Song analysis: The Beatles - Something

bigjon · September 2013

mike_l said:

I'm struggling with this, particularly the open chords, any help please
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ryGCAruMu2o

or a live version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EMzly9NNBKs

I'll post this in the Practice Studio Canteen thread at http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/115/the-practice-studio-canteen-for-your-quick-questions-on-theory-and-technique#latest and have a listen.

mike_l · September 2013

Clarky said:

wanna start a new thread with this one like the other thread suggested????
then it'll be easier for future reference...

Good call, luckily Bigjon did that for me

TheOtherDennis · September 2013

Crikey most of that stuff is way out of my league, but I thought it might be interesting to see how you think the George Harrison song compares to the song of a very similar title that inspired it -

A very young James Taylor turned up on Apple's doorstep one morning in 1968 with this as his demo piece and asked what they thought of it. They loved it and signed him up.

George later said that JT's first line was so good that although he only originally intended to borrow it so that he could use it as a starting point to write his own song from, it had to stay in the final version.

Col_Decker · September 2013

Clarky said:

C∆7

Bloody hell Clarky that's some great stuff yiu've done there! But what does the triangle mean in the 'C triangle 7'?

EricTheWeary · September 2013

TheOtherDennis said:

Crikey most of that stuff is way out of my league, but I thought it might be interesting to see how you think the George Harrison song compares to the song of a very similar title that inspired it -

A very young James Taylor turned up on Apple's doorstep one morning in 1968 with this as his demo piece and asked what they thought of it. They loved it and signed him up.

George later said that JT's first line was so good that although he only originally intended to borrow it so that he could use it as a starting point to write his own song from, it had to stay in the final version.

That they came up with comprehensible, memorable lyrics is quite remarkable really. From what I read they worked on the music for a while and had that JT line as inspiration but otherwise the lyrics were just nonsensical stuff to fit the melody and were finished off quite late in the day.

Clarky · September 2013

it's conventional chord chart stuff

C∆7 = C major 7

C7 = C dominant 7

Cm7 = C minor 7

Cº7 = C diminished 7

Clarky · September 2013

Eric - yes I was actually aware of the song that inspired Something. I've not heard it though. I'll check it out later when I'm in the studio.

Clarky · September 2013

TheOtherDennis said:

Crikey most of that stuff is way out of my league,

-- if you're interested we can look are what bits you don't understand and try to clarify them for you

this is the whole point of an analysis: you get some new knowledge from it

but given you can listen to this 'knowledge' being used in an applied situation it should become a little more meaningful and less academic than just endlessly reading about scales and chords and stuff without hearing them used.

This is where music theory becomes really useful..

to help trigger those eureka moments in a way that makes sense

kinda - "ahh so that's what's happening ! ! cool ! !"

so... feel free to asked questions about anything that didn't make sense to you..

TheOtherDennis · September 2013

It's not that there's anything specific I don't understand, it's more the way that if I read each individual sentence I get it, but if I try to swallow it all I choke. And there's no way on earth I could have done it myself if you asked me to explain it all.

An interesting point though, that I remember from an interview with Macca once - he said "We had no idea we were writing in the mixolydian mode or whatever, we just put together some chords we thought went well together. We tried to do it in a way that wasn't expected, take people on journeys that made sense but surprised them at the same time."

That's not to diminish anything you've said, because it's all true, but they simply thought "So what can we play next that works but isn't obvious?"

Clarky · September 2013

the interesting point about your interesting point is how true it is for most folk that have written great songs.

they don't always know the technical in's and out's of what they're doing.. but their intuition tells them that it's hitting the spot..

guys like Macca and Lennon would have been no strangers to Dorian and Mixo tonality..

all through the 60's and 70's Blues and Rock'n'Roll music had and was rubbing off on everything..

so even though they may not have known the names of things they knew what sounded right..

and those guys in particular had a very astute ear for melody and harmony..

some folk seem to have a bit of a gift for song writing..

others have to work harder at it..

all the theory knowhow don't help you to write songs...

but it does help to rationalise what you hear by putting labels on things..

so when you hear something that hits the spot for you, it's useful to be able to inwardly digest this..

and then this can lead to you learning by example and so come up with better songs of your own..

I remember when I was a noob guitarist.. learning to play songs, chords, riffs and licks by ear..

I recall seeing and hearing certain patterns being common and figured out how to use them myself...

at the time I had no idea what they were called..

that is until many years later when I found that I'd discovered several scales [maj / min / harm min / min pentatonic / man pentatonic]..

but the killer thing was that I'd also discovered the relationship between them and stumbled upon the fact that they had a centre key..

the essence of the relationship between the major and relative minor..

and also the relationship between scale, chords and key..

but then I was lucky enough to have a small gift with respect to aural perception..

years later when I did all the 'learning' all of these fragments of notions and intuitions all fell into place..

it was like seeing an image suddenly come into sharp focus..

TheOtherDennis · September 2013

I know what you mean. I've never quite grasped the whole theory thing, but some of it has gone in not through reading about it, or playing it but by doing both - I was shown it, it was explained and then I heard it and played it and it slowly started to sink in. There's a reasonable bit of theory I get, but can't do, like scales, for instance - I know what the modes are supposed to be about, but I can't crack them or remember them, if you know what I mean. So if there's a series of chords to solo over, I have to sit down and work it all out painstakingly and slowly. I can't just do it.

