Some additional thoughts/corrections: 1) Thanks to Mark Sundaram from The Endless Knot for reading those definitions for me! You can check out his channel about linguistics here: ua-cam.com/users/Alliterative 2) Does Have A Cigar really have a chorus, or is it more of a tag? I don't know! It's ambiguous! I'd say that, for length reasons, it's not a very prototypical chorus, but on the other hand it does have some of the other relevant qualities, so I think it's reasonable to count it. 3) Not all choruses have repeated lyrics! My favorite example is Jackson Browne's Song For Adam, where the theme is the same and there are a few key words that recur each time but most of the actual lyrics are different. 4) The meaning of the perspective shift in Take Me To Church is fairly ambiguous, and there's multiple reasonable interpretations. I went with the simplest one because it didn't super matter to the point I was making, but there's plenty of other ways to read it. 5) Technically, only the first chorus is of Living On A Prayer from Gina's perspective, and the second is from Tommy's. I don't think it's clear who's singing the final chorus.
Interesting - I never considered that the chorus of Living On A Prayer was sung from the characters' perspective. I always took it as a general statement tossed back to the listener from the singer - We're almost there, take my/our hand and we'll make it (just like these two characters that we're singing about).
From my experience, in Japanese pop and rock the lyrics rarely repeat straight up in choruses, yet Japanese choruses are still very chorus-y in most other regards.
I’d add- 3. The pre-chorus poses the dilemma. 4. The bridge is a reflective statement or observation. * If used, a final alternate chorus is what you or the character has concluded. This is intended to build upon your perfect explanation of verse and chorus, and to be of help to songwriters.
I once wrote a song with a chorus that keeps building. Like the first time you hear it, its one line; second time its two lines; and only at the end you get the full climax chorus. I mean, it sucked hard, but I still thought it was fun idea.
Try checking out Waves of Loneliness by Jon Bellion That's the best example of how you can build a chorus in that way while it still feels complete every time in my opinion
@@loganwheeler1769 Thanks for the recommendation. Nice song and you are right. The chorus feels different every time but is still the center point of the song
@@nachfullbarertrank5230 Hmm, although a nice song, it kind of looses the sense of a chorus. It is more of a call and response built up nicely done. My song was similar to such a thing only with verses in between.
I once saw a solo concert and the guy said "you'll know this next one, so remember it has two sections, a chorus and a refrain. Now a chorus is where you all join in and the rest you refrain". I honestly think that's the heart of what a chorus is. The bit that invites the audience to sing along, even if it's through techniques which invite it implicitly. And our conventions and subversion of those conventions evolves out of that history.
@@drewburchett2824 They way I hear it, Stairway to Heaven and Bohemian Rhapsody had to share one chorus between the two songs. So they cut it into pieces and to this day no one will admit where they put them.
I always thought it would be fun to try and get the chorus to form another part of the narrative, Which makes sense being repeated after each verse, Although of course it's not the easiest thing to do.
@@reillywalker195 i think it depends how the song ends. if the song starts on a verse but ends on a chorus, or vice versa, its not a sandwich. if is starts and ends with the chorus its a sandwich. same thing if it starts and ends with a verse.
Here's the thing about song-writing when it comes to the verse vs the chorus (or hook): It doesn't matter what I say So long as I sing with inflection That makes you feel I'll convey Some inner truth or vast reflection But I've said nothing so far And I can keep it up for as long as it takes And it don't matter who you are If I'm doing my job, it's your resolve that breaks Because the hook brings you back I ain't tellin' you no lie The hook brings you back On that you can rely. 😉
I find it interesting, as someone who listens to a lot of Japanese music (especially Vocaloid), that there seems to be less need to exactly repeat lyrics in a chorus in other languages. A lot of my favorite songs in Japanese share some lyrics across choruses, and may repeat a particular chorus lyrically, but will have at least slightly altered lyrics between choruses. How different usually seems to depend on if there's a mood shift, they want to draw attention to something different, or, most drastically, if they are telling a story. Not that there aren't Japanese examples of songs where the lyrics stay the same across all choruses, but I find it much easier to find examples where the lyrics change in Japanese songs than English ones.
Yeah, the common trope in popular Japanese music is basically to have an A chorus and a B chorus, returning to the A chorus the third time around for an ABA structure (often with minor changes though) The melody remains the same, and the lyrics often retain a short lyrical hook, but other than that the lyrics of the second chorus are usually more an expansion of the first one than a repetition
Oh wow I had no idea, I've always personally written my music that way. It takes me so long to write a song that I get incredibly tied of it and my brain tells me to change the lyrics and certain notes each chorus because it adds something slightly new while still holding form
I love the obscure “you either get it or you don’t” references you sometimes use in your drawings. “Significant changes” was a particular favourite here.
And they did this as a counter to their own formula of clean verse heavy chorus they became know for (One, Welcome Home et al). Which they apparently borrowed from Remember Tomorrow by Iron Maiden.
I love that the take-away is the same for writing a lot of music in general. Find what you want to do, find out how its usually done, and strike a balance between what is done and what you need. You need to learn the rules first to break them properly
I'm not sure how to feel about the cross referencing between my favorite UA-cam channels. The community aspect is awesome, and yet it's a little odd at the same time. Mostly, I'm happy to see a successful channel I enjoy supporting one of my favorites. Thanks Warren!
Haha! I blanked out on the video for about the next two minutes as I mulled over the debate in my head. I landed on it's a sandwich if when in its natural state it can lie flat on a plate with zero movement and no lean. Perhaps 12tone should break down the structure of sandwich theory.
@@tb5535 my personal stance is that "two pieces of bread with stuff between them" is sufficient. Connectivity doesn't matter, but there is a distinction I can come at from two directions that, at the moment, seem equally plausible. The first is familiarity-based: it's a sandwich if the bread component is something the speaker has been culturally trained to think is sandwich bread. For me, that's slices from a loaf, rolls or bagels cut in half (and, sadly, donuts as an extension of bagels), hot dog and hamburger buns, crackers, and matzah. The second is geometric: it's a sandwich if it's basically flat with bread above and below. So all the things I mentioned above count (and we can include non-food sandwiches that are just kinda symmetrical stacks of things), and tall sandwiches are peripheral, and it also excludes tacos, open-faced melts, sausage rolls, and pizza slices folded in half. I'm also pretty sure the sandwich is a European/American invention, and that sandwiches in other cultures (like the banh mi) are a legacy of colonialism and imperialism. (Feel free to correct me if that's not true.) So that's worth accounting for in your definition. It is still true that, if a well-meaning alien were to ask me to make sweeping generalizations about Earth food, I would tell them we're known for "bread around things, accounting for regional nuances in all three of those terms." That's the superclass to which sandwiches, tacos, melts, pies, stuffed shells, and gyoza all belong. (I should go have breakfast, shouldn't I?)
"Primadonna" by Marina and the Diamonds is a good example of an anti-chorus with a more subdued chorus with the verses acting as the expulsion of sonic energy
I love that I never know entirely what to expect in the more theory-heavy videos. Come for the music theory, stay for the extended section on the epistemological failures of definitions. ^_^
Japanese pop and rock music changes the lyrics in the chorus a lot, usually having a 1st chorus, 2nd chorus, and then coming back to both in a row at the end of the song. They use the same melody but build on the feelings in the chorus. For example, Ayumi Hamasaki’s “Teddy Bear” used the first chorus to build up the story the man is telling her, and the second used the same melody, but more emotional, to deliver the payoff of that story. Jupiter’s “Nostalgie,” one of my absolute favorite songs, used a second chorus to differentiate between the singer’s feelings at the time, talking about the future, then the second chorus starts off with “Now…” repeating the same idea but framing it as a sense that what happened before will help him overcome his darkness now. By the way, I recommend both songs as beautiful, heartbreaking songs that have a lot of power and feeling, even if you don’t speak Japanese ☺️
Someone else who does this a lot is Stephen Sondheim. He's working with narrative and character functions, of course, so the changing lyric will mark changes in the story. But he's usually pretty clear about where the chorus is. (He even calls it a "release.") But then I remembered Sweeny Todd and the song "Nothing's Going to Harm You." Toby sings this to Mrs. Lovett (RIP Angela Lansbury) a couple of times in sweet innocence. Suddenly *she* sings the chorus back to him--and now it's the accompanying chords that change, skewing a song of innocence into something far more devious! But it's still the chorus, the very same words and melody. Only we hear her evil... I guess the word would be prevarication. Amazing!
