Jump to content

Those mystical magical song structures


Kendrix

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I generally write tunes in one of the standard structures.

You know ABABCB, ABABCAB, and, rarely, ABAB or BABCB.

Sometimes there's a distinct intro sometimes not.

Sometimes an outro instrumental section of some sort.

 

The past few tunes I've written spilled out fiarly easily. I always re-write /tweak but its nice when 80% just seems to flow on first take.

 

My most recent tune has been kicking around for weeks with the key musical sections recorded and a few decent verses written. In this case I was half improvising when I tracked the guitar part and I diverged from the usual song structures. It seemed to work musically so I tried to work witt it. It was something like: intro ABCAB.

 

However, the more I struggled to fit a half decent lyric into this off-kilter structure the more frustrating it became.

I just could not make the song "click/coalease".

There was not enough room to really set up the chorus.

It drove me nuts.

 

This AM I had a breakthrough when I focused on the structure rather than trying to wordsmith in the context of a poor structure.

 

The logjam cleared and new words " flowed" right into into the improved structure. Now it feels right: (introABABCAB)

 

There really is something mystical/magical about the standard song structures. They work.

 

Discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First of all, I am really happy to see a thread about this important aspect of writing. In many ways, I think that structure can be used to bring mood and originality to a somewhat flat song.

 

I stray somewhat from the traditional pattern. I try to concentrate on tightly packed, interesting songs that don't drag or do anything unnecessary. Here are some examples of my new ones.

 

Verse/Prechorus/Chorus/Insturmental/Prechorus V2.0 (same melody, 1/2 different lyrics) /Chorus / end with main riff and spoken word.

 

Verse/Prechorus/chorus/Short solo over verse riff/ Verse/ shortened prechorus/chorus/end.

 

Verse/Chorus/verse/modified chorus (same riff/different melody/different lyrics)/ chorus/ bridge/ Verse/ end.

 

As you can see, there is nothing really revolutionary about the changes to the traditional structure. Just tweaking to fit the 'roll' of the song (ie: the momentum of the song). These somewhat nontraditional structures came about from a live writing session where I didnt have much of an idea where the songs were going. Instead of looking at them in parts, I tried to make a flowing unit that I could preform in the streets.

 

And I did. But thats a whole different story.

 

Hope this helped.

Blake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I like to experiment a bit, back when I was in a progressive rock group my favorite structure was to introduce the theme in the beginning, which would either be the bridge or the chorus...

 

I often ended up with a second modified bridge when it was used as the intro though ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The benefit of a traditional song form is that those songs can be easily remembered, improving the odds that listeners will be humming your tunes. And the fact that they're traditional (many-times used) doesn't affect the overall beauty-factor of the song. When songs are great, it's usually because of the right mix of predictability and innovation, and usually slanted in favour of predictability. The predictability offered by a standard song form (ABABCB, for example) is often better than a complicated form that leaves the listener feeling a bit lost.

 

-Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by Gary Ewer

The benefit of a traditional song form is that those songs can be easily remembered, improving the odds that listeners will be humming your tunes. And the fact that they're traditional (many-times used) doesn't affect the overall beauty-factor of the song. When songs are great, it's usually because of the right mix of predictability and innovation, and usually slanted in favour of predictability. The predictability offered by a standard song form (ABABCB, for example) is often better than a complicated form that leaves the listener feeling a bit lost.


-Gary

 

Well said. :thu: I also like song stuctures that are one huge crescendo. Starting of with very little instrumentation and just adding and adding and getting louder and louder. So there's really no Verse/Chorus/Bridge..it's just a big melody that keeps on building. Still quite appealing to most listeners I find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

I used to write a lot in the trad ABABCAB format, but I found that the songs just seemed to be too long and to repetitive. Over the past few years, I've been doing a lot of ACB, BACB, ABCB, and the like*. I've even done some where there is sort of 2 variants of A that end with two or three similar lines that are *like* a chorus, but not entirely -- songs like this get structured A1CA2 and so on.

