“God Only Knows”
The Beach Boys
An Eclectic Analysis
"God Only Knows"-- The Beach Boys
Friday, May 1, 2009
Historical Background
It’s said that when Brian Wilson heard The Beatles’ U.S. release of Rubber Soul in 1965 he claimed: “That’s it. I really am challenged to do a great album.” With that Wilson dropped from active touring with the Beach Boys and retreated back to Hawthorne, California and into his studio and over the next year created what would ultimately become one of the most lauded albums in Western pop music history—Pet Sounds. Musically, it is the deepest and most complex cut of the Beach Boy’s oeuvre. This “challenge” from the Beatles lead Wilson to expand the pop idiom in new and strange ways through creative arrangement and advancing Phil Spector’s idea of the using of the studio as an instrument, and he did all of it with practically one ear!
However, it seems that a sense of tragic irony follows Mr. Wilson wherever he goes. Now considered absolute gold by critics, producers, arrangers, composers, lyricists, and regular listeners alike, when it was released by Capitol Records in 1966, though, it was considered a commercial failure in the U.S., only making it to #10 on the on the Top 40 charts. This lackluster welcome of his magnum opus sent Wilson Though, this now has now has commonly come to be understood as mostly Capitol’s fault for their lack of promotion and advertisement of the album, Pet Sounds only went platinum in 2000 (“Pet Sounds”, Stevens).
But the irony continues; in the UK the album was met much greater praise, reaching #2 on their LP charts, and Paul McCartney has been quoted in saying that “It blew me out of the water”. He continues on to say that “I've often played Pet Sounds and cried. I played it to John [Lennon] so much that it would be difficult for him to escape the influence ... it was the record of the time,” and thus what came out in response to Wilson’s magnum opus in 1967 is the prime candidate for greatest rock album of all time and probably will never be topped: Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (Brian Wilson).
Of all the songs on Pet Sounds there is one that has a special hold on this analyst as well as many others and is the one I will be analyzing; “God Only Knows” is the eighth track on the album and is the hidden gem of the album. McCartney has often also referred to “God Only Knows” as his top favorite song saying “ ‘ God Only Knows’ is one of the few songs that reduces me to tears every time I hear it. It’s really just a love song, but it’s brilliantly done. It shows the genius of Brian. I’ve actually performed it with him and I’m afraid to say that during the sound check I broke down. It was just too much to stand there singing this song that does my head in, and to stand there singing it with Brian”(“God Only Knows”). And he’s not the only one to think that and it hard not to see why. Simultaneously heartbreaking, uplifting, brilliantly recorded, ingeniously arranged and composed yet deceptively simple and baring this work is the most transparent in showing the depth and breadth of Brian Wilson’s innate ear for melody and prowess behind the boards in the studio.
One final yet important not about the song itself is the fact that is was one of the first to use the “God” in the title. At first, Wilson was reported to have not wanted to use it for fear it would be controversial and consequently limit its airplay. But as history would have it, this leap worked out for them and for the song.
However, it seems that a sense of tragic irony follows Mr. Wilson wherever he goes. Now considered absolute gold by critics, producers, arrangers, composers, lyricists, and regular listeners alike, when it was released by Capitol Records in 1966, though, it was considered a commercial failure in the U.S., only making it to #10 on the on the Top 40 charts. This lackluster welcome of his magnum opus sent Wilson Though, this now has now has commonly come to be understood as mostly Capitol’s fault for their lack of promotion and advertisement of the album, Pet Sounds only went platinum in 2000 (“Pet Sounds”, Stevens).
But the irony continues; in the UK the album was met much greater praise, reaching #2 on their LP charts, and Paul McCartney has been quoted in saying that “It blew me out of the water”. He continues on to say that “I've often played Pet Sounds and cried. I played it to John [Lennon] so much that it would be difficult for him to escape the influence ... it was the record of the time,” and thus what came out in response to Wilson’s magnum opus in 1967 is the prime candidate for greatest rock album of all time and probably will never be topped: Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (Brian Wilson).
Of all the songs on Pet Sounds there is one that has a special hold on this analyst as well as many others and is the one I will be analyzing; “God Only Knows” is the eighth track on the album and is the hidden gem of the album. McCartney has often also referred to “God Only Knows” as his top favorite song saying “ ‘ God Only Knows’ is one of the few songs that reduces me to tears every time I hear it. It’s really just a love song, but it’s brilliantly done. It shows the genius of Brian. I’ve actually performed it with him and I’m afraid to say that during the sound check I broke down. It was just too much to stand there singing this song that does my head in, and to stand there singing it with Brian”(“God Only Knows”). And he’s not the only one to think that and it hard not to see why. Simultaneously heartbreaking, uplifting, brilliantly recorded, ingeniously arranged and composed yet deceptively simple and baring this work is the most transparent in showing the depth and breadth of Brian Wilson’s innate ear for melody and prowess behind the boards in the studio.
One final yet important not about the song itself is the fact that is was one of the first to use the “God” in the title. At first, Wilson was reported to have not wanted to use it for fear it would be controversial and consequently limit its airplay. But as history would have it, this leap worked out for them and for the song.
Open Listening #1
The piece opens with clanking organs and pianos under a simple what sounds like horn melody that for some reason distinctly gives me the feeling of being at sea or listening to the song on a boat. Perhaps it’s the heavy reverbs that make it feel dense, like sea-salt air. The addition of sleigh-bells gives it a cheery feeling. Overall I think feeling is what this song accomplishes, and it is one of a pure love. The sounds and lyrics work to evoke a sentiment the way one would by looking a still picture rather than try to tell a story with characters, plot, and dialogue like you would get from looking at a film.
Perhaps the most striking and memorable moment of the piece is the opening line: “ I may not always love you”. It catches you off guard, the tone so far has implied something more sentimental but this is what you get and it makes one do a double take, somewhere in the vein of “Did he really just say that?” But then any anxiousness is assuaged when we get the rest of the verse and song and realize he’s actually using it to say that he would only stop loving if the world ceased to exist.
Instrumentally, I noticed that the instruments seem to change and drop in and out with nearly every change of section but somehow this did not seem to interrupt the songs flow or energy for the most part. Except there was one part that seemed a little of kilter—the little instrumental bridge between the verses—but maybe just because it is the only time the rhythm is really broken up and the continuous quarters seem lost.
Finally, I have to talk about the chorus. It’s amazingly simple in every respect; it’s just one line, but its length is inversely proportional to how much it can mean: “God only knows what I’d be without you”. And by the time the end of the song finishes with a round on that line, it is stuck permanently in your head for the rest of the day.
Perhaps the most striking and memorable moment of the piece is the opening line: “ I may not always love you”. It catches you off guard, the tone so far has implied something more sentimental but this is what you get and it makes one do a double take, somewhere in the vein of “Did he really just say that?” But then any anxiousness is assuaged when we get the rest of the verse and song and realize he’s actually using it to say that he would only stop loving if the world ceased to exist.
Instrumentally, I noticed that the instruments seem to change and drop in and out with nearly every change of section but somehow this did not seem to interrupt the songs flow or energy for the most part. Except there was one part that seemed a little of kilter—the little instrumental bridge between the verses—but maybe just because it is the only time the rhythm is really broken up and the continuous quarters seem lost.
Finally, I have to talk about the chorus. It’s amazingly simple in every respect; it’s just one line, but its length is inversely proportional to how much it can mean: “God only knows what I’d be without you”. And by the time the end of the song finishes with a round on that line, it is stuck permanently in your head for the rest of the day.
Syntax (Musical)
I’d like to break the syntactical analysis into two parts, musical and recording, because I think in this case, since there is enough information available on both and each are uniquely and equally responsible for the overall sound and meaning of the song it would be detrimental and irresponsible not to.
With that given, this song is not that hard to break down. Firstly, all the music in the song was written and arranged by Brian Wilson. The lyrics, however, were written by a young Hollywood lyricist and copywriter, Tony Asher, whom Wilson had met earlier and then collaborated with for a majority of the songs on the album.
I bought a version of the score online that can be viewed below and gives us chords and melody and lyrics but doesn’t have any other instrumental parts scored out which is unfortunate. However, I found a page,, by Greg Panfile, that has also done a type of harmonic analysis, and I found it to be very helpful and refer and include parts of analysis as I believe they better explain some the harmonic quirks.
Form-wise the song is relatively simple. Given there is an Introduction (I), Verse (A), Chorus (B), Interlude/Bridge (C), and Coda (D), the overall form of the song plays out like this:
I—A—B—A—B’—C—C ’—B’’—A—B—D
From a theory perspective we get something more challenging than what we would expect from first listening to the song. The first thing I notice is that this song doesn’t seem to have a distinct key, but rather perpetually fluctuates between two key tonal areas A major and E major, but sometimes we could. Neither seems truly distinct or dominates over the other, and without actually looking at the score do I believe that any lay-listener would catch this.
Given that every single chord played in this piece plays out for exactly 4 beats, or one-bar, it will be easier just to write chord names. The Intro starts in what seems to be A major. What we get is this:
(Panfile)
We rock back and forth from A-E for three bars before moving on to F#m while the bass preps us for the verse at the end of the sixth bar. These last four bars A-E-F#m-E also foreshadow and gorund us for the central motif of the song.
Then we move into the verse, which plays out like so:
Looking at the chords we encounter our first ambiguity. It looks like we’ve moved to D major because our first 3 chords place us there but then the Bm comes back except this time as a major which is immediately followed by E which implied a V-I in E major. Now all D’s become D#’s further and the D#dim7 to E acts as another (V)-I in E further cementing us in that key. In 12 bars, Wilson has already thrown away every recipe in the pop cookbook and our ears don’t even know it!
Next we get that irresistible hook, the chorus.