That you drew a platypus to describe something that is "part of the group but not a good example of it" is probably my favorite thing I've seen on any of your videos. Brilliant
Sooo much information there!! As a non native english speaker I found out that seeing your videos at 0,75 speeds is the perfect speed to get at least most part of the great information you have put on your videos. Thank you!
Great video! Living on a Prayer is my go-to example for chorusses as well so you using it made me smile. I never realized that chorusses tend to have a tonic function, always guessed they worked as dominant, bringing me back to a tonic verse, like the turn-around in a blues song, just extended. No wonder I never wrote a good pop song :)
"If the House Burns Down Tonight" by Switchfoot is a great example of a chorus that doesn't repeat verbatim. Each time the chorus presents as a call and response - the call changes each time but the response repeats.
"This is Music" by The Verve contains _few_ lyrical repetitions in its choruses, with only a few shared phrases. The choruses' last lines are similar but not exactly the same, while their middling lines are all completely different. They still feel like choruses with their shared melody and harmony distinct from the rest of the song, but lyrically they differ significantly apart from their first lines. "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" by Tears For Fears does something similar. It contains no lyrical repetitions within its choruses beyond the title of the song, but you can still recognize each chorus as a chorus because of the elements that _are_ consistent between them. All five choruses use the same lyrical structure and vocal melody, the same chord progression distinct from that of the verses, and the same final lyrics.
15:18 I think a better way to put this is that the title comes from the chorus. Usually when writing song lyrics or poems, you don't have a title from the start, and instead decide the title after writing it. Typically those repeated phrases that become the title are important (often metaphors but not always) phrases to the meaning of the song, which is why they're repeated.
They can be, for sure. I wrote a tune where I used that as the name, but a friend of mine who gave me some feedback on the song suggested reverting to the first line of the verse and then bring that back thematically in the last verse, which ended up better.
Also, if your chorus is doing a good job on the "memorability" function of a chorus, the audience will call it something in the chorus _anyway_. Might as well mean into that instead of having to re-title. (e.g. "Escape", which became "Escape (the Pina Colada song)" because everyone just called it "The Pina Colada Song".)
Lionel Richie’s Hello often gets lumped into the “Songs Without a Chorus” list because because the “hello, is it me you’re looking for?” is the last line of the verse and the lift section changes from the first time it is sung to the second, but that repeats the third time (and fourth in the album version off memory). Musically, THAT is the chorus. That is the fucking hook.
Good example. LR's most famous music sounds dated due to the '80s keyboards and drum machines, but strip those down and the songs are really well-written.
@ghost mall I would say that the first chorus of that song is simply omitted. I'm hearing it as verse - pre-chorus (- missing chorus) - verse - pre-chorus - chorus. You are expecting a chorus after the pre-chorus, but it simply doesn't come - the first chorus is replaced by a short instrumental interlude. The outro of the song has the function of a chorus, even though it only appears once in the song. But also, while it only appears once, it's still repeated so many times that it clearly feels like a chorus. And it's also the catchy part of the song.
@@MaggaraMarine on their official UA-cam channel posting of the song they offer up only the lyrics to the chorus in their video notes. Guess what they are calling the chorus?
@@Iwasbornin74 Yeah. I think that's the only part in the song that feels like a chorus. (And that part does definitely feel like a chorus.) But even though I agree with it, I have to say that the official video calling it a chorus doesn't really prove it is one. These labels are somewhat subjective, and Don't Stop Believing is a good example of a song that doesn't really follow the "textbook definition" of a chorus. Just because the artist decides to call the section a chorus doesn't necessarily make it one. But good to know that I agree with the "official video".
I have an idea without any actual proof, that basically choruses were created for audience to sing along. Like in sea shanty or in songs for children, question-answer kinda thing. And all old songs with somewhat modern structure that i can remember are guitar-campfire kinda songs, i dont know how to explain better, but verses are typically only for the guy with the guitar, and choruses are for whole croud. And maybe back vocals today are kinda representing croud singing along to the chorus? So yea, chorus is the part of song to sing along. Also i noticed a lot that chorus summarises whle song, and you can pretty much understand what song is about from chorus alone
Good points! Of course, there have got to be songs that completely defy it all, but generally yes! The verses tell the stories, the choruses highlight the moral of the song.
I think the most important simple to explain point that this video is missing is a concept in all art: contrast. A chorus is probably the focal point of the song, and you get people to notice the focal point with contrast. All examples you give are an example of contrast, even the cases like Billie Eilish's Bury a Friend, or Where Is My Mind, they don't necessarily need to be subverting expectations (though they do, they would still likely work in a vacuum where no other human had ever heard another song) all they're doing is giving a contrasting section of the song that draws attention from the listener. You notice when instruments cut out because it's different, you notice when the energy lowers because it's different, similarly you notice when the energy elevates, when background singers come in, when there are more instruments, more notes, less notes, etc... all because it's different. That's contrast, a fundamental aspect of almost all art, though my relationship with it is primarily from the visual arts.
well if you are playing a song but don't really know it note for note you throw in a little of the chorus your hook to get away with it..improvising ...
INSANELY good video! I liked this to remember to come back to it later while I write. So many good ideas and points from music theory all distilled perfectly into a (relatively) quick 20 minutes. Thank you for this
Interesting example of titles. The song we know as Fly Me to the Moon was originally titled In Other Words. The phrase "in other words" appears in it 7 times, the phrase "fly me to the Moon" only appears once. It seems we ought to call it by its original title, but the opening line is so memorable that by the time Sinatra recorded it, 10 years after it was first recorded by a cabaret singer called Kaye Ballard, Peggy Lee had already conviced the songwriter to change the name officially, and the famous Sinatra/Basie version was listed as Fly Me To The Moon (In Other Words), and later versions dropped the old title altogether.
When you go into our obsession with definition you reach a level of philosophy that excited my intellectual mind. I come for music talk, so I consider this a juicy bonus. Thank you for all of your videos I've watched and all of them I haven't watched yet, even the ones you haven't made yet. Keep on rocking
I always felt, from a songwriting prospective, that the chorus is suppose to be the most identifiable part of the song. Not only does it usually reuse the same lyrics, but it also feels like a part of the song that belongs to the audience. I never felt it was something that could be simply defined, but felt
This may well be one of your best videos yet! I'm currently stuck trying to finish a composition and 12:00 made me realize that a section I thought was a verse, was actually an intro/prechorus bc what comes after it definitely sounds like "the thing" on which the song should end. So, thanks on this new perspective you've given me!
@@xezmakorewarriah ehh I'd say they are functionally different. You can go back to the chorus as often as you want, but a drop has to be used sparingly or else it loses it's impact.
A chorus is the song’s anchor. The fine details regarding how that anchor is crafted isn’t as important as it being a defined section of song that the other parts can latch onto in order to establish the song’s identity. Change the pitch, keys, lyrics, whatever… so long as you’ve maintained some kind of theme to be shared among chorus A, B, and/or C, etc you’re doing it right. IMO making subtle changes between different chorus’ in the same song while maintaining each section’s identity as “the chorus” is a lot of fun and makes a song more interesting to listen to.
