chord, it makes sense to analyze it as that with an added sharp-nine (the ninth of the key of A is B, so that's why it should be notated B#, but again, a minor point), and in second inversion.--Jayron32 18:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Also, if you wanted to analyze it as an extension of an A-minor chord (A - C - E) then you would treat the C# as a Db and it would be Am (add b11) / E. I'm not sure which is better in this case; whether it's an extension of an A-major with an #9 or an A-minor with a b11 depends on its role in the composition. Essentially, it's a simultaneous major/minor chord having both C and C# in it, so it really depends on what chord sets it up and what chord it resolves to to know how to analyze this chord. --Jayron32 18:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- By the way, there's a paragraph or two about mixed third chords such as this at added tone chord. If you also added the dominant seventh interval to it, you get the Hendrix chord. --Jayron32 18:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- The next note is just the electropop motif found in most of the song, all B's. It's a very different timbre than the previous ~two seconds. The immediately preceding is the GB GB in an electronic organy sounding timbre like the EA etc. Also there's a third GB in different color in the octave above the GB's which suggests it's not the same timbre in the official song too due to this Youtuber's attention to detail (even finding an instrument that resembles the artist saying "ahhh" when ~1.5 octaves of consecutive semitones is played). Electronic notes often have some aspect (like pitch) rapidly vibrating at least minisculey (vibrato? tremolo? one of those is broadest) so maybe the timbre contributes to "sounding extra fancy" too even if it's just 2 pitch classes at first? Especially from contrast with the slightly dissonant timbre that makes most of the song sound like electricity. Some people don't like electropop for some reason (especially Tonight I'm Loving You) but even if you find it cool it's still a sudden brief increase in consonance (whatever chord is the better interpretation that's a lot of consonant intervals too like major and minor thirds while the electro seems to be mostly or all one-simultaneous pitch class (wedding cakes of octaves)) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:56, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- By the way, there's a paragraph or two about mixed third chords such as this at added tone chord. If you also added the dominant seventh interval to it, you get the Hendrix chord. --Jayron32 18:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Also, if you wanted to analyze it as an extension of an A-minor chord (A - C - E) then you would treat the C# as a Db and it would be Am (add b11) / E. I'm not sure which is better in this case; whether it's an extension of an A-major with an #9 or an A-minor with a b11 depends on its role in the composition. Essentially, it's a simultaneous major/minor chord having both C and C# in it, so it really depends on what chord sets it up and what chord it resolves to to know how to analyze this chord. --Jayron32 18:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Chords don't change their character by adding octaves in the same instrument; the addition of octaves can change the chord voicing but does not alter its fundamental nature or function in a composition. This is because of something known as octave equivalence: Because two notes an octave apart share the exact same overtone series, when you play them together, your brain treats the higher pitch like a slight modification on the lower pitch, and perceives the two notes together as essentially one note with a slightly different timbre. This is an important compositional technique, mind you, but should not be treated like playing two notes of a different pitch class together. When analyzing a chord, the only things you need to know, usually, are 1) which of the twelve notes are in the chord 2) which note is the root and 3) which note is in the bass if it isn't the root note. That's it. Thus, your first chord is just a G-B diad, which isn't really a chord, it's a major third interval, even with the octave doubling, you'd still analyze it as a major third interval and not as a 4 note chord. Your second chord is really just E A C C# (actually, technically it should be notated something like E A B# C# because you only get one note of each letter in a chord, you can't put C and C# on the same chord in standard notation, but that's a minor point) and using a simple tool like this, I get a number of possible chord names, none of them are pretty. The simplest is A(add #9)/E (assuming E is in the bass); since A - C# - E is an A major chord, it makes sense to analyze it as that with an added sharp-nine (the ninth of the key of A is B, so that's why it should be notated B#, but again, a minor point), and in second inversion.--Jayron32 18:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- I knew chords can have more than 3 notes. I looked up a video and it's not quite what I remember (0:16), there's 4 notes at once by the same instrument but it's GBGB on adjacent octaves and first note change after that is to a EACC#AC#AC# chord on 3 different octaves which is 4 of 12 possible vanilla notes of the octave but no single instrument plays 4 of the 12 at once. So it's the wide pitch range of manyish simultaneous notes that's responsible for those parts sounding "extra high def" and not seventh chords of 3 consecutive third intervals. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:56, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Those are called "chords". Every-other white key 4-finger chords can be C major 7, D dominant 7, E minor 7, F maj 7, G dominant 7, A minor 7, or B "half diminished" 7. Gangnam Style has none of those chords; it's entirely major and minor triads. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 18:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- 4-note polyphony on 4 consecutive lines or spaces with no sharp symbols if the notes are amongst the 7 out of 12 semitones that are part of the key the music is written and played in. A subset of which is anything made by pressing every other white key with 4 fingers touching the piano. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- Whatever do you mean by "quadruple decker third intervals"? Dominant or major seventh chords? And, no, a seventh is not essentially a second, any more than a fifth is essentially a fourth or a third a sixth. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 16:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- And an unfortunate fact of chord charts on the internets is that errors get propagated while corrections don't. So if you've found many sites repeating what you think is a mistake, it very well may be a mistake, just copied from site to site. When I'm looking for the chords for a particular song (I run a ukulele club, and also play bass in a duo) I'll sometimes shell out the money to a site like Musicnotes to see what the published editions say -- even though there are often errors in published editions, too. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 21:18, 31 July 2020 (UTC)