Over the same four bars as in the intro we get the unforgettable line, but somehow we seem to have gotten back to A major. Damn. Looking at the end of the verse we see a glimpse of genius. Theory-wise, the choice of the C#m is perfect as it acts as pivot chord because it works in both keys: it’s the vi in E major and the iii A major and the bass has already been leading us logically down a pentachord from E so when we finally land in A nothing seems out of place.
We go back to the verse. Harmonically nothing changes. When we get back the next chorus however we get a change. Instead of keeping with the pop-standard of
duple-bar-multiples per section, Wilson cuts us off early. Instead of getting that last E we only get
But he does more than just to be cheekily novel as we see in the next section where we get a seemingly random instrumental break that is never returned later in the song.
The score I found omits this, but a pitzicatto string section plays the instrumental break over the following chords like so:
(Panfile)
Once again we see Brian’s utilization of the pivot chord with the F#m which works as the ii of E major coming out of the chorus and the vi in A major. Also once again we seem prepared to have moved to a new key, D major because A and G would be the IV and V respectively but what we get next as the bridge, which consists of the Boys engaging a heavily contrapuntal scat/do-wop breakdown, begs to differ.
But upon further inspection we find that these 8 chords are merely the same as the verse except we have transposed everything up a 4th ,so instead of being in D/E we are in G/A. So in fact, we never really were in D at all in that instrumental part of the break but in fact just getting ready to be in G major!
Then to follow in these footsteps we hear the chorus, except also transposed up a fourth. So instead of being in the A major area we are in the D major area.
And once again we omit the fourth measure. But this time we don’t modulate instead we get a D.S. a Coda and go right back into a third verse, except this time like the way we heard it originally:
With the last verse we go straight into a coda, which consists of the original Chorus section—A—E--F#m—E—sung as two-part round and showing off more of Brian’s ear for natural and rich counterpoint.
With that given, this song is not that hard to break down. Firstly, all the music in the song was written and arranged by Brian Wilson. The lyrics, however, were written by a young Hollywood lyricist and copywriter, Tony Asher, whom Wilson had met earlier and then collaborated with for a majority of the songs on the album.
I bought a version of the score online that can be viewed below and gives us chords and melody and lyrics but doesn’t have any other instrumental parts scored out which is unfortunate. However, I found a page,, by Greg Panfile, that has also done a type of harmonic analysis, and I found it to be very helpful and refer and include parts of analysis as I believe they better explain some the harmonic quirks.
Form-wise the song is relatively simple. Given there is an Introduction (I), Verse (A), Chorus (B), Interlude/Bridge (C), and Coda (D), the overall form of the song plays out like this:
I—A—B—A—B’—C—C ’—B’’—A—B—D
From a theory perspective we get something more challenging than what we would expect from first listening to the song. The first thing I notice is that this song doesn’t seem to have a distinct key, but rather perpetually fluctuates between two key tonal areas A major and E major, but sometimes we could. Neither seems truly distinct or dominates over the other, and without actually looking at the score do I believe that any lay-listener would catch this.
Given that every single chord played in this piece plays out for exactly 4 beats, or one-bar, it will be easier just to write chord names. The Intro starts in what seems to be A major. What we get is this:
Chords: A E A E A E F#m E
Melody: C# D E B A C# D E B A
Bass: E F# G
(Panfile)
We rock back and forth from A-E for three bars before moving on to F#m while the bass preps us for the verse at the end of the sixth bar. These last four bars A-E-F#m-E also foreshadow and gorund us for the central motif of the song.
Then we move into the verse, which plays out like so:
Chords: D Bm F#m B E D#dim E C#m(Panfile)
Bass: A B F# E D# E F# E (D#) C# (B)
Looking at the chords we encounter our first ambiguity. It looks like we’ve moved to D major because our first 3 chords place us there but then the Bm comes back except this time as a major which is immediately followed by E which implied a V-I in E major. Now all D’s become D#’s further and the D#dim7 to E acts as another (V)-I in E further cementing us in that key. In 12 bars, Wilson has already thrown away every recipe in the pop cookbook and our ears don’t even know it!
Next we get that irresistible hook, the chorus.
Chords: A E F#m E(Panfile)
Over the same four bars as in the intro we get the unforgettable line, but somehow we seem to have gotten back to A major. Damn. Looking at the end of the verse we see a glimpse of genius. Theory-wise, the choice of the C#m is perfect as it acts as pivot chord because it works in both keys: it’s the vi in E major and the iii A major and the bass has already been leading us logically down a pentachord from E so when we finally land in A nothing seems out of place.
We go back to the verse. Harmonically nothing changes. When we get back the next chorus however we get a change. Instead of keeping with the pop-standard of
duple-bar-multiples per section, Wilson cuts us off early. Instead of getting that last E we only get
Chords: A E F#m E
(Panfile)
But he does more than just to be cheekily novel as we see in the next section where we get a seemingly random instrumental break that is never returned later in the song.
The score I found omits this, but a pitzicatto string section plays the instrumental break over the following chords like so:
Chords: A G
Melody: C# A C# A B F# B A G F#
(Panfile)
Once again we see Brian’s utilization of the pivot chord with the F#m which works as the ii of E major coming out of the chorus and the vi in A major. Also once again we seem prepared to have moved to a new key, D major because A and G would be the IV and V respectively but what we get next as the bridge, which consists of the Boys engaging a heavily contrapuntal scat/do-wop breakdown, begs to differ.
Chords: G Em Bm E(Panfile)
Scat: Ah ah ah ah dodo do dodoo Bom bompa bompapa
Chords: A G#dim A F#m
Scat: Bom bom Bompa pa pa bom Ba bom Ah, ah...
But upon further inspection we find that these 8 chords are merely the same as the verse except we have transposed everything up a 4th ,so instead of being in D/E we are in G/A. So in fact, we never really were in D at all in that instrumental part of the break but in fact just getting ready to be in G major!
Then to follow in these footsteps we hear the chorus, except also transposed up a fourth. So instead of being in the A major area we are in the D major area.
Chords: D A Bm(Panfile)
And once again we omit the fourth measure. But this time we don’t modulate instead we get a D.S. a Coda and go right back into a third verse, except this time like the way we heard it originally:
Chords: D Bm F#m B E D#dim E C#m(Panfile)
Bass: A B F# E D# E F# E (D#) C# (B)
With the last verse we go straight into a coda, which consists of the original Chorus section—A—E--F#m—E—sung as two-part round and showing off more of Brian’s ear for natural and rich counterpoint.
Syntax (Recording and Production)
The instrumental tracks were recorded in Hollywood California on March 10th , 1966 at Western Recorders studio. It took a total of 20 live takes to get what would ultimately become the master instrumental track. The session was engineered by Chuck Britz and later produced by Wilson. As he did with most of his songs, the instrumental tracks were recorded live and played as an ensemble and recorded directly to a four track deck rather than recording each of the instruments separately. Wilson often rode the faders and did live mixing as the recording was going on, making each performance unique and highly un replicable (“Pet Sounds”, “God Only Knows”)
Instrumentally, the song is as advanced arrangement-wise as it is harmonically. For this simple, short pop song over 23 studio musicians have been reported to be used, though only 16 are credited with being used for the final master. And the range of instruments also goes far beyond the pop standard of guitars and drums. “God Only Knows” is known to have the following instruments were recorded but not all were used:
Drums, Precussion, Electric Bass, Upright Bass, danelectro bass, piano, organ, accordion, clarinet, bass clarinet, flute, French horn, baritone sax, violin, viola, cello, harpsichord .
Wilson was known for using a technique where he would often double instrument, mostly rhythm ones like piano or bass, and adding dense reverb and delay to give it the “Wall of Sound” feel. Also, he was inclined to synthesize two instruments into the same track and add reverb to get startling new textures such as organ and French horn. This is now become a standard production trick today to try and get fuller and unique sonic blends. (“Pet Sounds”)
The instrumental tracks were the bounced down to 1 track on an Ampex 8-track recorder, which was the newest technology of the day. And allowed him to use the rest of the tracks for the Beach Boys signature dubbed vocal melodies and harmonies.
For “God Only Knows” this was done at Columbia studios which was the only studio with an 8-track at the time. The rest of the tracks were filled in with Carl Wilson on lead vox, and whose voice was doubled to give is a fuller sound. Brian and his cousin Bruce Johnston filled in the remaining tracks with their backing vocals, Brian doing both the high and low registers while Bruce sang in the middle(“God Only Knows”).
Mastering-wise this song, this song was ultimately mixed into mono, even though stereo was around. Brian is reported to have favored mono because at the time most playback devices where his music would be heard, such as TV, radio, and car stereo were only capable of playing mono. He also felt that in the mastering stage he could coax more out of mix and that by releasing it as such he didn’t have to worry that it wouldn’t sound the not the way he intended because of the speakers or their positioning, which its crucial in replicating a stereo image (“Pet Sounds”).
Instrumentally, the song is as advanced arrangement-wise as it is harmonically. For this simple, short pop song over 23 studio musicians have been reported to be used, though only 16 are credited with being used for the final master. And the range of instruments also goes far beyond the pop standard of guitars and drums. “God Only Knows” is known to have the following instruments were recorded but not all were used:
Drums, Precussion, Electric Bass, Upright Bass, danelectro bass, piano, organ, accordion, clarinet, bass clarinet, flute, French horn, baritone sax, violin, viola, cello, harpsichord .
Wilson was known for using a technique where he would often double instrument, mostly rhythm ones like piano or bass, and adding dense reverb and delay to give it the “Wall of Sound” feel. Also, he was inclined to synthesize two instruments into the same track and add reverb to get startling new textures such as organ and French horn. This is now become a standard production trick today to try and get fuller and unique sonic blends. (“Pet Sounds”)
The instrumental tracks were the bounced down to 1 track on an Ampex 8-track recorder, which was the newest technology of the day. And allowed him to use the rest of the tracks for the Beach Boys signature dubbed vocal melodies and harmonies.