As a philosopher, I agree (and am glad you included) a brief explanation about what a "definition" is, and what it is NOT. The philosophy of language is unique because it is very complicated, yet we use it every day. Ethics is the same way. This is why philosophers in their front matter spend a great deal of time creating a VERY specific definition for what they mean by the words they use...and these definitions end up being several sentences long in many cases. This is because they understand that a 'definition' is not ONLY what it is, but also attempts to represent and describe a thing as it truly is whilst conveying it to another person. Its a difficult task that is often overlooked. And you handled that task with both tact and rigor. Fantastic content
The best chorus you can write get more and more interesting every time it comes in, don’t always put it right where it “should be”, sometimes throw in extra pieces in between that give delayed satisfaction, build to it. I wrote a song that begins with a broken down version of the chorus, then going into it right after. After that are 2 non repeated riffs back into the chorus. The lyrics are different but the patterns and riff are the same. It then goes through clean sections, solo sections, harmonized lead sections, and breakdowns before the final chorus. The final one actually changes from a triplet eighth to straight 16th notes and slightly alters the patterns in voice. Guitar layers add and then doubles in length reintroducing a theme from the broken down intro except switching from strings into guitar before the final words are the title, which haven’t actually been spoken before giving solid closure to the track and giving the choruses previous to the last a new context. Very fun and one of my favorite songs I’ve ever written
Beabadoobee's "Sorry" is a really cool example of chorus subversion. It has a really obvious Verse-Chorus setup, first section ("Thought I'd come and see you") not repeating, and next section ("And it Hurts Me...") repeating and generally acting like a chorus. There's even an entire guitar solo before any other sections come in. And then, after a quick bridge/alt-verse, a brand new section comes in and completely takes over the gravity of the song ("I'm soooooorry, I'm so-oh-horryyyyyy") and suddenly what you'd thought was the chorus is just the supporting material, a sort of prechorus, to this section that ticks off all the mental boxes for "chorus".
Also, don't be afraid to mess with chorus phrases fitting neatly into 2 or 4 bar lengths. One of my favorite choruses ever is the one to Shania Twain's Man! I Feel Like A Woman!, which not only regularly uses 5 bar phrases, but repeats it only 3 times before dropping the title line and then the intro riff needs an extra 2/4 bar to play out before we get back to the rest of the song. It's gloriously confusing, and a hell of a time.
On the topic of titles, when it comes to art, titles are often a significant piece to consider when analyzing a piece. In my opinion, titles are as much as part of a work as anything else, so it's entirely fair to include them in an analysis like this.
I would describe that as a hook rather than a chorus. I think given that the word 'chorus' in latin literally refers to singing, the part of a song called a 'chorus' needs to contain vocals. I don't know Seven Nation Army, but it's possible that it's just a song that doesn't really have a chorus.
@@aliquidcow a hook to me is an appetizer, short, sweet and doesn't overstate anything or lacks pretentiousness. A chorus on another hand is a well prepared dish, maybe not a full course entree, but it's enough to make you want seconds of it. A hook grabs your attention, a chorus captivates you.
One of my favorite inversions of the verse/chorus energy (and just one of my favorite songs ever) is "Who Are You" by The Who: high-as-fuck energy verses, very subdued choruses.
This is a truly tremendous video thank you good sir 👏. I was having a really bad day and this video has cheered me up so much for which I am extremely grateful. So much interest, so much nostalgia, and I particularly enjoyed the hot dog section. You make the most watchable music theory videos on the Internet thank you and keep it up!
Great video! I would love it if some future installment could touch on the relationship between chorus and its surroundings more, as I am inclined to believe that no great chorus can exist in a vacuum, or put another way: You can't have a satisfying, climactic payoff without previous build-up of musical tension. An interesting question would therefore be how to build up to the chorus in a natural, cohesive manner suited to the song.
One of my fave musical genres is progressive rock\metal. many prog songs have a very unorthodox structure, sometimes no parts truly repeat, or if they do they are altered. Many Prog band today are prog for progs said but in the 70s when the genre was born, the term wasn't even coined yet. They were just laying the boundaries of what they could do. I'd lovely hear a n episode on that. Song structures (?) of 20 minute classic Prog songs. Thanks.
Oldies Station by Twenty Øne Piløts is a great example. The meaning of the song is about keeping going, don't give up when it gets hard. The real release of the song only comes in the bridge, when big pianos start pounding out chords. Only then do we hear "Your favorite song was on the Oldies Station (push on through)", rewarding the listener for being patient and looking for those sweet title lyrics.
So something interesting ive noticed. I play a lot of Contemporary Christian Music and a big trend recently is a large building bridge section. I would even argue that in many cases the bridge here outshines the chorus as the most memorable part. For example in the song Holy Ground by Passion, the title comes from the chorus, but by far the most memorable part is the bridge “Chains, Fall. Fear, bow. Here, now. Jesus you change everything”. I know a lot of musicians turn off their ears when they hear about CCM but I wouldn’t mind hearing your thoughts on this! The song form you hear is basically verse chorus verse chorus (and this is where is starts picking up usually) several bridges chorus. Then it’s not uncommon to go back and forth between the bridge and chorus a few more times.
17:20 Another interesting example of this is "It's All Coming Back To Me Now" (popularized by Celine Dion). The song is formatted verse pre-chorus chorus I bridge/post-chorus chorus II (repeat all) The verses ("There were nights when the wind"..) and pre-chorus ("I finished crying...") are pretty straightforward and give you the meat of the characters and current situation. Chorus I (or chorus part 1) is a mellow recollection of former emotions in a lower register. The bridge reminisces about positive memories in contrast to the verses and then the Chorus II repeats the same elements as Chorus I an octave up with much fuller accompaniment. This follows that same buildup of energy. The only downside of this format is that it makes the combined chorus section take up the bulk of the song's runtime which effectively makes the listener forget the verses. Which is a bummer because they're lyrically the most emotionally dynamic part.
I think I knew all of this already... but I had no idea that I knew it. It's always fascinating to see things that have been floating around in your head articulated. It may have actually just helped me figure out what one of my songs needs. It's chorus/verse/chorus/verse chorus, but it always kind of felt incomplete. I think it needs a pre-chorus before the first chorus. It's frustrated me for years. It's got some of my best lines, a nice story board of action, but just always felt like it needed something else.
I have always viewed the chorus as a sort of musical "home" in songs. Rarely do you start (birth) or finish (death) at home. And you leave your home multiple times throughout life (the verses). But you know where home is to you. This also allows for the chorus to change as your home will throughout your life. It may be different but its still home
As a dubstep listener, the biggest indicator that a section is a chorus is, for me, the pre chorus. Even in a song like Virtual Riot's Neon Angel, which doesn't even have any repeated sections, you can fairly easily identify the chorus because it's the part after the build up
When developing choruses I like to pick two contrasting motifs and combine them with different repetition patterns (AABA, AABB, AAAB, etc), then I pick the one that has the right balance between repetition and contrast. Both repetition and contrast are key to memorable, catchy choruses.
Haha, as someone who has studied linguistic and cognitive categorization (including classic prototype theory), the penguin at 4:37 really does it for me. :) (If anyone don't know, a penguin is usually used as an example of a non-prototypical example of a bird because it lacks one of the most basic and common properties of "bird", namely "can fly", yet we have no problem categorizing it as a bird.)
Oasis' Live Forever is a great example of an ambiguous verse-chorus relationship. Musically it seems obvious which is the chorus, however what is unique is how what you would typically define as the verse is the section that repeats the lyrics, and the chorus sounding section changes its lyrics, the only thing that doesn't is when he sings the title.
First example of a chorus without a title I thought of was the song "Thing That Should Not Be" by Metallica. Rather than stating the title, they describe exactly what "The Thing" is and leave the title for a throwaway line at the end. It also adds to the fact that "The Thing" is the Chtulu and thus really cannot be observed (so the myth goes). Not that this is an argument against anything said, just a cool observation of a quirk within a chorus. Same could be said about the song "Rats" by Motionless in White; rather than having the word Rats in the chorus, it's about hiding, lying, acting, and "feeding ourselves lies" which culminates into a line towards the end of the song, "We creep about the floors to indulge like Rats." Again, the chorus acts as a highly descriptive musical verse that leaves the listener with an idea, that is then symbolized by a Rat later in the song. I love your videos man, just wanted to share some delving I did because of your video!