I had the exact same experience with crosswords. I always wanted to be able to do cryptic crosswords, and I'd read three books on the subject and got precisely nowhere. Then I saw a documentary on BBC4 about it and bingo it clicked. I've been doing them every day ever since.

Clarky · September 2013

there really is no substitute for having someone sit in front of you to explain something, demonstrate it, show you the possibilites..

and if need be, take you by the hand and lead you on a voyage of discovery

Blueingreen · September 2013

Not that I want to discourage the idea of doing these analyses, which I think are great, but "Something" is also a song that always seemed to me very good at illustrating the limitations of analysis.

For example, the bass part. For me this is a masterpiece, one of thet greatest bass parts in all of rock and pop. I've seen more than one name bassist, the kind who could eat Macca for breakfast technically, admit that they can only dream of coming up with a part so original and perfect. And yet, try to analyse it and everything that makes it great eludes description. It's basically arpeggios with some scalar connecting notes. It hints at the melody in places. Rhythmically it's a little random, slightly busier here, slightly sparser there - an obvious Jamerson influence, but this kind of randomness soon went out of fashion as bassists developed a preference for clarity, precision, repetition. But somehow a whole lot of stuff that analysis suggests is ordinary, even cliched, comes out as fresh and magical.

There are other things we could discuss similarly - the descending basslines against triads sounds great, but they are also musical cliches. Why are they so memorable in this song while failing to elevate other songs above the ordinary? Why are the oh so simple guitar parts so memorable and effective? Why doesn't the ploddy and uninspired 'you're asking me' section totally ruin the song?

The Beatles are weird in this regard. There used to be a school of thought that they were great songwriters but not so hot as instrumentalists or even singers. If that were true then given the many thousands of cover versions of their songs, many by artists who were great in their own right, it should be easy to assemble a collection of Beatles covers that blow the originals out of the water. But sit down and listen to a list of Beatles covers and you'll quickly realise that although there is the odd gem, remarkably few top the originals: for some reason no-one plays or sings Beatles songs as well as the Beatles. And again, how do you explain that?

fnpt · September 2013

Clarky, would you be so kind as to analyse the solo as well, and maybe compare the choice of notes with the chords in the background?

Clarky · September 2013

@blueingreen - everything has strengths and weaknesses yes? and some songs / pieces will offer more / less points of interest than others. So I guess you could argue "why analyse anything at all?"
a reasonable enough question I guess...
of course there are limitations to sensible things that you can find in some music to talk about..
generally, classical music has more to offer from an analysis standpoint by virtue of the compositional process [think Sonata form, Baroque Suites, Concerti etc]..
contemporary music most often does not contain anything close to the number of 'talking points' that you'd find in the 1st mvt of a Symphony...
that said... even if a song, or a bit of a song can reveal something remotely interesting, then there is something to be gained for taking a detailed look at it..
so.. Macca's bassline.. I reckon that'd be like trying to analyse a blues solo.. sounds to me like he is just playing what he feels sounds / fits the best and works best for the song... and I agree, it's very cool.. can you anayise any of that?? maybe there are some things of interest that are certainly worth a mention.. the first thing that springs to mind is the note density... the bass is consuming a lot of space.. I suspect that this is to prevent the song from 'plodding along' as it would if the bass were simply pumping root notes..
You do seem to have ideas / opinions as to what it is that makes The Beetles different..
Even talking about the more subjective elements is valid anaysis.. it don't all have to be hard facts..

@fnpt - I'll take a look at the solo... generally solos in contempory music don't offer a great deal to talk about because the creative process is generally less 'composed' and more 'intuitively felt'. That said I'll see if I can find somethnig a little more interesting to say than "it sucks".. lmao

Clarky · September 2013

ok... it's quite tough to find much of interest to say about that solo..

it's not very big.. and not much happens..

it's sparse and built around small licks.. lots of space.. minimal..

it's mostly using C pentatonic licks so it's quite safe with the overriding C major / C mix tonality

some of the licks are essentially similar fingerings in different positions

this is an old 'trick' which gives a kind of "theme and variations" effect..

so this sort of trick does make the solo sound a little more 'composed' rather than just throwing your entire lick vocabulary at it..

the solo seems to be built from about three basic licks

there are a few ways to approach a solo..

- write one: a compositional approach

pro's -- the solo can / should have more melodic content and contain more points of interest

con's -- can be quite unexciting

- free style: pure improv

pro's -- can pull some serious fireworks out of the bag

con's -- can sound like a series of preset licks or worse.. solo-ized exercises

- a little of both

this is my personal preferred approach..

usually a composed entrance and exit with a few general contours

but with enough scope to goof around..

the solo in Something sounds to me to have been written after several takes / practice passes

so it could have started life as a small improv and then settled into a set piece

which funnily enough is how 90% of my solos [in mature songs] end up

Blueingreen · September 2013

Clarky, I'm not suggesting analysis isn't worth doing. It's worth doing insofar as it's useful, which it sometimes is. But one of the things it's not terribly good is accounting for aesthetic value; often a memorable melody shows no structural differences from a pedestrian one. The reason I posted wasn't to disagree with anyone but precisely because as a Beatles fan who at different points has learned the bass and guitar parts to this song I had had some thoughts in the past about how difficult it was to account for the things that made it work.

