3 ms·

Totally valid question, and I think that yes... there is a reason that our (or Western) song structure has evolved the way it has. For some reason it is very a

Totally valid question, and I think that yes... there is a reason that our (or Western) song structure has evolved the way it has. For some reason it is very appealing to the listener, and I think it's a combination of sonic qualities but also relief from repetition. And this is what's lacking from a lot of today's music. Today we have what amounts to a loop where someone presses Play, mumbles over it for a period of time, and then presses Stop. There's no payoff. I think one of first times I thought about this was listening to "Crazy in Love" by Beyonce. It has this big build-up that you think is going to go into a satisfying chorus... but it goes nowhere. Nowhere, for the whole song. And that song is fairly dynamic by today's standards.

gedy 2y ago
> It has this big build-up that you think is going to go into a satisfying chorus... but it goes nowhere. I don't disagree in general, but that particular song is likely just due to the use of that rising horn sample from the original 1970 Chi-Lites song: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hm2YjDENPPU https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hm2YjDENPPU
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  That is indeed what I mean... but I don't think the source of the sample makes any difference.
poincaredisk 2y ago
I disagree. This song structure is cheap and mostly used for pop songs meant to be a catchy background. Many (most?) music pieces that could be called masterpieces don't follow such simplistic structure. I'm not trying to be pretentious. I'm not a hardcore music fan, and most of the music I listen to nowadays has the classic verse/chorus structure (because it's catchy and ready to vibe on). But pretending it's the one correct way to make music is not right.
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  I'm only talking about pop music; that's what charts typically cover.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - shermantanktop 2y ago
    The equivalent charts from the 30s and 40s were often not verse/chorus/verse. Think “Somewhere Over The Rainbow” or “Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy”. There are repeated sections like choruses but the bones are often a 32 bar form with an AABA structure.
    - DidYaWipe 2y ago
      At least they had that. And a melody.

gedy 2y ago

> It has this big build-up that you think is going to go into a satisfying chorus... but it goes nowhere. I don't disagree in general, but that particular song is likely just due to the use of that rising horn sample from the original 1970 Chi-Lites song: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hm2YjDENPPU https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hm2YjDENPPU

DidYaWipe 2y ago
That is indeed what I mean... but I don't think the source of the sample makes any difference.

poincaredisk 2y ago

I disagree. This song structure is cheap and mostly used for pop songs meant to be a catchy background. Many (most?) music pieces that could be called masterpieces don't follow such simplistic structure. I'm not trying to be pretentious. I'm not a hardcore music fan, and most of the music I listen to nowadays has the classic verse/chorus structure (because it's catchy and ready to vibe on). But pretending it's the one correct way to make music is not right.

DidYaWipe 2y ago
I'm only talking about pop music; that's what charts typically cover.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- shermantanktop 2y ago
  The equivalent charts from the 30s and 40s were often not verse/chorus/verse. Think “Somewhere Over The Rainbow” or “Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy”. There are repeated sections like choruses but the bones are often a 32 bar form with an AABA structure.
  - DidYaWipe 2y ago
    At least they had that. And a melody.