I don't know if it counts as a chorus or hook, but I've been going through David Bowie's discography in the last couple days, and I got to the song Memory of a Free Festival (which is the closer of Space Oddity) and was surprised when I didn't find almost 4 straight minutes of the same thing being repeated boring. The bit in question is "Woah, sun machine is coming down and we're gonna have a party." The fist half of the song is a pretty standard pop/rock song for that time, but the second half (starting about 3 and a half minutes in) is the aforementioned line just being repeated over and over with the instruments almost going wild in the background, then in the last minute or so, the song starts fading out and gets to a point where the instruments are a mere echo and all that's left is Bowie's voice still repeating the line. End of song. It feels as much like a chorus to me as the exclamations at the end of Cygnet Committee: "We want to believe!", "We want to live!", "I want to live!" Then again, who knows with David Bowie? A lot of his songs don't have choruses at all and quite a few subvert expectations.
The song ''For No One'' by Laura Brehm does kind of the same thing, albeit with a much shorter song, less than four minutes total. Half of the song if just the ''No one'' repeated over and over with the background instruments being the thing that changes, before they fade away at the end.
An interesting example I'd like to call out is Incubus' "Nice to Know You" where the chorus is identified in part due to a drastic reduction in lyrical complexity. Going from "Perspective pries your once-weighty eyes and it gives you wings" to "I haven't felt the way I feel today" seems odd at first because they're emphasizing their most predictable, boring lines from a poetic perspective, but from a memorability perspective it makes a lot of sense. They do a similar thing in "Wish You Were Here."
I really appreciate the nod to Despacito towards the end! It seems like as "Pop EDM" is becoming more an more prevalent, the Post Chorus is increasingly becoming the energetic climax of the song
Funny thing about "Do I Wanna Know" is that the chorus has always felt more like a bridge to me and my friends. I didn't even know the song was called that until I tried to look up "Crawling Back to You" and got corrected by google.
There are definitely musical cues to tell you what the title of the song is. It’s why the parenthetical subtitle exists. For the songs that tell you their title is one thing but are actually titled something else.
The chorus is the main identity of a song. It's the home. It's the "most whole" feeling section of a song, regardless of how loud or how much musical instruments are involved.
Damn some good examples here. Billie, Nirvana, Lizzo, P!ATD, that one hip-hop song I didn't recognize but sounded good... you got good musical taste my dude.
Sometimes I struggle identifying the chorus from other sections. I understand the difficulty with definition & categories buy I want to rely on it because I don't trust my feel for things. But getting to your Billy Ellish point is reassuring! The world is still very frustrating!! Keeping listening...
One formula where the chorus has different words every time, we can see in the song _Both Sides, Now_ . The words are similar, but they respond to the topic of the verse: clouds, then love, then Life.
IRON MAIDEN. Their choruses are often Bruce simply singing the title of the song over and over...especially in their newer stuff. The two examples that come to my head are Blood Brothers and Caught Somewhere in Time. When I think of those songs (both of which I love dearly), I think of the main riffs and the choruses being sung in Bruce's signature high range. In fact, as I write this, I am hearing "Caught someWHERE in TIIIIIIME" in my head. I think this is one of the many things that made Maiden so popular. The talented guitarists with memorable riffs and solos...the catchy choruses...the galloping basslines from Steve. They were and are truly an inspiration.
I think I have to respectfully (partially) disagree. I love Maiden but I think this a 'device' that they overuse dreadfully and has diminished several otherwise great songs. The two songs you mention are notable exceptions but more often than not I just get that "not this again" feeling when they do it. It just sounds like treading the same old ground.
The conversational direction changing is most apparent in “you shook me all night Long” by AC/DC, but if you listen to “fuck you” by CeeLo Green he switches back-and-forth in the verses as well.
I would label that section in Bury a Friend a "Refrain". Refrains are common in old church hymns that serve a very similar function to a chorus. They are short repeated phrases at the end of each verse with simple lyrics to ground the emotion, but instead of being built up in an anthem, they are laid back in a reflection. It Is Well With My Soul is a great example (unless you listen to a modern version). Also, Sweet Caroline is a great example of the function of a chorus. Nobody knows the verses, but once the chorus comes in, everybody shouts it out.
50 Cent attributed part of his success to an early mentor telling him to sing the chorus multiple ways, to practice getting good at making hooks, a technique he actually employs on a few songs, like PIMP, where he echoes the chorus with different lyrics in a bridge-like section
Some additional thoughts/corrections:
1) Thanks to Mark Sundaram from The Endless Knot for reading those definitions for me! You can check out his channel about linguistics here: ua-cam.com/users/Alliterative
2) Does Have A Cigar really have a chorus, or is it more of a tag? I don't know! It's ambiguous! I'd say that, for length reasons, it's not a very prototypical chorus, but on the other hand it does have some of the other relevant qualities, so I think it's reasonable to count it.
3) Not all choruses have repeated lyrics! My favorite example is Jackson Browne's Song For Adam, where the theme is the same and there are a few key words that recur each time but most of the actual lyrics are different.
4) The meaning of the perspective shift in Take Me To Church is fairly ambiguous, and there's multiple reasonable interpretations. I went with the simplest one because it didn't super matter to the point I was making, but there's plenty of other ways to read it.
5) Technically, only the first chorus is of Living On A Prayer from Gina's perspective, and the second is from Tommy's. I don't think it's clear who's singing the final chorus.
A hot dog is a taco
I thought I recognized that voice. :)
Interesting - I never considered that the chorus of Living On A Prayer was sung from the characters' perspective. I always took it as a general statement tossed back to the listener from the singer - We're almost there, take my/our hand and we'll make it (just like these two characters that we're singing about).
Re: 2) Great. Now we have to define the difference between a tag and a chorus. Might as well throw a refrain in there to increase the ambiguity.
From my experience, in Japanese pop and rock the lyrics rarely repeat straight up in choruses, yet Japanese choruses are still very chorus-y in most other regards.
My two favorite guides:
1. A chorus is what the audience sings back to you
2. The verse is what’s happening, the chorus is how you feel about it
Damn I never thought of it that way but that makes so much sense.Did you come up with this?
I know the second one, but that fascinating first one is new to me.
the second one made me say.. OooOOoOoO
Vulfpeck - Dean Town .... What if the audience sings bassline?
I’d add-
3. The pre-chorus poses the dilemma.
4. The bridge is a reflective statement or observation.
* If used, a final alternate chorus is what you or the character has concluded.
This is intended to build upon your perfect explanation of verse and chorus, and to be of help to songwriters.
I once wrote a song with a chorus that keeps building. Like the first time you hear it, its one line; second time its two lines; and only at the end you get the full climax chorus. I mean, it sucked hard, but I still thought it was fun idea.
Try checking out Waves of Loneliness by Jon Bellion
That's the best example of how you can build a chorus in that way while it still feels complete every time in my opinion
@@loganwheeler1769 Thanks for the recommendation. Nice song and you are right. The chorus feels different every time but is still the center point of the song
Why We Build The Wall from Hadestown also does a similar thing, fitting with the name/theme of the song
@@nachfullbarertrank5230 Hmm, although a nice song, it kind of looses the sense of a chorus. It is more of a call and response built up nicely done. My song was similar to such a thing only with verses in between.
That is very common, no? Not unusual for pop songs introduce more instruments to intensify the final/later chorus(es)
I once saw a solo concert and the guy said "you'll know this next one, so remember it has two sections, a chorus and a refrain. Now a chorus is where you all join in and the rest you refrain".
I honestly think that's the heart of what a chorus is. The bit that invites the audience to sing along, even if it's through techniques which invite it implicitly. And our conventions and subversion of those conventions evolves out of that history.
Probably the simplest argument to make, too. It's right there in the name: chorus.
Does that make Bohemian Rhapsody one big chorus?
@@drewburchett2824 They way I hear it, Stairway to Heaven and Bohemian Rhapsody had to share one chorus between the two songs. So they cut it into pieces and to this day no one will admit where they put them.
@@drewburchett2824 YES
@@beatrixwickson8477 Would you mind elaborating on that? For some reason, I'm not fully getting what you mean by that.