For “God Only Knows” this was done at Columbia studios which was the only studio with an 8-track at the time. The rest of the tracks were filled in with Carl Wilson on lead vox, and whose voice was doubled to give is a fuller sound. Brian and his cousin Bruce Johnston filled in the remaining tracks with their backing vocals, Brian doing both the high and low registers while Bruce sang in the middle(“God Only Knows”).
Mastering-wise this song, this song was ultimately mixed into mono, even though stereo was around. Brian is reported to have favored mono because at the time most playback devices where his music would be heard, such as TV, radio, and car stereo were only capable of playing mono. He also felt that in the mastering stage he could coax more out of mix and that by releasing it as such he didn’t have to worry that it wouldn’t sound the not the way he intended because of the speakers or their positioning, which its crucial in replicating a stereo image (“Pet Sounds”).
Phenomenological Analysis
The entire song is only 2:51. Despite its brevity, we still get a chock full of sonic data thrown at us which I’ve tried to put into timeline format here.
00:00—00:08
The song opens with what sounds like a piano and maybe a harpsichord beating out chords, but the reverberance makes it smooth and diminishes the attacks. An organ, plays but with sustained, adding another layer of thickness. An effected French horn plays a melody that rises high and crests like a wave and then recedes a little. It doesn’t sound like a pure French horn, and has been perhaps been blended with something else that gives more of a synthesizer feel.
00:08—00:15
Bass comes in playing a loping line, pretty low register, gives body to the mix. It sounds more electric, but I could be completely wrong. This, along with the addition of the steady shaking of sleigh bells gives propels us along.
00:15—00:17
Everything playing except bass drops out, and another instrument comes in that sounds like the affected French horn but sounds like it could be played on a key instrument, like and affected organ. This instrument and the bass play in unison and pull us up and away into the next section.
00:17—00:35
The prominence of the sleigh-bells are traded for wooden precussion making more hollow klicking and klacking sounds. Bells remain but lower in the mix. Vocals come in the middle-higher register and everything seems to pull back to give them space. A cleaner sounding piano beats out chords, a little softer. Our deep bass seems to have moved up higher is register and doesn’t sound like the bass we first heard.
00:35—00:40
We experience almost and exhaling and release sensation that marks the chorus as everything in the mix—bass, vox, rhythm—seems to fall, but not heavily.
00:40—1:05
The deeper bass comes back in and with the help of the bass of piano and help gives a push back upward. Wood precussion drops out momentarily, but bells continue. We get a new type of organ sounding instrument, perhaps playing with an accordian, playing more sustained as the vocals come back in, giving back a new blanket of sound.
1:05—1:14
We get a sudden break with the previous parts of the song. Instrumentation changes and the momentum we have been accustomed to the last minute is usurped as a different higher organ that sounds more synthy and Carribean comes in and, with the base, seems to ping-pong around different notes. The notes sound like as if the keys were plucked at rather than layed upon gently like before. Everything else is dropped but we get a new percussive force, the snare drum, making little accents and comments in between the breaths and hiccups that the melody is making.
1:14—1:29
Bells and woods come in like before and we are back on our journey. The sustained keyboard instruments continue to provide a warmth and padding. Still though, we seem to be in familiar sonic territory, something seems to have changed after the break. Now we get multiple voices coming in scat style. The first on sings “oohs” in a sighing manner. “Doo doo”s come in to answer it and then more prominent and nasal sounding “bompa ba”s come in and seem to want to take over the melody. This continues with “ooh”s and “doo”s working together in harmony as “bompa bah” point out a melody to us. However our harmony vocals have the last word and like before lift us out of this section
1:29—1:52
Lead vocal returns and restates his intentions this time in a higher register. Our instrumental arrangement is similar before. At about 1:46—1:48 and we get a subtle flute, I believe, whirling in the high end like birds who seem to answer the vocals the last word of a line and then do the same at 1:50—1:52 except slightly lower.
1:52—1:59
Our chorus motif returns but this time it is aided by the additional return of the French horn singing to itself and repeating the line it played in the opening bars in the background.
2:00—2:10
Then something seems to shift. Just the synthy organ and bass play while the vocal repeats the chorus but something seems different. Bells drop but woods stay and become more present. At 2:04 a different vocal comes in repeating the thought of the of the lead. When it finishes at 2:09 we get a snare fill suggesting that everything will return. But we back off
2:10—2: 51
The lead vocal continues repeating while vocals are added back in and play tag with each other while overdubs hum high, loopy “ooh”s. Snare fills continue to interject filling empty spot. At 2:16 the sleigh bells return. At some point another layer of piano or organ return and we feel fuller body return. The whole thing gives us a rocking sort feeling as if the voices are two children on a see-saw while the oohs act as other children playing around them. This feeling is carried on until the song fades out.
00:00—00:08
The song opens with what sounds like a piano and maybe a harpsichord beating out chords, but the reverberance makes it smooth and diminishes the attacks. An organ, plays but with sustained, adding another layer of thickness. An effected French horn plays a melody that rises high and crests like a wave and then recedes a little. It doesn’t sound like a pure French horn, and has been perhaps been blended with something else that gives more of a synthesizer feel.
00:08—00:15
Bass comes in playing a loping line, pretty low register, gives body to the mix. It sounds more electric, but I could be completely wrong. This, along with the addition of the steady shaking of sleigh bells gives propels us along.
00:15—00:17
Everything playing except bass drops out, and another instrument comes in that sounds like the affected French horn but sounds like it could be played on a key instrument, like and affected organ. This instrument and the bass play in unison and pull us up and away into the next section.
00:17—00:35
The prominence of the sleigh-bells are traded for wooden precussion making more hollow klicking and klacking sounds. Bells remain but lower in the mix. Vocals come in the middle-higher register and everything seems to pull back to give them space. A cleaner sounding piano beats out chords, a little softer. Our deep bass seems to have moved up higher is register and doesn’t sound like the bass we first heard.
00:35—00:40
We experience almost and exhaling and release sensation that marks the chorus as everything in the mix—bass, vox, rhythm—seems to fall, but not heavily.
00:40—1:05
The deeper bass comes back in and with the help of the bass of piano and help gives a push back upward. Wood precussion drops out momentarily, but bells continue. We get a new type of organ sounding instrument, perhaps playing with an accordian, playing more sustained as the vocals come back in, giving back a new blanket of sound.
1:05—1:14
We get a sudden break with the previous parts of the song. Instrumentation changes and the momentum we have been accustomed to the last minute is usurped as a different higher organ that sounds more synthy and Carribean comes in and, with the base, seems to ping-pong around different notes. The notes sound like as if the keys were plucked at rather than layed upon gently like before. Everything else is dropped but we get a new percussive force, the snare drum, making little accents and comments in between the breaths and hiccups that the melody is making.
1:14—1:29
Bells and woods come in like before and we are back on our journey. The sustained keyboard instruments continue to provide a warmth and padding. Still though, we seem to be in familiar sonic territory, something seems to have changed after the break. Now we get multiple voices coming in scat style. The first on sings “oohs” in a sighing manner. “Doo doo”s come in to answer it and then more prominent and nasal sounding “bompa ba”s come in and seem to want to take over the melody. This continues with “ooh”s and “doo”s working together in harmony as “bompa bah” point out a melody to us. However our harmony vocals have the last word and like before lift us out of this section
1:29—1:52
Lead vocal returns and restates his intentions this time in a higher register. Our instrumental arrangement is similar before. At about 1:46—1:48 and we get a subtle flute, I believe, whirling in the high end like birds who seem to answer the vocals the last word of a line and then do the same at 1:50—1:52 except slightly lower.
1:52—1:59
Our chorus motif returns but this time it is aided by the additional return of the French horn singing to itself and repeating the line it played in the opening bars in the background.
2:00—2:10
Then something seems to shift. Just the synthy organ and bass play while the vocal repeats the chorus but something seems different. Bells drop but woods stay and become more present. At 2:04 a different vocal comes in repeating the thought of the of the lead. When it finishes at 2:09 we get a snare fill suggesting that everything will return. But we back off
2:10—2: 51
The lead vocal continues repeating while vocals are added back in and play tag with each other while overdubs hum high, loopy “ooh”s. Snare fills continue to interject filling empty spot. At 2:16 the sleigh bells return. At some point another layer of piano or organ return and we feel fuller body return. The whole thing gives us a rocking sort feeling as if the voices are two children on a see-saw while the oohs act as other children playing around them. This feeling is carried on until the song fades out.
Textual and Musical Representation
The lyrics of this song were co-written by Tony Asher and Brian Wilson. You can read them below:
I may not always love you
But long as there are stars above you
You never need to doubt it
I’ll make you so sure about it
God only knows what I’d be without you
If you should ever leave me
Though life would still go on believe me
The world could show nothing to me
So what good would living do me
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
If you should ever leave me
Well life would still go on believe me
The world could show nothing to me
So what good would living do me
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
This song is a love song, and one of the most touching ever written. Yet you wouldn’t get that from the first line, “I may not always love you,” which may be the most ironic lyrics in the history of love songs. The song follows the singer/character in first who may or may not be talking to his lover directly. But, as we get into the next part of the verse we realize he’s just using the line to try and make explicit how deeps his love is; he will continue to love until his death, because the only reason he would stop would be when the universe ends and there are no more stars existing. And so as long as he is living he will do whatever he needs to prove himself to his lover.
Next comes the focal sentiment of the piece: “God only know what I’d be without you.” It is a line so powerful in that it is so simple. The singer feels absolutely blessed to have his lover because she is what make him him. Had anymore been written, I believe only clutter would have been added and effectiveness lost. I feel McLuhan would consider this a very “cool” lyric because it is so open to interpretation yet universal statement. It makes one wonder what kind of person the singer’s lover is, and allows them to supply to their own beliefs to what makes the perfect soulmate. It makes them think about who shapes them. The lyrics also makes one think that this song is actually more of the singer talking and music to himself rather than talking directly to his significant other. It is implied to be rhetorical and not actually posed as serious question but rather a musing one would make to oneself. Also, as mentioned in the historical background, this was one of the first POP songs to make use of the word “God” both in the title and within the lyrics. This choice, when listening now years later, doesn’t seem out of place. In fact it, only supports the singers sincerity and imbues the song with a sense of spirituality.