 

I've got some stuff up at www.decadentboys.com where I started writing w/ these different structures. I don't really have any proper-ish recordings of more recent ventures into this method (which is not as jarring, or untraditional as you might think).

 

*where A = Verse; B = Chorus; C = Chorus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do the ACBACBBDB format too with some sort of an intro that reflects the chorus vibe and a prechorus©.

 

However lately I have been adding in an instrumental E lately. Basically a post chorus/transition into the verse. I have noticed this on quite a few recent artists.

 

The trick is to only make it one or 2 bars and then get right into the verse. It seems to add energy to the arrangement.

 

ABEABEDB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I just realized I rarely do ABABCB or anything too traditional.

 

ABABCB can be a bit boring sometimes depending on the music. There can be many more creative ways to arrange modern music that is still very easy to remember.

 

I write mostly modern rock music. I don't see ABABCB format fitting in with most Top 40 rock songs. Although I know a lot of the writers on HC are still playing oldies. =). no offense :thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Stylez, I'm guessing that 'D' you have in there is a bridge correct?

 

This is an excellent topic. Song structures can be quite tricky when you want to fit certain melodies together and sometimes it just leads to writers block, because the song is not clicking.

 

Some songs just seem to flow and come out without much hassle, but there are some songs I start writing and it just wears me down almost. But at that point I know I need to take a long break and step back to see what is going on and see how it can be changed to flow more smoothly.

 

I was having a heck of a time getting a song going in the right direction. I had a ABCABCB thing going and realized that the C should not be a post chorus but a pre chorus. Since then it flows so much more smoothly. I'm actually still working on it just because it took me close to a month to get to this point. I'm still figuring out the exact structure, but It's much easier to handle since I've shifted it around.

 

I agree that bringing in the chorus at the beginning of a song can do wonders, really makes an impact.

 

Happycannibal, I like that idea of a Modified Chorus. I think that can go a long way to release any expectation and provide more innovative thinking in the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah I totally get writers block from it sometimes.

 

Yes D is a bridge.

 

Funny thing is that I can walk into someone else's song and redo the arrangement in no time and have it turn out wonderful, but my own stuff I have a hard time with.

 

Go figure. =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I came across a song that is really big in the underground scene in clubs right now. It mixes synths, guitars, drums (including a Sherman Filterbank for making it crunchy) and the synths do the bass. It's a well laid out song, but it uses a really long and out of the ordinary song structure.

 

This is what I gathered from listening to it. The Song structure seems to be like this (and I did study this carefully):

 

Short Intro, A, B, C, D, A, B, C, D, E, A, C (longer), E. Man, that seems like a lot.

 

The A and B seem to be like a verse but are definitely totally different from each other in structure.

 

C seems to be a Pre-Chorus.

 

D must be the Chorus.

 

E seems to act like a bridge (, but it's filled with more energy than the chorus or any other part of the song).

 

It actually really flows. I can't find a clip for you guys to listen on the net. You can download it from Limewire, I checked it.

 

The Song is by the Band 'Razed in Black' and the song is 'Oh my Goth'. Funny title.

 

I'm curious if the song structure I listed above is right. I've just never noticed a structure like this before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I often stick to traditional structures, ABABAB, ABABCAB, that sort of thing. But in some cases ditz around with that, such as BAABAB. Very often, however, I alter the endings of same-sections, to make them point to new places. ABAB'CA'B'', for example.

 

However, I try very hard to either make something distinctive about them, such as an anticipatory pause AND harmony at the end of a chorus or a dramatic key shift in returning to the A section or a chord from outside the key at a lyrically and rhythmically significant point.

 

I also work to make my melody be INTERESTING. Current popular music has a strong tendency to make the melody basically boring. Songs I write that have little harmonic interest, therefor, NEED a really strong melody to carry the listener's interest.

