Why can’t you use more sophisticated chords in current hits?

[fantasyvn]

Hi all,

When it comes to songwriting advice, I have read some arguments that in the old days, even in the 1960s and 1970s, you could use sophisticated chord progressions in pop. The reason was more emphasis was put on interesting pitches and their relationship to the chord progression.

However, in the 21st century the rhythm of the melody has become the primary focus for creating listener appeal. That's why an instructor, Jai Josefs , said “so many songs today can use only a simple chord loop (instead of the rich variety of chords used in the 20th century) and still remain thoroughly engaging and compelling”.

He listed an example: “Listen to the first 15 notes of Ed Sheeran's recent hit "Shape of You" for example. All 15 are the exact same pitch, but the intricate rhythm completely engages you and captures your attention.”

I understand that this is a very common situation nowadays: intricate rhythm, simple chords.

But I still don’t understand why it is difficult for songwriters to use complex chords on intricate rhythm. Is it because such a combination would make it impossible to create melodies?

Thank you

[Gamma-UT]

He listed an example: “Listen to the first 15 notes of Ed Sheeran's recent hit "Shape of You" for example. All 15 are the exact same pitch, but the intricate rhythm completely engages you and captures your attention.”

Isn't there a minor-third interval in the first two words? Ok, the next dozen or so are all the same.

I'd argue doing anything more complex in the vocal would be a problem against the opening riff (which does imply a reasonable amount of chordal movement, although hardly extended chords), so the voice is really just a rhythmic counterpoint using a style that's been adopted from dancehall-genre songs. Which leads me to...

But I still don’t understand why it is difficult for songwriters to use complex chords on intricate rhythm. Is it because such a combination would make it impossible to create melodies?

...fashions change. The songwriters of the 60s adopted different motifs from the tin-pan alley songwriters. Then songwriters like Bowie used their early experience to re-adopt them. The 80s brought the tyranny of the sus2 and sus4 chords. Then people decided they liked repetition, lots and lots of repetition, even if it meant taking songs like Valerie and chopping them down to a couple of basic riffs. Sia brought out This is Acting because there were good songs she'd written that just didn't 'fit' for whatever reason – and I think in a number of cases they were just a bit too sophisticated for the producers and marketers. We're probably at the extreme swing of the pendulum right now.

It's also worth noting that the music environment is much more complicated than it used to be. If you're looking at chart hits, you're dealing with a comparatively small segment of listeners who arguably care less about music than the image that goes with it – a natural consequence of youth. There's plenty of more complex stuff going on but it just doesn't tickle the Top 40 because none of those artists can command the critical mass of the more fashion-conscious part of the audience. But you don't have to look far to find more interesting modern songwriting that sells.

[do_androids_dream]

It's the reason I developed an interest in Russian pop and J Pop - far more interesting chord progressions and song structures.

The only western pop I really like for its minimalism and simplicity is R 'n B. I think this was largely due to Prince's influence on pop music - thank god for 'im.

[shonky]

Slightly offtopic but found this on the 'tube and I'm guessing that if you used more sophisticated chords you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the bland, passion-free, nothingness of the tunes. Can the rhythm even be considered a hook if it's practically identical between tunes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5t4F5QZIUk

[Kinh]

It's the reason I developed an interest in Russian pop and J Pop - far more interesting chord progressions and song structures.

+1

[Kinh]

Listen to Korean music if you wanna hear sophisticated chords on rhythmic tracks

[DJ Warmonger]

People still make sophisticated song, just they don't get promoted as mainstram. It's a business and needs to appeal to everyone. Most people are incapable to comprehend complex melodies.

[shonky]

Or listen to something other than current hits I guess.

[kelvyn]

Although not a broad brush statement I think it’s worth mentioning that technology has played a part in the simplification of chord structures in today’s popular music. More and more writers and producers come from a computer based background - building up songs from an eight bar rhythmic basis and then re-arranging those eight bars to create a track that a singer then finds a melody for - rather than the other way round where a composer would start with either a melody or a chord pattern on which to build a song.
Tastes have also changed according to new research and it would appear that a lot of people prefer simple repetitive song structures.
I’m not sure that songs like Bohemian Rhapsody or McArthurs Park could make it into the charts today.
@Gamma-UT. Great post

[funky lime]

We like stuff that is familiar and memorable. It's probably the same reason why we use simple language in our idioms, adages, cliches.