Another cool description to add to the prototypes:
Verse: the story of the song
Chorus: the emotion of the song
I always thought it would be fun to try and get the chorus to form another part of the narrative, Which makes sense being repeated after each verse, Although of course it's not the easiest thing to do.
So by being placed between two verses, a chorus is, indeed, a sandwich.
Some songs actually _start_ on the chorus, though. "Skye Boat Song" and "Live Forever" come to mind as examples.
@@reillywalker195 i think it depends how the song ends. if the song starts on a verse but ends on a chorus, or vice versa, its not a sandwich. if is starts and ends with the chorus its a sandwich. same thing if it starts and ends with a verse.
Here's the thing about song-writing when it comes to the verse vs the chorus (or hook):
It doesn't matter what I say
So long as I sing with inflection
That makes you feel I'll convey
Some inner truth or vast reflection
But I've said nothing so far
And I can keep it up for as long as it takes
And it don't matter who you are
If I'm doing my job, it's your resolve that breaks
Because the hook brings you back
I ain't tellin' you no lie
The hook brings you back
On that you can rely.
😉
I find it interesting, as someone who listens to a lot of Japanese music (especially Vocaloid), that there seems to be less need to exactly repeat lyrics in a chorus in other languages. A lot of my favorite songs in Japanese share some lyrics across choruses, and may repeat a particular chorus lyrically, but will have at least slightly altered lyrics between choruses. How different usually seems to depend on if there's a mood shift, they want to draw attention to something different, or, most drastically, if they are telling a story. Not that there aren't Japanese examples of songs where the lyrics stay the same across all choruses, but I find it much easier to find examples where the lyrics change in Japanese songs than English ones.
What are some of your favorites?
Yeah, the common trope in popular Japanese music is basically to have an A chorus and a B chorus, returning to the A chorus the third time around for an ABA structure (often with minor changes though)
The melody remains the same, and the lyrics often retain a short lyrical hook, but other than that the lyrics of the second chorus are usually more an expansion of the first one than a repetition
@@kimdavis2433 Thats interesting. I remember the term "pre-chorus." Theres so much to learn!! Thank you.
@@kimdavis2433 me with 0 song writing theory found myself doing this because i wanted to build off of the first chorus yea
Oh wow I had no idea, I've always personally written my music that way. It takes me so long to write a song that I get incredibly tied of it and my brain tells me to change the lyrics and certain notes each chorus because it adds something slightly new while still holding form
I love the obscure “you either get it or you don’t” references you sometimes use in your drawings. “Significant changes” was a particular favourite here.
Also, Metallica's "Unforgiven" inverts the loud/soft and high register/low register in the verse and chorus.
And they did this as a counter to their own formula of clean verse heavy chorus they became know for (One, Welcome Home et al). Which they apparently borrowed from Remember Tomorrow by Iron Maiden.
i was thinking of the same song when he brought that up!
Also "Fade to Black" has a chorus with no lyrics while the verses have lyrics,
I love that the take-away is the same for writing a lot of music in general. Find what you want to do, find out how its usually done, and strike a balance between what is done and what you need. You need to learn the rules first to break them properly
I love the chorus in Bohemian Rhapsody.
Flawless
The chorus in Sound of Silence is even better
Which bit is that!?
@@kathybramley5609 ‘MAMA,didn’t mean to make you cry,’ that part’. No other would fit as a chorus
@@badgasaurus4211 Krieghandt was joking. Bohemian Rhapsody doesn’t have a chorus.
Great! Another excellent video. Thanks for posting! P.S I got a shoutout at the end! Happy to support such an amazing channel!
I heard "Warren Huart" at the end and did a double take.
@@EmyrDerfel haha yes!! Indeed
@@EmyrDerfel you're not the only one
I'm not sure how to feel about the cross referencing between my favorite UA-cam channels. The community aspect is awesome, and yet it's a little odd at the same time. Mostly, I'm happy to see a successful channel I enjoy supporting one of my favorites. Thanks Warren!
@@chiju haha thanks
“I don’t care whether a hot dog is a sandwich”
*proceeds to define the hot dog debate as if it were obvious that hot dogs aren’t sandwiches*
Haha! I blanked out on the video for about the next two minutes as I mulled over the debate in my head. I landed on it's a sandwich if when in its natural state it can lie flat on a plate with zero movement and no lean. Perhaps 12tone should break down the structure of sandwich theory.
@@tb5535 my personal stance is that "two pieces of bread with stuff between them" is sufficient. Connectivity doesn't matter, but there is a distinction I can come at from two directions that, at the moment, seem equally plausible.
The first is familiarity-based: it's a sandwich if the bread component is something the speaker has been culturally trained to think is sandwich bread. For me, that's slices from a loaf, rolls or bagels cut in half (and, sadly, donuts as an extension of bagels), hot dog and hamburger buns, crackers, and matzah.
The second is geometric: it's a sandwich if it's basically flat with bread above and below. So all the things I mentioned above count (and we can include non-food sandwiches that are just kinda symmetrical stacks of things), and tall sandwiches are peripheral, and it also excludes tacos, open-faced melts, sausage rolls, and pizza slices folded in half.
I'm also pretty sure the sandwich is a European/American invention, and that sandwiches in other cultures (like the banh mi) are a legacy of colonialism and imperialism. (Feel free to correct me if that's not true.) So that's worth accounting for in your definition.
It is still true that, if a well-meaning alien were to ask me to make sweeping generalizations about Earth food, I would tell them we're known for "bread around things, accounting for regional nuances in all three of those terms." That's the superclass to which sandwiches, tacos, melts, pies, stuffed shells, and gyoza all belong. (I should go have breakfast, shouldn't I?)
@@WizardOfDocs There's a Radiohead song in there somewhere.
@@tb5535 I'm not familiar enough with Radiohead to see where you're going with that. Care to elaborate?
@Calm Mango My favorite argument to use in these hypothetical arguments is to say “if hotdogs were sandwiches then people would call them sandwiches.”
i would love to see more about different sections of songs. like solos, breakdowns and bridges.
"how to write a good drum solo" when
I second the request for a breakdown vid. There isn't nearly enough good info out there.
Agreed. Also how an instrumental break/solo can advance the song's narrative.
"Primadonna" by Marina and the Diamonds is a good example of an anti-chorus with a more subdued chorus with the verses acting as the expulsion of sonic energy
I love that I never know entirely what to expect in the more theory-heavy videos. Come for the music theory, stay for the extended section on the epistemological failures of definitions. ^_^
And dislike because he refuses to tell us if a hot dog is a sandwich or not. WHAT ARE YOU HIDING 12TONE!?
Japanese pop and rock music changes the lyrics in the chorus a lot, usually having a 1st chorus, 2nd chorus, and then coming back to both in a row at the end of the song. They use the same melody but build on the feelings in the chorus. For example, Ayumi Hamasaki’s “Teddy Bear” used the first chorus to build up the story the man is telling her, and the second used the same melody, but more emotional, to deliver the payoff of that story. Jupiter’s “Nostalgie,” one of my absolute favorite songs, used a second chorus to differentiate between the singer’s feelings at the time, talking about the future, then the second chorus starts off with “Now…” repeating the same idea but framing it as a sense that what happened before will help him overcome his darkness now. By the way, I recommend both songs as beautiful, heartbreaking songs that have a lot of power and feeling, even if you don’t speak Japanese ☺️
Someone else who does this a lot is Stephen Sondheim. He's working with narrative and character functions, of course, so the changing lyric will mark changes in the story. But he's usually pretty clear about where the chorus is. (He even calls it a "release.") But then I remembered Sweeny Todd and the song "Nothing's Going to Harm You." Toby sings this to Mrs. Lovett (RIP Angela Lansbury) a couple of times in sweet innocence. Suddenly *she* sings the chorus back to him--and now it's the accompanying chords that change, skewing a song of innocence into something far more devious! But it's still the chorus, the very same words and melody. Only we hear her evil... I guess the word would be prevarication. Amazing!
That you drew a platypus to describe something that is "part of the group but not a good example of it" is probably my favorite thing I've seen on any of your videos. Brilliant
Sooo much information there!!
