|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 9, 2022 18:32:27 GMT
I've been listening to last night's beachboystalkmatt episode with Nelson Bragg, and something struck me that Nelson said that is surprisingly incorrect. While I know he's a very talented musician, I'm not sure of his music theory background (if any), which could explain it.
But he was trying to explain how they doled out vocal harmony parts, and he was explaining how the original Beach Boys did it. Basically, while saying which person typically sat where in the stack (e.g., Mike was lowest, then Dennis or Al, and so on), he was assigning the notes of each chord at the same time. So he said something like "Mike is lowest, on the root of the chord; then Dennis or Al is next, which is the third; then Carl, on the fifth; and then Brian, often doubling the bass on the octave, on the root."
While he might be more or less right about the order in the stack of low to high, there is no way you could seriously say that about the voicings. It implies that every single harmony was just in the typical, straight-ahead root-third-fifth-octave voicing. It doesn't take into account sevenths, ninths, and other extensions; suspensions; passing tones; or just other voicings. When writing harmony, you're doing a lot of voice leading, and while Brian wasn't exactly by the book, using counterpoint ideas. Honestly if you sang harmony the way Nelson described it, you could hit all the right notes, but it would sound pretty bad.
It would be like the difference between playing a guitar with every chord done as a barre chord and just moving up and down the neck, versus a kind of open position use of chords (where, for example, on an E chord the next note is the 5th, but when you go to the B7, it's the 3rd).
Obviously this doesn't matter, really. Just struck me as surprising to hear from a guy who performed this music.
|
|
|
Post by joshilynhoisington on Feb 9, 2022 21:15:36 GMT
It is hard to know if Nelson was just kind of misleadingly trying to simplify for a general audience, or if he doesn't quite grasp how that works.
Also, Carl actually was given the next-up-from-Mike voice in the group vocals, possibly much more than Al, although I've never done a quantitative assessment of that.
I guess it makes a difference as far as what kind of harmony vocals we're talking about, they certainly did do big block chords for some things, but when you take into account the moving-parts style harmonies they tended to do more of, the Bragg model is not right. In the more Freshman-y stuff, Mike actually rarely hits the actual root of the chord anyway, because they are usually in inversion of some sort, and as such is almost never in unison with Brian.
I think a better way of talking about it is in many ways just to be more general. Mike usually sang the lowest voice, and Brian the highest. The others filled in the rest according to what worked for that arrangement -- it might be outlining a triad, it might be outlining a 7th chord, it might be outlining a 13th chord. My guess is that Brian gave them lines rather than individual pitches when things got complex, going pitch by pitch is inane and slow.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 9, 2022 21:33:58 GMT
I was thinking how boring the Beach Boys' vocal harmonies would be if they truly were usually doubling the root and singing the third and fifth of each chord. It would be so strikingly different from what they are most known for!
So often in jazz harmonies, the fifth is the first to go because it's implied (and frankly almost audible anyway with overtones), not to mention in a rock band environment the odds are the guitarist (at least) is playing it. And the root is usually next to see the chopping block for similar reasons (e.g. it's in the bass, or the piano has it, or whatever). Hell, once you're trying to use extensions, something has to go. If somebody's got the seventh and somebody else has a ninth or a sharp eleventh or a thirteenth well...I don't think we're doubling the root.
Anyway, like I said, he might just have been stumbling over his words trying to explain it. And plenty of great musicians don't know theory, either. It just all struck me as (probably unintentionally) misleading, especially for anyone who actually wants to learn how harmonies work.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 9, 2022 21:37:27 GMT
I guess it makes a difference as far as what kind of harmony vocals we're talking about, they certainly did do big block chords for some things... Oh yeah, I wanted to comment on this, too.
Even when the suggested model is used here, it would generally only happen for one chord! Let's say we're in C major and so we've got the C-E-G-C voicing Nelson suggests. If we go to the IV chord--even assuming we're using big block chords--I highly doubt they'd all jump up a 4th, and sing F-A-C-F. You'd imagine a C-F-A-C, or some such thing.
I know Brian supposedly failed some HS music class (or at least an assignment), but by the time he was arranging Beach Boys hits, there's just no way he'd "fail counterpoint" that badly!
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 11, 2022 1:24:52 GMT
Question for the board:
What, not counting a cappella arrangements, do you think is the Beach Boys' best simple arrangement? We've talked a lot about some of the bigger ones, with outside musicians playing strings, horns, etc. I won't define "simple," but use your best judgment. Not counting vocals-only, what's one you love and why?
|
|
|
Post by joshilynhoisington on Feb 13, 2022 1:34:51 GMT
That is hard to define "simple"!
Lana? Such simplicity in the track and the vocals, but so sweet. Farmer's Daughter is similar. A lot of those early ones.
Some Wild Honey stuff, too is very unadorned.
Some Smile era stuff is simple, too in a different way -- structural simplicity. Take Barnyard for instance. Two chords over and over, same pattern in the instruments every repeat. But effective at hammering away the "message."
|
|
sockit
The Surfer Moon
Posts: 234
Likes: 181
|
Post by sockit on Feb 13, 2022 16:31:49 GMT
Question for the board:
What, not counting a cappella arrangements, do you think is the Beach Boys' best simple arrangement? We've talked a lot about some of the bigger ones, with outside musicians playing strings, horns, etc. I won't define "simple," but use your best judgment. Not counting vocals-only, what's one you love and why?
I was thinking along the lines of Smiley Smile, but I don't love anything from that album other than GV and HV....and they don't count. Vegetables is one that applies, and it sounds pretty good for a song with not much going on instrumentally other than bass. It's a catchy song, has sort of a commercial jingle feel to it, and it might have made a good single as somewhat of a semi-novelty tune (which might have worked in '67-'68). Little Pad is another one, as it is pretty sparse on instrumentation, but I guess its simplicity is debatable. It sounds simple, but there is just a bit of complexity in the time shifts. I guess the big question is, are those sections the composition of the song or part of the arrangement?
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 14, 2022 15:40:55 GMT
My pick would be one of the band's greatest early ballads: "In My Room."
The instrumental background is almost just the band doing a pro forma sort of 12/8 '50s ballad with the picked arpeggios on the guitar, the subtle bass and drums, the coloration of the organ. It's only the harp that is "imported," if you will. And I think that's all perfect as a complement to the vocal arrangement, which is the obvious highlight of the song. Speaking of the vocals, the layering of harmonies to begin each verse was a great decision, as was the unison singing in the bridge. A personal highlight, the background vocals' "answer" of "in my room" to end every verse.
So there's my pick: In My Room.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 23, 2022 15:11:39 GMT
I was listening to That's Why God Made the Radio this morning and thought of this thread, specifically for the opening track. I've never been anywhere near as high on "Think About the Days" as it seems a lot of people are, but I will say this: any success it has is due to the arrangement--because it seems to me it's more arrangement than song!
It's mostly just that one F minor figure, 3-4-5-4-3-4-5 repeated, with the descending line. It's really all playing around with that, with different countermelodies and parts. It's pretty, but it's insubstantial. There's no there there.
What I don't like about it isn't that, though. It's the piano. I wish it had been an a cappella piece, or maybe with subtle piano arranged differently. While better than some of the "tinkling" on Joe Thomas collaborations (ugh, that makes it sound like I'm talking about pee...), it's just not to my taste.
|
|