The second and only other verse takes up a more melancholic tone. Here the singer dwells upon the thought of being abandoned by his love and the suffering it would incur. He takes on a realist tone in the second line, admitting that “Though life would still go on,” he doesn’t believe he could keep on living because the “world could show nothing to him”. Here it seems that Asher and Wilson seem to be playing word games, probably in the more literal sense. In the second line “life” could be considered a more depersonal metaphor meaning that the world and time continues—people will keep going about and living their lives. The world does not stop for someone’s emotions. But this world would no longer be able to show him anything he states in the third line. While that is not true in the literal sense, I’m sure he could learn facts and other things, he seems to be talking about world in a more personal metaphoric sense—i.e. that his lover is his world and was the only one who could actually “show” him anything of value.
Thus the chorus that follows, though it is the same line seems to take up a new definition. After just considering this prospect and possibly freaking himself out, the singer now has a new sense of relief and appreciation for his lover.
The second verse repeats, possibly implying that this qualm is one deep-rooted in his psyche
The round singing of the chorus builds and reaffirms the singer’s gratitude toward his lover with every repeat until the song fades out.
I may not always love you
But long as there are stars above you
You never need to doubt it
I’ll make you so sure about it
God only knows what I’d be without you
If you should ever leave me
Though life would still go on believe me
The world could show nothing to me
So what good would living do me
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
If you should ever leave me
Well life would still go on believe me
The world could show nothing to me
So what good would living do me
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows what I’d be without you
God only knows
God only knows what I’d be without you
This song is a love song, and one of the most touching ever written. Yet you wouldn’t get that from the first line, “I may not always love you,” which may be the most ironic lyrics in the history of love songs. The song follows the singer/character in first who may or may not be talking to his lover directly. But, as we get into the next part of the verse we realize he’s just using the line to try and make explicit how deeps his love is; he will continue to love until his death, because the only reason he would stop would be when the universe ends and there are no more stars existing. And so as long as he is living he will do whatever he needs to prove himself to his lover.
Next comes the focal sentiment of the piece: “God only know what I’d be without you.” It is a line so powerful in that it is so simple. The singer feels absolutely blessed to have his lover because she is what make him him. Had anymore been written, I believe only clutter would have been added and effectiveness lost. I feel McLuhan would consider this a very “cool” lyric because it is so open to interpretation yet universal statement. It makes one wonder what kind of person the singer’s lover is, and allows them to supply to their own beliefs to what makes the perfect soulmate. It makes them think about who shapes them. The lyrics also makes one think that this song is actually more of the singer talking and music to himself rather than talking directly to his significant other. It is implied to be rhetorical and not actually posed as serious question but rather a musing one would make to oneself. Also, as mentioned in the historical background, this was one of the first POP songs to make use of the word “God” both in the title and within the lyrics. This choice, when listening now years later, doesn’t seem out of place. In fact it, only supports the singers sincerity and imbues the song with a sense of spirituality.
The second and only other verse takes up a more melancholic tone. Here the singer dwells upon the thought of being abandoned by his love and the suffering it would incur. He takes on a realist tone in the second line, admitting that “Though life would still go on,” he doesn’t believe he could keep on living because the “world could show nothing to him”. Here it seems that Asher and Wilson seem to be playing word games, probably in the more literal sense. In the second line “life” could be considered a more depersonal metaphor meaning that the world and time continues—people will keep going about and living their lives. The world does not stop for someone’s emotions. But this world would no longer be able to show him anything he states in the third line. While that is not true in the literal sense, I’m sure he could learn facts and other things, he seems to be talking about world in a more personal metaphoric sense—i.e. that his lover is his world and was the only one who could actually “show” him anything of value.
Thus the chorus that follows, though it is the same line seems to take up a new definition. After just considering this prospect and possibly freaking himself out, the singer now has a new sense of relief and appreciation for his lover.
The second verse repeats, possibly implying that this qualm is one deep-rooted in his psyche
The round singing of the chorus builds and reaffirms the singer’s gratitude toward his lover with every repeat until the song fades out.
Virtual Feeling
In terms of the context of virtual feeling, this song, at least personally, plumbs some of my deepest depths. At first I feel relax and buoyed by the bobbing introduction. But then as the sonic space makes room and that first line comes in I become disconcerted me and takes the wind out of my sails. It anguished me to think about having to say to someone that I do love that that may not always be the case. But the music seems to continue oblivious to what is being said and is what anchors us. But as each line comes along and then pauses, I start regaining my initial cheer. The chorus makes me exhale and think about how lucky I am to have known the very few and special people who have shaped me. But this daydream feeling is interrupted by the break that makes me snap back and pay attention. But I slip back and a montage seems roll in my head as sweet vocals interplay around my ears. Then the vocals remind me that, seriously, I wouldn’t know what to do without these people. Then any qualms are washed away as voices everywhere tell me how lucky I am.
Onto-Historical Worlds
The Beach Boys were considered one of the first few “American” bands. They took their home and their culture of California girls, sun and surf, of cruising down highways in a convertible, of innocence and youth, and popularized it into a world-wide image for America. People could listen to the Beach Boys anywhere else in the world and hear those guitars and pianos soaked in reverb while those boys sang their tight harmonies and they think in their head that that was how all of America was. Never mind the fact that in 1966, the United States was not all fun in the sun—racial and civil tensions were high and disparities were everywhere.
So does there thematic material, which some could make an argument for being inane and naive, and it’s popularity make it symbolic of the white escapism of the 1950’s and 60’s? Still, they never planned any of this. The Beach Boys starting writing about what they knew; there is a sense of earnestness to their works and their sound ground them as one of the more actually serious bands of the time. That is especially evident in this song.
Musically they can be considered to be the first true “garage band” as argued by David Walsh in his insightful, and very unknowinglyonto-historical article “Listening to Brian Wilson”. The group was a true family outfit made of three Wilson brothers and a first-cousin Mike Love who started out first playing in their garage under the band called the Pendletones. Each had their own tastes and brought their own influence to the group,
“Wilson's melodic genius, almost unparalleled in the history of pop, was fashioned as much by Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue as by the close-harmony singing of groups such as the Four Freshmen: from an early age, his taste inclined towards the complex, the ambitious, the operatic. But little brother Carl turned him on to Chuck Berry guitar riffs, and his well-off cousins the Loves converted him to the R&B” (Walsh).
Thus, what we get from their music is an indirect collage of all the sonic movements going on around America.
So does there thematic material, which some could make an argument for being inane and naive, and it’s popularity make it symbolic of the white escapism of the 1950’s and 60’s? Still, they never planned any of this. The Beach Boys starting writing about what they knew; there is a sense of earnestness to their works and their sound ground them as one of the more actually serious bands of the time. That is especially evident in this song.
Musically they can be considered to be the first true “garage band” as argued by David Walsh in his insightful, and very unknowinglyonto-historical article “Listening to Brian Wilson”. The group was a true family outfit made of three Wilson brothers and a first-cousin Mike Love who started out first playing in their garage under the band called the Pendletones. Each had their own tastes and brought their own influence to the group,
“Wilson's melodic genius, almost unparalleled in the history of pop, was fashioned as much by Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue as by the close-harmony singing of groups such as the Four Freshmen: from an early age, his taste inclined towards the complex, the ambitious, the operatic. But little brother Carl turned him on to Chuck Berry guitar riffs, and his well-off cousins the Loves converted him to the R&B” (Walsh).
Thus, what we get from their music is an indirect collage of all the sonic movements going on around America.
Open Listening #2
Going back to this piece keeping in mind everything I have just explored, I begin to see and understand exactly why and how this piece works so well. So rather than just taking it in as-is, I recognized the intentionality behind all of Brian’s little moves in orchestration and production and how he used them to help support the text to evoke so much with what seems and sounds like so little.
For example, how the intro goes from being heavy in instrumentation but then as we move into the verse he precisely lets just the bass take us there with its rising three notes. By peeling away the other textures that add harmony and leaving us with only single notes on the bass, rather than chords which imply keys better, we are unaware that we have even really moved to another possible tonal center. This reduction simultaneously works to open up space for the vocals to come in and thus be our main focus.
Also having being able to look at the score I noticed that he also made a conscious decision to use more unstable or ambiguous chords to help match what the text was saying at a given moment, such as how a D#dim chord plays through the line that talks about doubt. This also happens melodically such as when he sings “stars above you” and his vocals go up from A-B-C#.
I noted that despite the inherent pop sensibility to write in 2 or 4 bars, he was able to use harmony to get by sections like the chorus with only three bars without us ever noticing the deletion because the chords that follow seem to just meld, rather than each section be its own standalone thing.
I realize that my initial feelings of being at see are most likely because of the rhythmic feel of the song, which seems to bob forward at a pleasing pace like a tide. Also I never really noticed how much the percussion instruments were vital to this and there is actually few real drum parts, in fact I don’t think there is a single kit fill or cymbal hit in the entire song!
Finally, though I was perturbed by the seeming out of place instrumental break I actually, upon analysis and more focused listening came to appreciate it for what it was both as a rhetorical theory device and as sprinkle of texture that made me excited to hear what would come next rather than lo a detraction from the song.
For example, how the intro goes from being heavy in instrumentation but then as we move into the verse he precisely lets just the bass take us there with its rising three notes. By peeling away the other textures that add harmony and leaving us with only single notes on the bass, rather than chords which imply keys better, we are unaware that we have even really moved to another possible tonal center. This reduction simultaneously works to open up space for the vocals to come in and thus be our main focus.