As a non native english speaker I found out that seeing your videos at 0,75 speeds is the perfect speed to get at least most part of the great information you have put on your videos.
Thank you!
Great video! Living on a Prayer is my go-to example for chorusses as well so you using it made me smile. I never realized that chorusses tend to have a tonic function, always guessed they worked as dominant, bringing me back to a tonic verse, like the turn-around in a blues song, just extended. No wonder I never wrote a good pop song :)
"If the House Burns Down Tonight" by Switchfoot is a great example of a chorus that doesn't repeat verbatim. Each time the chorus presents as a call and response - the call changes each time but the response repeats.
Yes!! The guys in Switchfoot are master songwriters
Yes! Switchfoot don't get talked about enough but they are amazing, and so is that song!
"This is Music" by The Verve contains _few_ lyrical repetitions in its choruses, with only a few shared phrases. The choruses' last lines are similar but not exactly the same, while their middling lines are all completely different. They still feel like choruses with their shared melody and harmony distinct from the rest of the song, but lyrically they differ significantly apart from their first lines.
"Everybody Wants to Rule the World" by Tears For Fears does something similar. It contains no lyrical repetitions within its choruses beyond the title of the song, but you can still recognize each chorus as a chorus because of the elements that _are_ consistent between them. All five choruses use the same lyrical structure and vocal melody, the same chord progression distinct from that of the verses, and the same final lyrics.
Props on the verve example. Ace band
Wait the chorus of "Everybody Wants To Rule The World" is more than just the title line???
15:18 I think a better way to put this is that the title comes from the chorus. Usually when writing song lyrics or poems, you don't have a title from the start, and instead decide the title after writing it. Typically those repeated phrases that become the title are important (often metaphors but not always) phrases to the meaning of the song, which is why they're repeated.
They can be, for sure. I wrote a tune where I used that as the name, but a friend of mine who gave me some feedback on the song suggested reverting to the first line of the verse and then bring that back thematically in the last verse, which ended up better.
Also, if your chorus is doing a good job on the "memorability" function of a chorus, the audience will call it something in the chorus _anyway_. Might as well mean into that instead of having to re-title. (e.g. "Escape", which became "Escape (the Pina Colada song)" because everyone just called it "The Pina Colada Song".)
*Lean into
Darn autocorrupt.
“Living On A Prayer” was the example that was in my head for a clearly defined chorus. Great minds and whatnot, I guess
Disappointed that you didn't use "The Hook" by Blues Traveler in this analysis. It'd have been very meta.
That one could be a whole series of videos... love that song.
Glad I found this comment before I said the same thing. I would like an analysis on this song in general.
Lionel Richie’s Hello often gets lumped into the “Songs Without a Chorus” list because because the “hello, is it me you’re looking for?” is the last line of the verse and the lift section changes from the first time it is sung to the second, but that repeats the third time (and fourth in the album version off memory). Musically, THAT is the chorus. That is the fucking hook.
Good example. LR's most famous music sounds dated due to the '80s keyboards and drum machines, but strip those down and the songs are really well-written.
@ghost mall I would say that the first chorus of that song is simply omitted. I'm hearing it as verse - pre-chorus (- missing chorus) - verse - pre-chorus - chorus. You are expecting a chorus after the pre-chorus, but it simply doesn't come - the first chorus is replaced by a short instrumental interlude. The outro of the song has the function of a chorus, even though it only appears once in the song. But also, while it only appears once, it's still repeated so many times that it clearly feels like a chorus. And it's also the catchy part of the song.
@@MaggaraMarine on their official UA-cam channel posting of the song they offer up only the lyrics to the chorus in their video notes. Guess what they are calling the chorus?
@@Iwasbornin74 Yeah. I think that's the only part in the song that feels like a chorus. (And that part does definitely feel like a chorus.)
But even though I agree with it, I have to say that the official video calling it a chorus doesn't really prove it is one. These labels are somewhat subjective, and Don't Stop Believing is a good example of a song that doesn't really follow the "textbook definition" of a chorus. Just because the artist decides to call the section a chorus doesn't necessarily make it one.
But good to know that I agree with the "official video".
This is my favorite 12Tone video so far. LOVE THIS DEEP DIVE. Choruses are hard for me right now.
I have an idea without any actual proof, that basically choruses were created for audience to sing along. Like in sea shanty or in songs for children, question-answer kinda thing. And all old songs with somewhat modern structure that i can remember are guitar-campfire kinda songs, i dont know how to explain better, but verses are typically only for the guy with the guitar, and choruses are for whole croud. And maybe back vocals today are kinda representing croud singing along to the chorus? So yea, chorus is the part of song to sing along.
Also i noticed a lot that chorus summarises whle song, and you can pretty much understand what song is about from chorus alone
Good points!
Of course, there have got to be songs that completely defy it all, but generally yes!
The verses tell the stories, the choruses highlight the moral of the song.
"lack some abstract sense of definitive sandwichness" is my new favorite sentence thank you
I think the most important simple to explain point that this video is missing is a concept in all art: contrast. A chorus is probably the focal point of the song, and you get people to notice the focal point with contrast. All examples you give are an example of contrast, even the cases like Billie Eilish's Bury a Friend, or Where Is My Mind, they don't necessarily need to be subverting expectations (though they do, they would still likely work in a vacuum where no other human had ever heard another song) all they're doing is giving a contrasting section of the song that draws attention from the listener.
You notice when instruments cut out because it's different, you notice when the energy lowers because it's different, similarly you notice when the energy elevates, when background singers come in, when there are more instruments, more notes, less notes, etc... all because it's different. That's contrast, a fundamental aspect of almost all art, though my relationship with it is primarily from the visual arts.
well if you are playing a song but don't really know it note for note you throw in a little of the chorus your hook to get away with it..improvising ...
I think something to include here are songs that have a “build” chorus into a high energy instrumental “drop.”
True, common trope in electronic dance music especially
This video is everything I love about your channel. Please keep the semantic philosophy bits coming lmao
INSANELY good video! I liked this to remember to come back to it later while I write. So many good ideas and points from music theory all distilled perfectly into a (relatively) quick 20 minutes. Thank you for this
Interesting example of titles. The song we know as Fly Me to the Moon was originally titled In Other Words. The phrase "in other words" appears in it 7 times, the phrase "fly me to the Moon" only appears once. It seems we ought to call it by its original title, but the opening line is so memorable that by the time Sinatra recorded it, 10 years after it was first recorded by a cabaret singer called Kaye Ballard, Peggy Lee had already conviced the songwriter to change the name officially, and the famous Sinatra/Basie version was listed as Fly Me To The Moon (In Other Words), and later versions dropped the old title altogether.
I've just watched your video posted 4 years ago then I was watching this and mind blown! Your voice has changed so much.
When you go into our obsession with definition you reach a level of philosophy that excited my intellectual mind. I come for music talk, so I consider this a juicy bonus. Thank you for all of your videos I've watched and all of them I haven't watched yet, even the ones you haven't made yet. Keep on rocking
I always felt, from a songwriting prospective, that the chorus is suppose to be the most identifiable part of the song. Not only does it usually reuse the same lyrics, but it also feels like a part of the song that belongs to the audience. I never felt it was something that could be simply defined, but felt
Really like the variety of songs you used here
This may well be one of your best videos yet! I'm currently stuck trying to finish a composition and 12:00 made me realize that a section I thought was a verse, was actually an intro/prechorus bc what comes after it definitely sounds like "the thing" on which the song should end. So, thanks on this new perspective you've given me!
For me the perfect chorus is "more than a feeling" by Boston
Morgaan Freeeeeman
The secret is not write a chorus and do edm and make a fire drop
then the chorus is the pre-chorus :relieved:
drops are basically choruses without lyrics
@@xezmakorewarriah ehh I'd say they are functionally different. You can go back to the chorus as often as you want, but a drop has to be used sparingly or else it loses it's impact.
