Understanding hip hop music - need input

[chicagodannyd]

As a composer and fan of hip hop, I have a question.

The kind of hip hop I like, starts with a nice dance beat, adds a captivating melody, mixes in some rapping, with nice sample sounds, includes a chorus of several singers in the background.

Now also I have heard another kind of Black music. In this genre, it seems that there is no distinct melody, and the singer goes on and on singing around a chord or two, almost like lyrical-based improvising. I heard a song like this in the movie, "Mo Better Blues." This music doesn't seem to be based upon the 16 or 8 measures verse and chorus. It just goes on and on. It doesn't have a hook. What is it? Is this church based music or derived from church music? I have been hearing a lot of it lately. Maybe I'm hearing things. The reason it perks my interest is because it seems to defy standard music theory structure so much. Is this an actual music genre or what?

[DrApostropheX]

You'll probably want to go back to the era of what was called "negro spirituals" (basically the songs of the African-American people during the era of slavery in America) to find what you're looking for. The amazing group "The Sounds of Blackness" are a good source for this. Check out their CD "From Africa to America". It'll definitely open your mind.

[MyMusic42]

It's hard to respond without knowing what you are specifically referring to. Can you post an audio example?

As a fan of gospel/church music, I think there is a lot of variety to the genre. When I think of church music, I think that is DOES conform to music theory. So your comments surprise me.

If, in fact, you are referring to "sprituals', as one poster suggested--I would still argue that it conforms to music theory.

There is, however, a trend in black gospel music called the vamp/drive/special which usually occurs near the end of the song and is very repetitive vocals on top of a repetitious musical phrase. The lead singer will usually improvise on top of that. Could this be what you are talking about?

A lot of spirituals/slave songs/congregational songs etc were created/written in an environment without instruments. So if it is sung acapella, I guess I could see how you might see it as defying music theory. But every spiritual I ever heard does have a chord structure and a distinct melody. BUT something that is very common to black church music is improvisation. So the leader has a lot of leeway with how the interpret the song, and often give a very emotional/spiritual rendition which may push the envelope of the original melody.

In the modern church/gospel genre, these spirituals are now usually performed WITH music, and the underlying musical structure is much more evident.

Hope that helps.

[artepobre]

I think you're refering to this, hope it helps!!!

link ----> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melisma

[Melkor]

http://www.amazon.com/Music-Better-Blue ... B0000027DO

Im certain you are referring to track 6 "Pop Top 40"

This sounds like a standard one chord (I7) vamp, which is rife in jazz and blues.


Very easy to explain theoretically

[DrApostropheX]

Yep, and if you want to track how the vamp found it's way into hip-hop, check out any James Brown album from 1969 to 1979 or any Parliament album (particularly Funkentelechy vs. The Placebo Syndrome). I think it was George Clinton who said his goal was to take repetition (in music) from the the point where it's annoying to point where it becomes something sacred.

[chicagodannyd]

http://www.amazon.com/Music-Better-Blue ... B0000027DO

Im certain you are referring to track 6 "Pop Top 40"

This sounds like a standard one chord (I7) vamp, which is rife in jazz and blues.


Very easy to explain theoretically

I can't be specific as to which song it was in Mo Better Blues because I saw the movie just once. I know it's not track 6. I did go to Amazon and listened to several song samples from the movie sound track. They are so short that it is difficult to identify the song I am referring to. I noticed the song, "Harlem Blues." There is a little bit of a melody in the sound sample, but not much. I'd have to hear this song all the way through to determine if the singer transitions to a distinct 8 bar melody line or to a "hook" melody. If this is the song, maybe the piano player is playing blues chords, and the singer improvising a melody around the chords. Can't be specific. But I do know I have been hearing a lot lately, songs, that seem to be sung with a loose or improvised melody. It seems to be a genre that is heavily dependent on the singer's ability to improvise or stretch a melody around a chord or two. Maybe when the improvising is extensive, the original melody gets lost a bit and the song takes on a kind of meandering quality. I'm bringing all this up because I am interested in learning if audiences like this kind of music and what is the genesis of the music.

[nuffink]

http://www.amazon.com/Music-Better-Blue ... B0000027DO

Im certain you are referring to track 6 "Pop Top 40"

This sounds like a standard one chord (I7) vamp, which is rife in jazz and blues.