Also having being able to look at the score I noticed that he also made a conscious decision to use more unstable or ambiguous chords to help match what the text was saying at a given moment, such as how a D#dim chord plays through the line that talks about doubt. This also happens melodically such as when he sings “stars above you” and his vocals go up from A-B-C#.
I noted that despite the inherent pop sensibility to write in 2 or 4 bars, he was able to use harmony to get by sections like the chorus with only three bars without us ever noticing the deletion because the chords that follow seem to just meld, rather than each section be its own standalone thing.
I realize that my initial feelings of being at see are most likely because of the rhythmic feel of the song, which seems to bob forward at a pleasing pace like a tide. Also I never really noticed how much the percussion instruments were vital to this and there is actually few real drum parts, in fact I don’t think there is a single kit fill or cymbal hit in the entire song!
Finally, though I was perturbed by the seeming out of place instrumental break I actually, upon analysis and more focused listening came to appreciate it for what it was both as a rhetorical theory device and as sprinkle of texture that made me excited to hear what would come next rather than lo a detraction from the song.
Performance Guide
Performance-Guide
If one were given the daunting task of having to recreate and perform or record this song here is some advice I would give.
-Instrumentally: More of them is better. Conceivably I would like to play this song with a full band, plus a string section, and a horn section. However, one must take careful precaution that there is no ego, this song is not about your prowess at your instrument. A real musician knows that when performing less is often more. Play with taste and subtlety. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and if any part decides it’s more important than another then the message is lost.
-Rhythm: Perhaps may be the most important part because it is what unconsciously keeps the listener attentive. The tempo should be like sway; it is not plodding nor brusque, nor is it mechanical. Much of this is taken on by instruments such as the pianos and bells that beat out quarter notes, so these musicians should feel the song rather than read it.
-Vocals: Preferably can be sung like on the recording because otherwise you lose 2 very important parts of the song, the scat and the last round. That given, it is also given that you must know your parts cold if you want it to come off sounding tight. The lead vocal is relatively plain in timbre and dynamic range; there is not a lot of waver or tremolo.
-The ending: I feel that this type of round singing could have the tendency to move toward the epic. I am undecided here, and I feel that this section is more open to interpretation. If you want to stick straight to the song that is fine, but don’t let it crescendo. The song always seems to want to do that, especially every time you hear the drum fill, but we never crest and go full out, we are restrained and rather let the emotion in vocals do its job of getting stuck in the listener's head.
If one were given the daunting task of having to recreate and perform or record this song here is some advice I would give.
-Instrumentally: More of them is better. Conceivably I would like to play this song with a full band, plus a string section, and a horn section. However, one must take careful precaution that there is no ego, this song is not about your prowess at your instrument. A real musician knows that when performing less is often more. Play with taste and subtlety. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and if any part decides it’s more important than another then the message is lost.
-Rhythm: Perhaps may be the most important part because it is what unconsciously keeps the listener attentive. The tempo should be like sway; it is not plodding nor brusque, nor is it mechanical. Much of this is taken on by instruments such as the pianos and bells that beat out quarter notes, so these musicians should feel the song rather than read it.
-Vocals: Preferably can be sung like on the recording because otherwise you lose 2 very important parts of the song, the scat and the last round. That given, it is also given that you must know your parts cold if you want it to come off sounding tight. The lead vocal is relatively plain in timbre and dynamic range; there is not a lot of waver or tremolo.
-The ending: I feel that this type of round singing could have the tendency to move toward the epic. I am undecided here, and I feel that this section is more open to interpretation. If you want to stick straight to the song that is fine, but don’t let it crescendo. The song always seems to want to do that, especially every time you hear the drum fill, but we never crest and go full out, we are restrained and rather let the emotion in vocals do its job of getting stuck in the listener's head.
Meta-Critique
Meta-Critique
And now for the self-analysis. Firstly the biggest thing I had trouble with was trying to keep each of the sections truly delineated in their own syntax; that is not let my mind and my thoughts influence my reporting in say musical syntax by using more referential/emotional words. I found this also very hard to do in sound-in-time because I didn’t know when a word could be considered referential or possibly syntactical in a another realm such as “reverb” or “round”.
I believe if I had the full score, with all the instrumental parts charted out it could be helpful in figuring just what instrument was playing where and thus help illuminate why he may have chosen a French horn over a trumpet or an organ over a piano.
I must admit to the fact that no matter how hard I try, this Husserlian distancing will never truly work, and I feel that personal feelings associated with this song will always pervade my view of this work to some extent throughout this analysis. I feel that my feelings work against me from finding more possibly troubling problems in this piece. I would recommend to future analysts to do as much as possible without and background research on the band or the song as by reading others comments and views of this album, good or bad, as it may taint your initial feelings and reactions and analysis. After reading so much about why and how Brian is a genius and how beautiful this song and then going and say analyzing a score or lyrics I find myself also coming to similar conclusions and not knowing if this is genuinely something I would have found on my own or influenced by the fact that I read it.
Works Cited
"God Only Knows." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 16 Apr 2009, 19:07 UTC. 2 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=God_Only_Knows&oldid=284261676>.
"Musicians on Brian." Website. Brian Wilson Productions, 2009.
Panfile, Greg. "Mind of Brian I: God Only Knows". Website.
"Pet Sounds." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Apr 2009, 21:07 UTC. 2 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pet_Sounds&oldid=286722890>.
Walsh, David. "Listening to Brian Wilson." World Socialist Web Site. Sept. 1, 2000.
Wilson, Brian and Tony Asher. "God Only Knows." Pet Sounds. Performed by the Beach Boys. Capitol Records, 1966.
And now for the self-analysis. Firstly the biggest thing I had trouble with was trying to keep each of the sections truly delineated in their own syntax; that is not let my mind and my thoughts influence my reporting in say musical syntax by using more referential/emotional words. I found this also very hard to do in sound-in-time because I didn’t know when a word could be considered referential or possibly syntactical in a another realm such as “reverb” or “round”.
I believe if I had the full score, with all the instrumental parts charted out it could be helpful in figuring just what instrument was playing where and thus help illuminate why he may have chosen a French horn over a trumpet or an organ over a piano.
I must admit to the fact that no matter how hard I try, this Husserlian distancing will never truly work, and I feel that personal feelings associated with this song will always pervade my view of this work to some extent throughout this analysis. I feel that my feelings work against me from finding more possibly troubling problems in this piece. I would recommend to future analysts to do as much as possible without and background research on the band or the song as by reading others comments and views of this album, good or bad, as it may taint your initial feelings and reactions and analysis. After reading so much about why and how Brian is a genius and how beautiful this song and then going and say analyzing a score or lyrics I find myself also coming to similar conclusions and not knowing if this is genuinely something I would have found on my own or influenced by the fact that I read it.
Works Cited
"God Only Knows." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 16 Apr 2009, 19:07 UTC. 2 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=God_Only_Knows&oldid=284261676>.
"Musicians on Brian." Website. Brian Wilson Productions, 2009.
Panfile, Greg. "Mind of Brian I: God Only Knows". Website.
"Pet Sounds." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Apr 2009, 21:07 UTC. 2 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pet_Sounds&oldid=286722890>.
Walsh, David. "Listening to Brian Wilson." World Socialist Web Site. Sept. 1, 2000.
Wilson, Brian and Tony Asher. "God Only Knows." Pet Sounds. Performed by the Beach Boys. Capitol Records, 1966.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
MUSIC THEORY PAPER: "Building Steam with a Grain of Salt" by DJ Shadow
Carlos Salguero
4-19-09
Theory IV—T-Mac
Final Paper
On Building Steam with a Grain of Salt
Chances are you’ve never heard of Josh Davis. Clocking in at over 60,000 pieces of vinyl, he holds the world record for the largest personal record collection. But it gets better, he also holds a Guinness World Record for the first album to be created entirely out of samples. When Endtroducing. . . was dropped in 1996 neither Sean Davis, better known around the globe by his alias/moniker DJ Shadow, nor the rest of the world could have fully predicted the impact the album would have on the current musical world( “DJ Shadow”, “Endtroducing”).
Armed with nothing but his Akai MPC60, ProTools, and all the records he’d found from thrift-store bargain bins to the dusty basements of his favorite vinyl haunts, Shadow spent 2 years recording the album and the result was a sonic masterwork that has yet to be topped by anyone even Shadow himself. Drawing from snippets and scraps from long forgotten soul singles to old TV show broadcasts he manages to channel every genre from jazz, classical, break-beat, jungle, and more and weaves and stitches them together to create a new aural landscape. Yet, despite the fact that these beats and noises have been built on clips that have been “processed, looped and re-arranged far beyond recognition”, at the core, these “funky rhythms . . . never sound like they've been cut and pasted together”(Fine, Jason).
Thus what Shadow has created with Endtroducing is a new form musical expression. Some have called this new genre trip-hop but I like to think of it as the art of making sound landscapes, or soundscapes and “When Shadow brings sound together, it does not become music or a song, but rather a sonic painting that depicts the world. . . [and] provides a gripping ambiance that overtakes the listener”(Transmute).
Perhaps the most accessible and clear example of this is the LP’s first track “Building Steam with a Grain of Salt” which I will attempt to analyze here. You can listen to the entire song here:
DJ Shadow- "Building Steam with a Grain of Salt"
Approach:
Since this piece is made entirely of samples, there is no real published score per-se; instead what I have done is made a map of the entire piece indicating at which point in time which samples come in, how much time/how many measures said sample is looped, and what is playing concurrently with it. Also, when possible I’ve tried to identify where the and link/upload the original sample material and I believe I have all of it. The resulting score that I have created is a visual representation of how the different samples interplay and interact with each other to become one evolving and ultimately circular soundscape.