The real secret is edm sucks ass
A chorus is the song’s anchor. The fine details regarding how that anchor is crafted isn’t as important as it being a defined section of song that the other parts can latch onto in order to establish the song’s identity. Change the pitch, keys, lyrics, whatever… so long as you’ve maintained some kind of theme to be shared among chorus A, B, and/or C, etc you’re doing it right. IMO making subtle changes between different chorus’ in the same song while maintaining each section’s identity as “the chorus” is a lot of fun and makes a song more interesting to listen to.
The amount of work that is put into these videos just blows my mind. I appreciate the content and, of course, the work that goes into it.
As a philosopher, I agree (and am glad you included) a brief explanation about what a "definition" is, and what it is NOT.
The philosophy of language is unique because it is very complicated, yet we use it every day.
Ethics is the same way.
This is why philosophers in their front matter spend a great deal of time creating a VERY specific definition for what they mean by the words they use...and these definitions end up being several sentences long in many cases.
This is because they understand that a 'definition' is not ONLY what it is, but also attempts to represent and describe a thing as it truly is whilst conveying it to another person.
Its a difficult task that is often overlooked. And you handled that task with both tact and rigor.
Fantastic content
The best chorus you can write get more and more interesting every time it comes in, don’t always put it right where it “should be”, sometimes throw in extra pieces in between that give delayed satisfaction, build to it.
I wrote a song that begins with a broken down version of the chorus, then going into it right after. After that are 2 non repeated riffs back into the chorus. The lyrics are different but the patterns and riff are the same. It then goes through clean sections, solo sections, harmonized lead sections, and breakdowns before the final chorus. The final one actually changes from a triplet eighth to straight 16th notes and slightly alters the patterns in voice. Guitar layers add and then doubles in length reintroducing a theme from the broken down intro except switching from strings into guitar before the final words are the title, which haven’t actually been spoken before giving solid closure to the track and giving the choruses previous to the last a new context. Very fun and one of my favorite songs I’ve ever written
No, this exploration was not pointless! What a very well-done video! Subscribed
Beabadoobee's "Sorry" is a really cool example of chorus subversion.
It has a really obvious Verse-Chorus setup, first section ("Thought I'd come and see you") not repeating, and next section ("And it Hurts Me...") repeating and generally acting like a chorus. There's even an entire guitar solo before any other sections come in. And then, after a quick bridge/alt-verse, a brand new section comes in and completely takes over the gravity of the song ("I'm soooooorry, I'm so-oh-horryyyyyy") and suddenly what you'd thought was the chorus is just the supporting material, a sort of prechorus, to this section that ticks off all the mental boxes for "chorus".
It's my understanding that "the Hook brings you baahaaaack."
You ain't tellin' us no liies.
on that, you can rely, ehhehehehe
Are you telling me lies?
Also, don't be afraid to mess with chorus phrases fitting neatly into 2 or 4 bar lengths. One of my favorite choruses ever is the one to Shania Twain's Man! I Feel Like A Woman!, which not only regularly uses 5 bar phrases, but repeats it only 3 times before dropping the title line and then the intro riff needs an extra 2/4 bar to play out before we get back to the rest of the song. It's gloriously confusing, and a hell of a time.
I personally admire songs with a clickbait opening, like Toxic or Für Elise
Bruh said clickbait opening 🤣😭 I know exactly what you meant tho. Especially your examples. But I’m crying at how you worded it😂😂
Fact that toxic and fur elise got grouped together was great
This comment needs more likes lol!
What's clickbait about Für Elise?
@@leandrog2785 Don’t act like the second part is nearly as interesting as the begging. 😂
Man, I liked this video a lot! Explaining the chorus in all its diversity, giving advice without being prescriptive, to my eyes it is a success!
On the topic of titles, when it comes to art, titles are often a significant piece to consider when analyzing a piece. In my opinion, titles are as much as part of a work as anything else, so it's entirely fair to include them in an analysis like this.
Then you have a song like seven nation army where the “chorus” has no words
I would describe that as a hook rather than a chorus. I think given that the word 'chorus' in latin literally refers to singing, the part of a song called a 'chorus' needs to contain vocals. I don't know Seven Nation Army, but it's possible that it's just a song that doesn't really have a chorus.
kind of similar to how some edm songs with vocals will drop and cut them out
@@aliquidcow a hook to me is an appetizer, short, sweet and doesn't overstate anything or lacks pretentiousness. A chorus on another hand is a well prepared dish, maybe not a full course entree, but it's enough to make you want seconds of it. A hook grabs your attention, a chorus captivates you.
One of my favorite inversions of the verse/chorus energy (and just one of my favorite songs ever) is "Who Are You" by The Who: high-as-fuck energy verses, very subdued choruses.
This is a truly tremendous video thank you good sir 👏. I was having a really bad day and this video has cheered me up so much for which I am extremely grateful. So much interest, so much nostalgia, and I particularly enjoyed the hot dog section. You make the most watchable music theory videos on the Internet thank you and keep it up!
Great video! I would love it if some future installment could touch on the relationship between chorus and its surroundings more, as I am inclined to believe that no great chorus can exist in a vacuum, or put another way: You can't have a satisfying, climactic payoff without previous build-up of musical tension. An interesting question would therefore be how to build up to the chorus in a natural, cohesive manner suited to the song.
One of my fave musical genres is progressive rock\metal. many prog songs have a very unorthodox structure, sometimes no parts truly repeat, or if they do they are altered.
Many Prog band today are prog for progs said but in the 70s when the genre was born, the term wasn't even coined yet. They were just laying the boundaries of what they could do.
I'd lovely hear a n episode on that. Song structures (?) of 20 minute classic Prog songs. Thanks.
The point of view part was something I'd never picked up on and it blew my mind. Great take, as always!
Advance frame by frame at 5:04 when the sheet changes. Masterpiece.
I see the page that looks like static but what are you seeing specifically that I'm not getting?
@@BurnMoneyBeats put it on 0,25 speedy an spam the pause/unpause button. He means the 1 Frame picture between the two sheets
@@lenyu4473 you mean the page that looks like white noise? Or......static.
This is a very interesting look at Choruses and section function in general. Great job! It was my Friday motivation!
Your teaching method is incredible!
I hope to learn where to apply the chorus & how different levels of complexity choruses should be treated in that regard
Great video. The "anti-chorus" blew my mind but makes complete sense.
Oldies Station by Twenty Øne Piløts is a great example. The meaning of the song is about keeping going, don't give up when it gets hard. The real release of the song only comes in the bridge, when big pianos start pounding out chords. Only then do we hear "Your favorite song was on the Oldies Station (push on through)", rewarding the listener for being patient and looking for those sweet title lyrics.
So something interesting ive noticed. I play a lot of Contemporary Christian Music and a big trend recently is a large building bridge section. I would even argue that in many cases the bridge here outshines the chorus as the most memorable part. For example in the song Holy Ground by Passion, the title comes from the chorus, but by far the most memorable part is the bridge “Chains, Fall. Fear, bow. Here, now. Jesus you change everything”. I know a lot of musicians turn off their ears when they hear about CCM but I wouldn’t mind hearing your thoughts on this! The song form you hear is basically verse chorus verse chorus (and this is where is starts picking up usually) several bridges chorus. Then it’s not uncommon to go back and forth between the bridge and chorus a few more times.
Nicely done, putting this together with a coherent structure and memorable examples - ty for posting!
17:20
Another interesting example of this is "It's All Coming Back To Me Now" (popularized by Celine Dion).
The song is formatted
verse
pre-chorus
chorus I
bridge/post-chorus
chorus II
(repeat all)
The verses ("There were nights when the wind"..) and pre-chorus ("I finished crying...") are pretty straightforward and give you the meat of the characters and current situation.
Chorus I (or chorus part 1) is a mellow recollection of former emotions in a lower register. The bridge reminisces about positive memories in contrast to the verses and then the Chorus II repeats the same elements as Chorus I an octave up with much fuller accompaniment. This follows that same buildup of energy.
The only downside of this format is that it makes the combined chorus section take up the bulk of the song's runtime which effectively makes the listener forget the verses. Which is a bummer because they're lyrically the most emotionally dynamic part.
