Disrespect for standardisation is the mother of musical creativity. Hence, the Beatles with no formal music education were ground breaking anarchists, finding joy in every quirk and oddity.
Music is for the ears to feed the _soul,_ not the brain.
I’m surprised that loop is so unusual as it doesn’t sound unusual. I always think the best songs in odd time signatures are the ones that don’t seem odd at all. What brilliance.
They knew more theory than they even realized. Their success and fresh sound wasn’t because they rejected theory altogether but because their long hours of practise had given them an intuitive sense for it without formal training. They also wouldn’t have been anything more than a bar band without the further musical guidance of George Martin.
This idea that theory limits creativity is baseless and usually comes from people making excuses not to learn it.
It’s like learning a new language. You could take a course for it or you could just drop yourself in that country and learn on the fly. Rejecting that country’s native language isn’t really an option and will just alienate you. Then you’d be less of a Beatle and more of a Yoko Ono.
@battleframestudios8989 I used to stubbornly be like this, then I learned music theory and realised what an idiot I had been by making everything so hard for myself all those years.
Something notable about this progression that you didn’t mention i the video is its similarity to both the Magnolia progression (I-I7-IV-iv) as well as the I-V-ii-IV progression (very common in pop). It’s basically a cross between the two, the roots of the chords outline 1-5-2-4 but the chord qualities are adjusted so that we hear the 1-b7-6-b6-5 line cliché that is at the core of the Magnolia progression. It’s also basically the Magnolia progression except the chords are swapped for their relatives, where I and iv are the same but I7 has been swapped out for v (which is essentially an extension of I9) and IV has been swapped out for ii, its relative minor.
What if you throw a V (first inversion does this most smoothly) in between the I triad and I7? That way you get the entire line cliché and don’t skip from 1 to b7.
@wyattstevens8574 then you get that line cliché instead I guess. Oh I suppose if each notevif the line cliché is even lengthed then you can’t neatly fit it into four measures anymore
Madness were fascinating, there were multiple songwriting partnerships within the band and they all learned by “doing”. Mike Barson was probably the most musical, but they all contributed.
Disrespect for standardisation is the mother of musical creativity. Hence, the Beatles with no formal music education were ground breaking anarchists, finding joy in every quirk and oddity.
Music is for the ears to feed the _soul,_ not the brain.
Thinking of music education and music theory as limitations means not understanding its concept
I’m surprised that loop is so unusual as it doesn’t sound unusual. I always think the best songs in odd time signatures are the ones that don’t seem odd at all. What brilliance.
They knew more theory than they even realized. Their success and fresh sound wasn’t because they rejected theory altogether but because their long hours of practise had given them an intuitive sense for it without formal training. They also wouldn’t have been anything more than a bar band without the further musical guidance of George Martin.
This idea that theory limits creativity is baseless and usually comes from people making excuses not to learn it.
It’s like learning a new language. You could take a course for it or you could just drop yourself in that country and learn on the fly. Rejecting that country’s native language isn’t really an option and will just alienate you. Then you’d be less of a Beatle and more of a Yoko Ono.
@battleframestudios8989😂
@battleframestudios8989 I used to stubbornly be like this, then I learned music theory and realised what an idiot I had been by making everything so hard for myself all those years.
Something notable about this progression that you didn’t mention i the video is its similarity to both the Magnolia progression (I-I7-IV-iv) as well as the I-V-ii-IV progression (very common in pop). It’s basically a cross between the two, the roots of the chords outline 1-5-2-4 but the chord qualities are adjusted so that we hear the 1-b7-6-b6-5 line cliché that is at the core of the Magnolia progression. It’s also basically the Magnolia progression except the chords are swapped for their relatives, where I and iv are the same but I7 has been swapped out for v (which is essentially an extension of I9) and IV has been swapped out for ii, its relative minor.
A* student
What if you throw a V (first inversion does this most smoothly) in between the I triad and I7? That way you get the entire line cliché and don’t skip from 1 to b7.
@wyattstevens8574 then you get that line cliché instead I guess. Oh I suppose if each notevif the line cliché is even lengthed then you can’t neatly fit it into four measures anymore
👍👍👍❤❤❤
Nice interpretation 👍💥🙏
Thanks for listening
Love this song! You give it a whole new, quiet vibe though
Beautiful rendition.
Madness had some real bangers 🙂
I don’t think that it was any coincidence that the band was called Madness, as they had some unusual songs.
This is giving me major deja vu and I love it
Madness were fascinating, there were multiple songwriting partnerships within the band and they all learned by “doing”. Mike Barson was probably the most musical, but they all contributed.
This song always makes me think of The Young Ones 😊
In the last part I see Db and Eb which should be sharps!
Using v minor in major works pretty well. I should try to do that more.
Our house
In the middle of our house
Nicely played David 🙂
Sounds like Sims 4 building music when you play it like that
HE DIDN’T RESOLVED AAAHHHH