Very easy to explain theoretically

I can't be specific as to which song it was in Mo Better Blues because I saw the movie just once. I know it's not track 6. I did go to Amazon and listened to several song samples from the movie sound track. They are so short that it is difficult to identify the song I am referring to. I noticed the song, "Harlem Blues." There is a little bit of a melody in the sound sample, but not much. I'd have to hear this song all the way through to determine if the singer transitions to a distinct 8 bar melody line or to a "hook" melody. If this is the song, maybe the piano player is playing blues chords, and the singer improvising a melody around the chords. Can't be specific. But I do know I have been hearing a lot lately, songs, that seem to be sung with a loose or improvised melody. It seems to be a genre that is heavily dependent on the singer's ability to improvise or stretch a melody around a chord or two. Maybe when the improvising is extensive, the original melody gets lost a bit and the song takes on a kind of meandering quality. I'm bringing all this up because I am interested in learning if audiences like this kind of music and what is the genesis of the music.

Harlem Blues has the only female vocal on the soundtrack. I don't know what you call that kind of singing (blues recitative if you were feeling a bit pseudy) but I do know where you can find the motherload... http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jnmWVFmZ8ik

[Melkor]

I'm bringing all this up because I am interested in learning if audiences like this kind of music and what is the genesis of the music.

A long monotonic recititive over a single chord vamp, or a 2 chord vamp, is sort of like an intermission for live music.
Like an entree ...... it needs more substance to follow.

Recititives happen in all genres, from Metal to Broadway.

Having one in your live set isnt a bad idea, but it would be VERY hard IMO to make a whole show of this work, for obvious reasons.

Even having 2 or 3 in a set of 15 standard songs would really stretch the patience of the audience.......





The only obvious exception IMO is some forms of HipHop/Rap do nothing BUT monotonic recititives over very basic percussion, but without any harmony or melody whatsoever, or with such minimal harmony it comes across as weak.

The "battles" in the movie 8 Mile can be considered in this category.
Monotonic vocals, minimal percussion and a harmonic landscape so bleak it didnt really even exist.

This gives the rapper awesome freedom to improvise (he/she doesnt have to worry about pitch, every pitch they sing is the same unison note and there is no harmony to clash with, so they are left to concentrate on the rhythm and lyrics only, which is what they do best) .... but it leaves MOST listeners MUSICALLY unsatisfied, because there is no real tension/resolution at all and even the most open minded fans cant stomach the rapper pumping out the same note all night.

Incidentally, this is why i personally beleive a few less than talented rappers always "feature" someone else in their songs.
I believe its because the Producer ultimately knows that the rappers monotone cannot hold the entire song without becoming boring (yes, even 3 min songs) so the "featured artist" creates diversion and interest.

But anyway i digress

[wrench45us]

in modern urban churches there's often a segement called praise where the preacher preaches and the musicians esp the keyboardist(s) provide open-ended accompaniement.

This is usually where the keyboardist breaks out 'preacher' chords and most dramatic progressions

There may be some examples on

http://gospelmusicians.com/

[chicagodannyd]

I'm bringing all this up because I am interested in learning if audiences like this kind of music and what is the genesis of the music.

A long monotonic recititive over a single chord vamp, or a 2 chord vamp, is sort of like an intermission for live music.
Like an entree ...... it needs more substance to follow.

Recititives happen in all genres, from Metal to Broadway."

I think I'm learning a lot from the response. It isn't my imagination. There definitely seems to be a style of music that is of the kind I am describing. I heard another similar song today on 103.5 radio in Chicago, Illinois. The whole song could not have had more than 2 chords, with actually about no more than 6 main pitch notes, with one of them repeated quite a bit. It's pleasant to hear, but it does not strike me personally as a great melody, i.e. Paul McCartney's "Yesterday" or Twila Paris's "The Warrior is a Child" or other great melodies that linger in the mind for days after hearing them. That may be the weakness of non-structured, or very loosely structured music. For example, I can't repeat the melody I heard today. But a great melody worms its way into my mind quickly, and sometimes I can go for three days with the same very melodic tune lingering in my mind.

As a composer, I guess I can produce the type of music of this discussion easily. But striking a great melody does not come to me often, which is why I consider myself not a gifted composer at all.

[MyMusic42]

chicagodannyd wrote:
I'm bringing all this up because I am interested in learning if audiences like this kind of music and what is the genesis of the music.

It works a lot better live than in the studio. Certainly in gospel/church music, i've known songs to go on repetitively for literally 20-30 minutes and the audience was not bored. But this length of songs would never make it onto a record or CD. it's just not marketable.