After importing the song into Logic I figured out that the tempo of the song is roughly at 85.5 BPM, but wavers a little bit. Also by playing along with my guitar I was able to figure out the melodies for some of the sampled bits, as well as the fact that overall the piece is in C minor. Here is the score that I wrote out in Sibelius:
(Click on the images to make them clearere and then use the zoom feature on your mac. Sorry this was the best I could do. Let me know if you you want me to send the sibelius file. "
Analysis:The song starts out with voice clip saying “Producing” at time 00:00 (time used here is in min:sec format). This clip comes from a 1974 interview with jazz drummer and percussionist George Marsh, of which the whole clip can be found as an mp3 here:
Interview with George Marsh MP3
Different clips from this interview are used later throughout the piece.
Now comes in the sample that is the backbone that connects and holds everything together in this piece. It is a 2 bar loop from a song by Jeremy Storch called “I Feel a New Shadow”, that features two pianos. I found the original sample and you can listen to it here:
Jeremy Storch- "I a New Shadow"
The first piano is playing rapid arpeggiated/broken C minor chords while a second piano plays the following melody in a higher register:
This continues until the fifth measure when another George Marsh interview sample beings at 00:12 where he says:“From listening to records I just knew what to do
I mainly taught myself. And, you know, I did pretty well
Except there were a few mistakes, but um, that I made, uh
That I've just recently cleared up”
This entire sample lasts for the next four measures. At measure nine we hear a piano hit a forte low C that resonates and will be a feature throughout the piece and gives it an ominous sound. This C is hit on the first beat of every 2-bar piano loop for the next 8 measures. On the second beat of mm. 11 (00:30) we get another George Marsh clip that lasts until the end of bar 16 (00:47); what we hear now is:
“And I’d like to just continue to be able to express myself
As best as I can with this instrument
And I feel like I have a lot of work to do
Still, I'm a student-- of the drums
And I'm also a teacher of the drums too”
On cue, starting at mm.17 (00:47) as soon as the vocal sample is done, Shadow drops the drum beat which is also based on a 2-bar programmed groove seen here which features predominantly syncopated bass drum beats over a steady snare hitting on the 2 and 4 of the bar. The drum samples, bass and snare and cymbals come from an old soul song by Frankie Seay and the Soul Riders called “Soul Food”, which can be listened to here:
Frankie Seay and the Soul Riders- "Soul Food"
*Clicking this will take you away from this page, may want to right-click and open in new tab.
The drums and pianos play on for the next 8 measures.
At mm.25 (1:11) a new sample comes in. It comes from the same Jeremy Storch song as the pianos and features a choir that has been processed and affected to sound ghostly and eerie. The choir sings the same 2-bar piano melody that the original higher piano has been playing and that I have notated above. The piano playing the melody is put down in the mix a little but the piano arpeggios remain and drums remain at the same level. The choir loops for the next 16 measures, mm.25-mm.40 (1:11-1:57). When the choir comes in we also get a bass coming in playing a simple line but it is not that prominent, we first truly hear it in mm.32, which is at the end of the first 8 bars after the choir has come in, where is has a 2 beat fill starting on beat 3 of mm. 32 (1:33). This same fill returns at the end of the next 8 measures, on beat 2 of mm.40 (1:56). Starting at measure 33 (1:34) we also get a return of the low C piano hits every two bars until mm.41.
Starting at mm.41 our ghost choir drops out, leaving the rhythm section and pianos. We hear turntable scratching, seemingly preparing us for a new change, which we receive starting at mm.42. This is where a new sample, this time another vocal/spoken-word comes in and plays out through the end of mm.48 (2:21). The sample comes from a piece written by the electronic musician Mort Garson called “Planetary Motivations (Cancer)”. This piece is from a suite called “The Zodiac : Cosmic Sounds - Celestial Counterpoint with Words and Music,” in which he wrote a piece for each sign of the 12 signs of the Zodiac (“Mort Garson”). The sample used from Planetary Motivations features the following lyrics spoken by a female starting at 2:00 :
“What makes cancer tenacious?
The moon rules the fluids
Including the inner juices of human beings
That which assimilates and feeds the body
So the crab feeds his astral plane
Assimilating and distributing all he receives
Slowly, until it becomes a part of you”
Mort Garson- "Planetary Motivations(Zodiac)"
We hear the last few words, “a part of you”, effected with and delay and echo. Then when mm. 49 starts our ghost choir loop returns for the next 8 bars until 2:44. On the eighth bar of this section, mm.56 (2:41) we get 1 measure drum and bass fill that preps us for a new section.
What we from mm.57 (2:44) to mm.64 (3:07) get now is and 8-bar solo section where Shadow gets to show off his skills at drum programming. Using his MPC sampler he starts syncopating beats and progressively starts chopping and screwing them until they no longer play in time and no longer sound like a human playing them. Still if you keep the established beat in your head and tap it out you will find that the solo still ends perfectly in time at the end of the mm.64. Thus, aurally, Shadow plays with the beat we’ve heard and been stuck in our head so far and then turns it upside down so we are shaken from it and unsure of what comes next or how long it will go on. Yet, in actuality he has carefully and consciously measured out how long to make it and still keep a total, metrical flow of the work.
With the first beat of mm.65 (3:07) our anxiety brought on by the drum solo is relieved when we get a strong hit of the piano playing a low C, demarcating a new section. No piano and drums are present but a new sample is thrown into the mix. It is a funky, 1-bar guitar loop that has a wah effect on it. It comes from a funk song called “I Need You” by HP Riot and which you can find the original sample here:
HP Riot- "I Need You"
This guitar plays along with the bassline that also returns and leads us away from the previous motif into a new, refreshing direction. This group/groove plays on for three measure when in mm.68 (3:16) we get a 1 measure drum fill signaling the return of that instrument.
Measure 69 (3:19) starts with another low C piano hit and the drum groove drops back in and this group plays out for 8 measures, through mm.76 (3:42).
Mm. 77 (3:42) brings a new layer to our groove, a dreamy synth line that floats above the rest of the groove and giving the melody energy. The synth line comes from an old soul classic by the group Lexia called “I Worship You”.
Lexia- "I Worship You"
And though you wouldn’t know this without knowing and listening to the original samples, another sample from this song will soon be used, so in a way the use of this subtle sample foreshadows that it will come back in a more prominent way in the need future. This group plays out for another 8 bar section, through mm.84 (4:02) where a one bar drum fill signals an impending change.
The change that we get starting in mm.85 (4:05) is a progressive peeling back of textures from this new soundscape that happens over the course of the 8 measures. Measure 85 finds the wah-guitar dropping out. This leaves us with just the synth playing over bass and drums. This, however, only lasts for 3 measures, because starting in mm.88 (4:14) the synth is faded over the next 2 measure until it has disappeared by the end of mm.89 (4:20). This leaves us with just drums and bass in mm.90 (4:20), and once the synth has left our drums take up the lead with a mini-solo that lasts for the last three measures of this section building up a cacophony until 4:29.
Out of the mini-climax that ends mm.92, mm.93 (4:29) stops everything and out of the past comes our 2-bar piano loop by itself. It plays twice (4 measures) and mm. 97 we get a low-C piano hit. Starting in mm.98 (4:43) we get another sample, which is from the “I Worship You” featuring the female vocalist singing the line “I fly to the strangest lands” over the next 4 measures, through mm.100 (4:52).
The word “lands” echoes and prompts the drums and our ghost choir from earlier to come back in at mm.101 for the next 8 bars.
At bar 109 (5:16) our wah-guitar also gets added back to the mix so what we are getting is the return of all our samples playing in unison for the next 8 measures. Measure 113 (5:27) adds one more sample, a deep resonating bass synth that one feels more than hears if listening to the piece non-analytically. This gives us a new powerful push and helps distinguish this as a sort of finale of the song. All these instruments and play for four measures until mm.117.
Measure 117 (5:39) marks what I would call the “coda” of the piece. Here everything but the pianos and choir drops out. The choir now is heard naked, effect-less, like it sounds in the original sample. A low C hits in mm.119 then again in mm.121. In mm.121 finds the choir fading out from 5:50-5:53, leaving just the pianos. On beat 3 of mm.122 (5:54) we get our last sample, and the last words we hear come from George Marsh who brought us into the piece. He says:
“And I would like to able to continue
To let what is inside of me
Which is, which comes from all the music that I hear,
I would like for that to come out
And it's like, it's not really me that's coming
The music's coming through me”
Which takes until 6:08 to complete. Measure 123 has our last low C hit and on the third beat of this measure (6:09) the last line of this last George Marshall sample, “The music’s coming through me” repeats with heavy delays and echoes added as a final reminder to the listener through 6:14. We are left with the pianos tinkling and fading out for 6 more measures until by 6:31 everything is gone.
Conclusion:
Despite being a piece of electronic music, when looking back at the overall layout and format of the work is very structured and thought out. Because we are dealing with hip-hop, the core of the piece will always be rhythm, ie. drums and bass. All our musical samples fit into 1, 2, or four bars. Sections are comprised almost always of 8 bars, with 2-bar loops often used as the bass sample. Often within these 8-bar sections are subdivided into 2 four-bar phrases.
Looking at it from an larger formal perspective, I think this piece could be considered to be in sonata or rounded-binary ( ||A||BA’|| ) form. Our first section, of the “exposition” would comprise mm.0 till mm. 56 and our main theme could be considered our 2-bar piano loop. While there is no modulation, I think we could consider the shift of the melody from the piano to choir as the modulation to the dominant that we would often see in a sonata.
The drum solo serves as a modulation of sorts in the piece that can be considered the beginning of the “development”, as it breaks from what has been going on in the “exposition” and clears space by dropping pianos and choir. This modulation allows for the opening into new sonic landscapes that is brought about the wah-guitar. We get new feelings and textures shift as we add layers of synths with new melodies. This entire section I would consider to be comprised from mm.57 till mm.92.
But we don’t stay here for long, as our drums give us a modulation back into the “recapitulation” which starts off just like the beginning of the piece. We then continue but add everything back in, so that all the instruments from both the “exposition” and “development” play together and crest into a coda that brings us straight back into a final, harking sample and pianos just like our intro and the whole piece ends as it begins; circularity is achieved.