The density point you made is basically the same one I make in talking about randomness. The density (ie basically repetition of mainly arpeggiated notes) varies apparently randomly. There's nothing obviously stylistically original in that - you can hear the same thing in players like Jamerson, Bob Babbit and Carol Kaye - and Macca does it himself elsewhere, perhaps most conspicuously in "Rain".

Clarky · September 2013

@Blueingreen - ahh... I don't think I got what I'm thinking across too well in my previous comment to you.. hmm..

I am actually agreeing with you that analysis has it's strengths and weaknesses..

whilst some things are easy and clear [scales, form, key, specific compositional techniques etc] because they are solidly quantifiable, there are plenty of things that are not so clear...

why does that lick with the phaser in Spirit of the Radio sound soooo hugely cool??

erm... cos it does and cos it is, is about the best way I could answer that... lol..

that said... it is possible and worthwhile looking at how a piece [or moment within it] makes you feel..

I never lose sight of the fact that music is after all an "emotion delivery system"

fun, sadness, triumph, hate, stupidity, fear, awe and so the list goes on..

so it's also certainly a good thing to describe what it is, regarding what you're hearing, that makes you feel these emotions in terms of what the music is actually doing..

there is a killer point about analysis that is often overlooked.. and this is that it's not unusual for the performer / composer to have not been considering all these 'things' that the analysis points out at the time.. and that it simply "seemed / felt like the right thing to do".. but that's ok.. the analysis isn't really trying to dive into the mind of the writer / performer.. more like, the analysis is trying to determine what it is that makes that moment so interesting / moving etc..

the way I see it it, is that the analysis tries to makes some sort of sense of what you've heard so that you can learn from it and maybe take something inspiring and / or thought provoking away that has the potential to add new elements to your own writing..

but like you say.. and rightly so.. all of this can only go so far..

listening to Macca's bass part... it's actually almost like a solo throughout..

why he chose to do this I have no idea.. but it does seem to add something very cool..

I think it does add more variety to the song.. it certainly makes things sound a little more unpredictable...

I think it's highly likely that he had been goofing around with the song and had come across some very cool little ideas and as the song progressed he was playing them all out.. kind of like 'improv on a theme / in and around some ideas"..

maybe he was trying to avoid being repetitive to keep things interesting [but who for, the listener or himself]..

I reckon it was a bit of all of the above.. he had some ideas pre-worked out from the point of view of the approach to the song, and then kinda jammed with it when recording.. hence that unpredictable quality..

I think it's well worth considering the time in The Beatles career when this was written.. this was a time when they were getting very experimental.. so was he simply trying to be a little different?? when most bassists at that time in that style would happily pump away on the roots... strangely, the bass is actually to most active instrument in this song.. but because it's in a different register to the vocal, there is never a conflict between them..

I chose Something for good reason....

for what is on the surface and nice simple song... deep down inside it there is some very cool stuff happening.. and some very shrewd song writing going on...

which of course offers plenty to talk about...

close2u · September 2013

isolated bass & drums if it helps

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VICLxf5JwA

Clarky · September 2013

wow... listening to that was soooo revealing...

close2u · September 2013

Clarky said:

wow... listening to that was soooo revealing...

Given your great analysis so far I'm interested to read what further thoughts have been revealed to you ... and I'm not a bassist

ddlooping · September 2013

Thanks for the in-depth analysis, Clarky, very interesting.

Blueingreen said:

There are other things we could discuss similarly - the descending basslines against triads sounds great, but they are also musical cliches. Why are they so memorable in this song while failing to elevate other songs above the ordinary? Why are the oh so simple guitar parts so memorable and effective? Why doesn't the ploddy and uninspired 'you're asking me' section totally ruin the song?

The sum being greater than the parts?

Panama_Jack666 · November 2013

@Clarky

I've been learning this stuff and trying to analyse the song myself. You've put some really great information in this thread and it's been loads of use. I really appreciate the time you've taken, thank you!

Clarky · November 2013

haa… no probs matey...

Panama_Jack666 · December 2013

Are we going to have another song analysis thread? May I suggest another Beatles number?

Clarky · December 2013

why not...

what do you have in mind?

ThePrettyDamned · December 2013

Not contributing, but great idea!

Panic Attack - Dream Theatre ;-)

Reading all this, despite not being a fan of the Beatles, I might learn a couple of songs to get a feel for different chord progressions. I'm more of a riff guy, though, than specific harmony.

Panama_Jack666 · December 2013

I quite like the idea of Dear Prudence, or any of the White album. Could be worth starting a new thread and then we could archive them like chord of the week...

Basher · December 2013

digitalkettle · April 2023

Necro-post!

I had a look at this solo today so may as well park it here...

PDF available from link in sig.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Song analysis: The Beatles - Something

Comments