 

Also, studies on especially strong melody suggest that having only ONE high point maximizes a climax, having that high point about 2/3 of the way through feels pretty natural and that if you diverge from those you'd better know what you're doing or you're likely to diminish the impact of your material.

 

In all cases, a catchy rhythmic underpinning is best, but if harmonic drama and melodic development are missing, you'd better have a great thing happening in the rhythm.

 

My impression of beginning songwriters is that they either have one idea that they beat to death until it's distinctiveness is lost or they string together more and more barely-related sections in an attempt to get something to happen. Obviously, both are weak approaches.

 

Listen to the way you tell your friends a story when you're enthusiastic and get a good response from them. There's a 'punch line', a point to it. The point comes closer to the end than the beginning. The preceeding is important set-up for the punch. The succeeding eases the listener back into their position as observer where they can 'appreciate from a distance', as it were. This is not to say that lyrics have to tell a story, but to suggest that the 'curve of emotional impact' should follow that kind of path.

 

OK, enough pontificating for my first post on HC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Stylez I'll have to disagree with you a little bit when you say that

ABABCB can be a bit boring sometimes depending on the music.

 

Unless your playing prog rock, most modern rock/pop artists use that format or something similiar to it in most all of their music.

It seems that it is definitely cliche but works the best when done properly.

 

I think what makes the song work or remembered is the creative melody or lack of that you put into those ABABCB structures.

 

just my 2 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We've had about 50 years now to perfect the pop song. To the human ear, the three minute pop song seems to work. The challenge now is to always keep the song interesting and surprising while staying in the three-minute pop song format.

 

That;s not to say other forms of song don't work. I'm just saying from a pop perspective, and as a working songwriter, that making three minute pop songs interesting is the challenge (for me anyways).

 

DM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Donmak - That word you used, "surprising" is an important one.

 

For a pop song, the listener has to feel like they're in familiar and comfortable territory right away (notice how many people prefer cover tunes to your fine, new material when you or your band plays a club?) yet, at the same time, they have to be surprised by where the song goes.

 

So, standard song forms and good hooks start them feeling comfy and then a lil twist of some sort can lead them to a new and surprising place and be more satisfying than a mere repetition of some old thing they heard before.

 

A really simple harmonic example is this:

 

I... IV... V... I...

I... IV... V... vi (let ring)

 

or

 

C... F... G... C...

C... F... G... Ami (let ring)

 

The same melody note almost certainly works fine over both the C in the first line and the Ami in the second line. The Ami, tho, gives that little surprise underneath and can lead the song to a new direction or section. The same melody note over Ami might lead up instead of down or vice versa, thereby setting up movement into a new section of the tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Good points! Starting off comfy and then adding a twist is important definitely. But also taking different approaches to pop songs by adding completely new intros and hooks will put the "Wow" factor (if they are are appealingly good) into the song.

 

But all in all, for it to be a pop song, I guess it has to be on a similar page as other pop music, but I think not necessarily, as there are those exceptions that really stand out. I guess I'm really talking about groundbreaking stuff.

 

Why is it that some pop songs are so repulsive? It must be because of trends and more often than not, dumb and silly ideas that are manifested into music. I think I strayed away from the post here....better get back on it.

 

Stylez, you checked out that song yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
  • Members

Also, don't underestimate the benefit of having a unique intro. It doesn't have to be long, (in fact short is preferable), but just a few instrumental measures to set up the song. I kind of think of the intro as some sort of identification tag, where as soon as someone hears the song, within the first few seconds, they already know what it's going to be. (A good example would be "In My Life" by the Beatles). I imagine a song being played in concert, where before the singer even sings a word, the audience applauds after hearing the first couple of bars.

 

Also, it is common and effective to return to the intro at certain points throughout the song as well, such as after the first chorus, or at the very end. Makes people remember it even more. Kind of like reinstating a theme.

 

Of course, not all songs need intros, and some do just find without them, especially those that have really memorable opening lines (lyric). But I think it's a device that is tremendously effective, and is often overlooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...