Works Cited
Dahlen, Chris. “DJ Shadow: Endtroducing . . . [Delux Edition]”. Pitchfork Media. Online Review. June 9, 2005.
D.J. Shadow. “Building Steam with a Grain of Salt”. Endtroducing
Mo’ Wax: 19 Nov., 1996.
"DJ Shadow." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 20 Apr 2009, 09:18 UTC. 29 Apr 2009
"Endtroducing......" Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 23 Apr 2009, 09:39 UTC. 29 Apr 2009
Fine, Jason. “DJ Shadow, Endtroducing”. Rolling Stone. Music Review. Jan 23, 1997.
"Mort Garson." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 8 Apr 2009, 13:41UTC. 29 Apr 2009
NPR News. “NPR 100: Master List of top 300 Songs”. Website. 2009
<>
Sullivan, James. “Endtroducing. DJ Shadow aka Josh Davis”. Review. BAM Magazine, April 4, 1997.
Transmute. “Building Steam with A Grain of Salt”. Online. Blog. April 16, 2006.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Handel's Water Music
Carlos Salguero
N17000097
Music Technology
Music History II
E85.1068.001.099.SP09
Spring 2009
In the realm of the great masters of the Baroque, Georg Friderich Handel was only truly rivaled by JS Bach. Though he always seems to be somewhat in Bachs’s shadow, and understandably so, Handel’s life’s work nonetheless encapsulates and preserves the entire feeling of an era.
When I took music history in 12th grade, one of the first things that my teacher told when we got to the Baroque period was that if there was one thing to remember was the “Baroque = Big”. By this he meant that this time period was driven by aesthetic of excess; everything was bigger, flashier, and gaudier— dynamic action and movement dominated while subtlety was shunned. One need just to look at Henry XIV’s behemoth Palace of Versailles or listen to one of Bach’s fugues in which trills and ornamentation are as much of the work as the actual continuous, pumping melody itself to see evidence of this.
Following in this tradition, Baroque royalty and elite were also constantly competing against one another to be bigger and better, and much of that was determined by how entertaining one’s court was. Therefore music and it’s patronage gained much more importance, though not necessarily for sake of music as much as for social status, and thus one of the emphases found in Baroque music was a trend in the writing of more secular and instrumental music. Patronage of the best composers and musicians was highly desirable, and like-wise for the composers and musicians employment in the court meant a steady job and steady money. Of all of them, Handel himself was “perhaps the most famous composer to be associated with royal patronage” (“Baroque Music”).
I said earlier that court entertainment was often equaled, and sometimes surpassed, ruling for royalty. So how did they have fun in the good old Baroque days? By dancing, of course! In Baroque times, dancing became more than just a good work out—it was networking, status-representing; “Dancing is essential in a well-ordered society,” claims dance authoritarian Thoinot Arbeau “because it allows males and females to mingle and observe one another”(Hanning 208). In a time dominated by extreme sexual repression, dance created a socially acceptable space where one could show off their to possible mates and allowed for a kind of try-before-you-buy for women as they could then discern if a man was “shapely and fit or unattractive and lame. . . whether he is graceful and attentive or clumsy and awkward”(Hanning 208).
Therefore dance music also came to be more than trite and plebian thing. And we are in the Baroque period so why just have one type of dance when we could group many different kinds together and make a newer bigger new form and thus we get the Baroque suite de danses or just suite. More definitively the Baroque suite comprised of a number of different dance tunes all composed in the same key and that usually had an overture(“Suite”).
On July 17, 1717 Handel’s instant-classic Water Music suite for orchestra or winds was premiered for King George I of England. The king, along with other royal friends, lamped out on the Thames River on the royal barge while 50 musicians, except for the harpsichord as it was too large to fit, played on another nearby barge (“Water Music”).
Rumor has it that Handel wrote Water Music as a “reconciliation between the king and Handel” (“Handel”). In either case, these “finest Symphonies, compos’d express for this Occasion, by Mr. Hendel; . . . his Majesty liked so well, that he caus’d it to be plaid over three times in coming and going”( The Daily Courant).
Water Music actually consists of 3 suites , one in F major (HWV 348), one in D major (HWV 349), and one in G major (HWV 349) and contains some of the most memorable melodies in Western “Classical” music. More specifically, the “Alla Hornpipe” movement of the D Major suite, is not only a personal favorite but is also one of the most recognizable around the world and has been used in countless other forms of media from commercials to movies.
“Alla hornpipe” tempo indication that Handel subtitled the movement refers the popular dance rhythm in northern England in the 17th century and was used in both popular and art-music. A hornpipe is supposed to be in a lively, upbeat, 3/2 metered dance which had its origins “around the 16th century on English sailing vessels”(“Hornpipe”, Mackay).
I’ve chosen two different versions of the Handels hornpipe to analyze: one is by the die Berliner Philharmoniker conducted by Rafael Kubelik and was recorded in 1987; the other is by the English Baroque Soloists led by Sir John Eliot Gardener and was recorded in 2001.
An Excerpt of the famous first 2 themes/phrases :
In listening to Kubelik’s interpretation first we start off by hearing a full-bodied and lush string section begin with the two primary major themes (mm. 1-5 and then 5-11) supported by oboes, which are hard to distinguish, and harpsichord continuo. The trumpets then answer with the first theme and then the coronets and then all play the second theme. This trading and call-and-response between the strings and horn sections goes on as the two themes get varied and often the whole orchestra comes back together for the cadences. Then we a movement to B minor in which a third theme comes in, mostly played by the strings, which starts of quiet and restrained. Soon it grows more intense as first violins strings start moving frenetically and we get some signature syncopations and cross rhythms(Mackay). We then ritard back to a cadence to end the minor section, at which point the original theme in D major bursts back into play to finish out the piece.
Going on to listen Sir John Eliot Gardener’s interpretation we immediately notice some stark contrasts. Firstly, the tempo seems to quite faster, with the half-note being around 116-118BPM versus the ~110BPM of the Kubelik’s. It may not seem like much but in listening, it definitely makes a difference. Nextly, it seems that Gardener has made his strings a lot more on the stacatto side, which may partly be the tempo, but it just doesn’t sound as lush and full as the Berliner’s. This may also could be that they are not playing with a full orchestra.
The timbre of the instruments, or at least the horns, is also quite different. The English Baroque Soloists, as I learned from their website is one of the “worlds great period-instrument chamber orchestras” and thus only play instruments that Handel would have had and this chamber orchestra is definitely smaller in number. Still, I felt that Sir Gardener would benefit from his horns having more presence, I mean they are horns, they are supposed to generally play loud parts and be exclamatory.
I feel the Baroque Soloists do a fine job and certainly recreate the sound and instrumentation that you would hear in the Baroque era better than the Philharmoniker. Then again that is their purpose, playing period-accurately. Still, while they sound Baroque they don’t have the heart of the Baroque. This is purely a referential and phenomenological decision, but then again the aesthetic of Baroque is all about feeling and being moved. In that case I definitely think that the Philharmoniker wins for the most Baroque performance of the piece and thus overall because it is, at least in my opinion, more moving. Kubelik understands what he is doing and that is recreating a dance. Dancing is a vivacious and energetic part of human life and that is where I feel Gardiner falls off—yes this is supposed to be lively, but lively isn’t necessarily synonymous with a quick tempo. In fact, it works against him because when the piece goes to the minor section where the violins pick up speed Gardiners already increased tempo makes the dance feeling away and leaves it like justa speedy piece of chamber music.
Finally, the hornpipe isn’t just any dance. It’s a dance that was started by English sailor on boats. And when I think of English sailors dancing I also think of drunken revelry and a sort of swagger. With it’s fuller sound, the Philharmoniker is able to translate some of that bravado with sure-sounding and trilling horns while the Baroque Soloists seem to take a very meek and measured approach that doesn’t allow for any release of expression.
I think its clear now where I stand on which performance is stronger. While I think period-instrumentation is definitely a good thing, at least if you’re going for historical accuracy, if you don’t play it with the period-heart then what’s the point?
"Alla Hornpipe"-- Berliner Philharmoniker
"Alla hornpipe"-- English Baroque Soloists
Works Cited
Berliner Philharmoniker & Rafael Kubelik. “Handel: Water Music & Music for the Royal Fireworks”. Copyright 1963, Deutch Grammophon GmbH, Hamburg.
"Baroque music." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 3 Mar 2009, 16:50 UTC. 3 Mar 2009.
The Daily Courant. Newspaper Article. No. 4913. Friday 19, July 1717.
Found on Handel Reference Database. Compiled by Ilias Chrissochoidis.
English Baroque Soloists. “About Us”. Website. 11 March, 2009.
http://www.monteverdi.co.uk/about_us/ebs.cfm
English Baroque Soloists and John Eliot Gardener. “Handel: Water Music Suites and Music for the Royal Fireworks. May 21, 2001. Copyright 2001: Universal International Music B.V.
"George Frideric Handel." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 6 Mar 2009, 02:51 UTC. 8 Mar 2009.
Handel, Georg-Frediric. “Alla Hornpipe” Excerpt from Water Music. Full Score. Ed. Hans Ferdinand Redlich (1903-1968) Hallische Handel Ausgabe, Ser. IV: Bd. 13
Kassel: Bärenreiter-Verlag, 1962, BA 4018
Hanning, Barbara Russano. Concise History of Western Music. Boston: W. W.
Norton & Company, Incorporated, 2006.
"Hornpipe." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 21 Feb 2009, 14:22 UTC. 11 Mar 2009.
"Suite." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 4 Mar 2009, 04:00 UTC. 8 Mar 2009.