Like peas in a pod? Or like embryos in a dehiscent fabaceae carpel?

[Liney]

This is a subject and debate that is close to my heart, and I have given a great deal of thought to it.

I made a bunch of music a little over ten years ago that was more driven by passion than prowess in terms of musical theory (nothing wrong with that). However, in an attempt to get better, I then took time out to start to improve all aspects of my music making. This included a period of studying 60s pop (specifically the Beatles).

Newsflash: the Beatles really were extraordinary! From relatively humble beginnings, their songs became remarkably sophisticated harmonically. It is not by accident that the Beatles are, erm, THE Beatles.

Anyway, after this period of study, I thought how great it would be to bring this harmonic sophistication back into pop music. Of course it hasn't completely disappeared, but it has in the majority of pop music. I started writing songs which, in every case, would change key from verse to chorus, and again in the middle eight section. By 'change key', I don't just mean going up by a semitone for the last chorus like the average Eurovision hit, but instead changing key to a completely unrelated key, and then back again. I also wouldn't write a verse or a chorus without an 'interesting' chord in it: a diminished 7th, or augmented chord, or something even more exotic.

Anyway, the songs I wrote were actually pretty good I think. But when I came to arrange and produce them, I found it a real ball ache. It started to take a lot of time, and I started to think "why am I spending all this time on songs that I doubt anyone is ever going to listen to". Because a lot of what draws me to pop music is the textures and sounds (I'm a synth guy), and it became hard to bring in interesting sounds when the chords were jumping all around, and the song kept changing key. It brings up lots of other conundrums: what do you do when you have designed a nice kick drum sound and tuned it to the root of the song, and then the song changes key completely between sections!?

The dominance of rhythm in 'modern music' is also a big problem as you say, but for me it was also the dominance of sound design. If I was just recording a rock band, my songs would not have been a problem.

It bring to mind a quote from one of the Kraftwerk guys in the biography of them from a couple of years ago. To paraphrase, he says: "other bands spend ages coming up with the chords. We spend ages coming up with the sounds, and then come up with the chords later". If a song has interesting sounds and rhythms, it can have very simple chords (check out Talking Heads' brilliant album "Remain in Light", where a number of songs have only one chord. It was inspired by Fela Kuti). I've noticed that a lot of pop songs now also use the same chord progression for the chorus as for the verse. I used to turn my nose up at this, but now I embrace it.

Of course, in a way the Beatles also had interesting sound design in the Sgt Pepper era, but it was still largely real instruments being played, and then being manipulated on tape etc. They weren't programming digital synths.

The Beatles managed to be mainstream and yet experimental. What would this sound like today? To my ears, Radiohead. They experiment a lot, but mainly with rhythm, time signature, and sound design. Some of their songs now have very simple chords indeed.

All of this is my conclusions...feel free to disagree and educate me!

[ramseysounds]

I don't care, because so much of today's mainstream 'songs' is manufactured garbage and won't be around in 18 months time. Do what you feel suits you. Don't sell out and follow the crowd.
My 2 cents anyway.

[Azura]

I believe that we can turn it to our advantage. There is that current trend in the industry right now that dictates what is mainstream. But history teaches us that what is popular today will transform itself to something else. What? No one knows. But if we struggle to create music with a sense of quality, creativity, and honesty, we can hope that sooner or later it will get a broader audience.

Keep on doing good music, guys!

Marc

[zeep]

A lot of the people making this mainstream repetitive music (for the generation who have an attention span of 1 second), really want to make more intelligent music, but no record / media company wants that.
Not yet.

[Liney]

I would argue, though, that less sophisticated chords do not necessarily make a piece of music inferior - it depends what else is going on. Music has many elements/dimensions: timbre, rhythm, melody, etc.

As I mention in my post above, Remain in Light by Talking Heads has songs on it that have only one chord, but the songs in question are also very sophisticated. It depends what type of music you are going for. If you a singer/songwriter, with just vocals and guitar, I would perhaps not recommend writing songs with just two chords!

That said, 'Tomorrow Never Knows' by The Beatles! Perhaps it depends what drugs you are taking

I say that flippantly, but I used the example of the Beatles in my post above as a band with very sophisticated chords in their songs, but they also experimented in their songwriting with holding one chord for a long time (largely in the period when they discovered weed). I think that 'Ticket to Ride' holds just one chord until the eleventh bar (if you include the intro). I love that song...it is a classic rock and roll track.