N17000097
Music Technology
Music History II
E85.1068.001.099.SP09
Spring 2009
In the realm of the great masters of the Baroque, Georg Friderich Handel was only truly rivaled by JS Bach. Though he always seems to be somewhat in Bachs’s shadow, and understandably so, Handel’s life’s work nonetheless encapsulates and preserves the entire feeling of an era.
When I took music history in 12th grade, one of the first things that my teacher told when we got to the Baroque period was that if there was one thing to remember was the “Baroque = Big”. By this he meant that this time period was driven by aesthetic of excess; everything was bigger, flashier, and gaudier— dynamic action and movement dominated while subtlety was shunned. One need just to look at Henry XIV’s behemoth Palace of Versailles or listen to one of Bach’s fugues in which trills and ornamentation are as much of the work as the actual continuous, pumping melody itself to see evidence of this.
Following in this tradition, Baroque royalty and elite were also constantly competing against one another to be bigger and better, and much of that was determined by how entertaining one’s court was. Therefore music and it’s patronage gained much more importance, though not necessarily for sake of music as much as for social status, and thus one of the emphases found in Baroque music was a trend in the writing of more secular and instrumental music. Patronage of the best composers and musicians was highly desirable, and like-wise for the composers and musicians employment in the court meant a steady job and steady money. Of all of them, Handel himself was “perhaps the most famous composer to be associated with royal patronage” (“Baroque Music”).
I said earlier that court entertainment was often equaled, and sometimes surpassed, ruling for royalty. So how did they have fun in the good old Baroque days? By dancing, of course! In Baroque times, dancing became more than just a good work out—it was networking, status-representing; “Dancing is essential in a well-ordered society,” claims dance authoritarian Thoinot Arbeau “because it allows males and females to mingle and observe one another”(Hanning 208). In a time dominated by extreme sexual repression, dance created a socially acceptable space where one could show off their to possible mates and allowed for a kind of try-before-you-buy for women as they could then discern if a man was “shapely and fit or unattractive and lame. . . whether he is graceful and attentive or clumsy and awkward”(Hanning 208).
Therefore dance music also came to be more than trite and plebian thing. And we are in the Baroque period so why just have one type of dance when we could group many different kinds together and make a newer bigger new form and thus we get the Baroque suite de danses or just suite. More definitively the Baroque suite comprised of a number of different dance tunes all composed in the same key and that usually had an overture(“Suite”).
On July 17, 1717 Handel’s instant-classic Water Music suite for orchestra or winds was premiered for King George I of England. The king, along with other royal friends, lamped out on the Thames River on the royal barge while 50 musicians, except for the harpsichord as it was too large to fit, played on another nearby barge (“Water Music”).
Rumor has it that Handel wrote Water Music as a “reconciliation between the king and Handel” (“Handel”). In either case, these “finest Symphonies, compos’d express for this Occasion, by Mr. Hendel; . . . his Majesty liked so well, that he caus’d it to be plaid over three times in coming and going”( The Daily Courant).
Water Music actually consists of 3 suites , one in F major (HWV 348), one in D major (HWV 349), and one in G major (HWV 349) and contains some of the most memorable melodies in Western “Classical” music. More specifically, the “Alla Hornpipe” movement of the D Major suite, is not only a personal favorite but is also one of the most recognizable around the world and has been used in countless other forms of media from commercials to movies.
“Alla hornpipe” tempo indication that Handel subtitled the movement refers the popular dance rhythm in northern England in the 17th century and was used in both popular and art-music. A hornpipe is supposed to be in a lively, upbeat, 3/2 metered dance which had its origins “around the 16th century on English sailing vessels”(“Hornpipe”, Mackay).
I’ve chosen two different versions of the Handels hornpipe to analyze: one is by the die Berliner Philharmoniker conducted by Rafael Kubelik and was recorded in 1987; the other is by the English Baroque Soloists led by Sir John Eliot Gardener and was recorded in 2001.
An Excerpt of the famous first 2 themes/phrases :
In listening to Kubelik’s interpretation first we start off by hearing a full-bodied and lush string section begin with the two primary major themes (mm. 1-5 and then 5-11) supported by oboes, which are hard to distinguish, and harpsichord continuo. The trumpets then answer with the first theme and then the coronets and then all play the second theme. This trading and call-and-response between the strings and horn sections goes on as the two themes get varied and often the whole orchestra comes back together for the cadences. Then we a movement to B minor in which a third theme comes in, mostly played by the strings, which starts of quiet and restrained. Soon it grows more intense as first violins strings start moving frenetically and we get some signature syncopations and cross rhythms(Mackay). We then ritard back to a cadence to end the minor section, at which point the original theme in D major bursts back into play to finish out the piece.
Going on to listen Sir John Eliot Gardener’s interpretation we immediately notice some stark contrasts. Firstly, the tempo seems to quite faster, with the half-note being around 116-118BPM versus the ~110BPM of the Kubelik’s. It may not seem like much but in listening, it definitely makes a difference. Nextly, it seems that Gardener has made his strings a lot more on the stacatto side, which may partly be the tempo, but it just doesn’t sound as lush and full as the Berliner’s. This may also could be that they are not playing with a full orchestra.
The timbre of the instruments, or at least the horns, is also quite different. The English Baroque Soloists, as I learned from their website is one of the “worlds great period-instrument chamber orchestras” and thus only play instruments that Handel would have had and this chamber orchestra is definitely smaller in number. Still, I felt that Sir Gardener would benefit from his horns having more presence, I mean they are horns, they are supposed to generally play loud parts and be exclamatory.
I feel the Baroque Soloists do a fine job and certainly recreate the sound and instrumentation that you would hear in the Baroque era better than the Philharmoniker. Then again that is their purpose, playing period-accurately. Still, while they sound Baroque they don’t have the heart of the Baroque. This is purely a referential and phenomenological decision, but then again the aesthetic of Baroque is all about feeling and being moved. In that case I definitely think that the Philharmoniker wins for the most Baroque performance of the piece and thus overall because it is, at least in my opinion, more moving. Kubelik understands what he is doing and that is recreating a dance. Dancing is a vivacious and energetic part of human life and that is where I feel Gardiner falls off—yes this is supposed to be lively, but lively isn’t necessarily synonymous with a quick tempo. In fact, it works against him because when the piece goes to the minor section where the violins pick up speed Gardiners already increased tempo makes the dance feeling away and leaves it like justa speedy piece of chamber music.
Finally, the hornpipe isn’t just any dance. It’s a dance that was started by English sailor on boats. And when I think of English sailors dancing I also think of drunken revelry and a sort of swagger. With it’s fuller sound, the Philharmoniker is able to translate some of that bravado with sure-sounding and trilling horns while the Baroque Soloists seem to take a very meek and measured approach that doesn’t allow for any release of expression.
I think its clear now where I stand on which performance is stronger. While I think period-instrumentation is definitely a good thing, at least if you’re going for historical accuracy, if you don’t play it with the period-heart then what’s the point?
"Alla Hornpipe"-- Berliner Philharmoniker
"Alla hornpipe"-- English Baroque Soloists
Works Cited
Berliner Philharmoniker & Rafael Kubelik. “Handel: Water Music & Music for the Royal Fireworks”. Copyright 1963, Deutch Grammophon GmbH, Hamburg.
"Baroque music." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 3 Mar 2009, 16:50 UTC. 3 Mar 2009
The Daily Courant. Newspaper Article. No. 4913. Friday 19, July 1717.
Found on Handel Reference Database. Compiled by Ilias Chrissochoidis.
English Baroque Soloists. “About Us”. Website. 11 March, 2009.
http://www.monteverdi.co.uk/about_us/ebs.cfm
English Baroque Soloists and John Eliot Gardener. “Handel: Water Music Suites and Music for the Royal Fireworks. May 21, 2001. Copyright 2001: Universal International Music B.V.
"George Frideric Handel." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 6 Mar 2009, 02:51 UTC. 8 Mar 2009
Handel, Georg-Frediric. “Alla Hornpipe” Excerpt from Water Music. Full Score. Ed. Hans Ferdinand Redlich (1903-1968) Hallische Handel Ausgabe, Ser. IV: Bd. 13
Kassel: Bärenreiter-Verlag, 1962, BA 4018
Hanning, Barbara Russano. Concise History of Western Music. Boston: W. W.
Norton & Company, Incorporated, 2006.
"Hornpipe." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 21 Feb 2009, 14:22 UTC. 11 Mar 2009
"Suite." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 4 Mar 2009, 04:00 UTC. 8 Mar 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Open Viewing of Hopper's "Early Sunday Morning"
I'm kind of startled when I look at Hopper's "Early Sunday Morning". For some reason the top half of his painting, part dealing with the windows above the barbershop, looks strikingly more photorealistic to me than the bottom half. As my browser loads I only get most of the top half of the painting on my screen and if I squint a little bit it looks like and old photograph. But when I scroll down I begin to actually see Hopper's brushstrokes and realize that this was actually made by a person's hands, not a person using his hands to operate a camera. I feel that maybe this odd dichotomy may be artificially induced by the fact that this painting has been somehow captured, probably with a camera, and then copied digitally to a computer and transfered and recreated on my screen. But as we discussed in my recording technology class there is no way to fully capture something analogue because it is continous. When you quantize something by taking a picture and putting it online you, or the computer more accurately, has to make decisions about what combination of red, green, blue to use to make that specific color which can never be prefectly replicated and thus information is, in a sense, "lost". I mean when I go to display settings on my laptop I can't choose a "real life" setting, I can only choose up "Millions" of colors. But life and painting do not exist in just millions of colors.
So to come full circle, I feel that we already have unfelt biases inserted to our viewings when we do not view art, or at least paintings, in its original medium. It may not be a huge effect, as our technology has significantly improved, but we as long as we are quantizing we are limiting.
So to come full circle, I feel that we already have unfelt biases inserted to our viewings when we do not view art, or at least paintings, in its original medium. It may not be a huge effect, as our technology has significantly improved, but we as long as we are quantizing we are limiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)