I think I knew all of this already... but I had no idea that I knew it. It's always fascinating to see things that have been floating around in your head articulated.
It may have actually just helped me figure out what one of my songs needs. It's chorus/verse/chorus/verse chorus, but it always kind of felt incomplete. I think it needs a pre-chorus before the first chorus. It's frustrated me for years. It's got some of my best lines, a nice story board of action, but just always felt like it needed something else.
Ah yes, the Bon Jovi, ELectric guitar, and Tomato, the truest musical embodiment of the quality of sandwichness.
Tom drum?
A music journo here (Australia) used to always refer to a ‘Bon Jovi and Pineapple pizza’. I don’t know why that’s funny but it is.
I have always viewed the chorus as a sort of musical "home" in songs.
Rarely do you start (birth) or finish (death) at home. And you leave your home multiple times throughout life (the verses). But you know where home is to you.
This also allows for the chorus to change as your home will throughout your life. It may be different but its still home
Mentions the chorus being "under pressure"
Draws ice cube
I see what you did there
As a dubstep listener, the biggest indicator that a section is a chorus is, for me, the pre chorus. Even in a song like Virtual Riot's Neon Angel, which doesn't even have any repeated sections, you can fairly easily identify the chorus because it's the part after the build up
When developing choruses I like to pick two contrasting motifs and combine them with different repetition patterns (AABA, AABB, AAAB, etc), then I pick the one that has the right balance between repetition and contrast. Both repetition and contrast are key to memorable, catchy choruses.
intentionality is the secret to amazing song writing PERIOD
Haha, as someone who has studied linguistic and cognitive categorization (including classic prototype theory), the penguin at 4:37 really does it for me. :)
(If anyone don't know, a penguin is usually used as an example of a non-prototypical example of a bird because it lacks one of the most basic and common properties of "bird", namely "can fly", yet we have no problem categorizing it as a bird.)
Same with the platypus - the most "out there" member of the category of "mammal".
I saw the thumbnail and thought this was surely going to be a video about Blues Traveler’s “Hook”.
Oasis' Live Forever is a great example of an ambiguous verse-chorus relationship. Musically it seems obvious which is the chorus, however what is unique is how what you would typically define as the verse is the section that repeats the lyrics, and the chorus sounding section changes its lyrics, the only thing that doesn't is when he sings the title.
"By doing something different"
Draws Monty Python foot
Speaking of interesting dynamic changes in choruses, I think a breakdown of Metallica's Unforgiven (the first one) would be amazing
First example of a chorus without a title I thought of was the song "Thing That Should Not Be" by Metallica. Rather than stating the title, they describe exactly what "The Thing" is and leave the title for a throwaway line at the end. It also adds to the fact that "The Thing" is the Chtulu and thus really cannot be observed (so the myth goes). Not that this is an argument against anything said, just a cool observation of a quirk within a chorus. Same could be said about the song "Rats" by Motionless in White; rather than having the word Rats in the chorus, it's about hiding, lying, acting, and "feeding ourselves lies" which culminates into a line towards the end of the song, "We creep about the floors to indulge like Rats." Again, the chorus acts as a highly descriptive musical verse that leaves the listener with an idea, that is then symbolized by a Rat later in the song. I love your videos man, just wanted to share some delving I did because of your video!
I don't know if it counts as a chorus or hook, but I've been going through David Bowie's discography in the last couple days, and I got to the song Memory of a Free Festival (which is the closer of Space Oddity) and was surprised when I didn't find almost 4 straight minutes of the same thing being repeated boring. The bit in question is "Woah, sun machine is coming down and we're gonna have a party."
The fist half of the song is a pretty standard pop/rock song for that time, but the second half (starting about 3 and a half minutes in) is the aforementioned line just being repeated over and over with the instruments almost going wild in the background, then in the last minute or so, the song starts fading out and gets to a point where the instruments are a mere echo and all that's left is Bowie's voice still repeating the line. End of song.
It feels as much like a chorus to me as the exclamations at the end of Cygnet Committee: "We want to believe!", "We want to live!", "I want to live!"
Then again, who knows with David Bowie? A lot of his songs don't have choruses at all and quite a few subvert expectations.
The song ''For No One'' by Laura Brehm does kind of the same thing, albeit with a much shorter song, less than four minutes total. Half of the song if just the ''No one'' repeated over and over with the background instruments being the thing that changes, before they fade away at the end.
An interesting example I'd like to call out is Incubus' "Nice to Know You" where the chorus is identified in part due to a drastic reduction in lyrical complexity. Going from "Perspective pries your once-weighty eyes and it gives you wings" to "I haven't felt the way I feel today" seems odd at first because they're emphasizing their most predictable, boring lines from a poetic perspective, but from a memorability perspective it makes a lot of sense. They do a similar thing in "Wish You Were Here."
I really appreciate the nod to Despacito towards the end! It seems like as "Pop EDM" is becoming more an more prevalent, the Post Chorus is increasingly becoming the energetic climax of the song
Funny thing about "Do I Wanna Know" is that the chorus has always felt more like a bridge to me and my friends. I didn't even know the song was called that until I tried to look up "Crawling Back to You" and got corrected by google.
Can we take a moment and just point out how absolutely hard these videos must be to make? Wow
I love the the examples you gave
There are definitely musical cues to tell you what the title of the song is. It’s why the parenthetical subtitle exists. For the songs that tell you their title is one thing but are actually titled something else.
Watching these videos makes me love music even more. I wish I studied music theory in high school
The chorus is the main identity of a song.
It's the home. It's the "most whole" feeling section of a song, regardless of how loud or how much musical instruments are involved.
Damn some good examples here. Billie, Nirvana, Lizzo, P!ATD, that one hip-hop song I didn't recognize but sounded good... you got good musical taste my dude.
Sometimes I struggle identifying the chorus from other sections. I understand the difficulty with definition & categories buy I want to rely on it because I don't trust my feel for things. But getting to your Billy Ellish point is reassuring! The world is still very frustrating!! Keeping listening...
A traditional chorus is mostly a thing in older songs. Newer song don’t seem to have a chorus.
@@dustmybroom288 What? Newer songs practically smack you over the head with choruses these days.
One formula where the chorus has different words every time, we can see in the song _Both Sides, Now_ . The words are similar, but they respond to the topic of the verse: clouds, then love, then Life.
IRON MAIDEN.
Their choruses are often Bruce simply singing the title of the song over and over...especially in their newer stuff. The two examples that come to my head are
Blood Brothers and Caught Somewhere in Time.
When I think of those songs (both of which I love dearly), I think of the main riffs and the choruses being sung in Bruce's signature high range.
In fact, as I write this, I am hearing "Caught someWHERE in TIIIIIIME"
in my head.
I think this is one of the many things that made Maiden so popular. The talented guitarists with memorable riffs and solos...the catchy choruses...the galloping basslines from Steve.
They were and are truly an inspiration.
CAN I PLAY WITH MADNESS??
I think I have to respectfully (partially) disagree. I love Maiden but I think this a 'device' that they overuse dreadfully and has diminished several otherwise great songs. The two songs you mention are notable exceptions but more often than not I just get that "not this again" feeling when they do it. It just sounds like treading the same old ground.
12:31 One example that comes to mind is Megadeth's "Washington is Next" where the chorus has slightly different lyrics after each verse.
The conversational direction changing is most apparent in “you shook me all night Long” by AC/DC, but if you listen to “fuck you” by CeeLo Green he switches back-and-forth in the verses as well.
I would label that section in Bury a Friend a "Refrain". Refrains are common in old church hymns that serve a very similar function to a chorus. They are short repeated phrases at the end of each verse with simple lyrics to ground the emotion, but instead of being built up in an anthem, they are laid back in a reflection. It Is Well With My Soul is a great example (unless you listen to a modern version). Also, Sweet Caroline is a great example of the function of a chorus. Nobody knows the verses, but once the chorus comes in, everybody shouts it out.
4:32
12tone - "I don't care. I have no horse in this race. Please don't tell me your opinions."
me - "A HOT DOG IS A TACO!"
14:51 - The MAJOR violator here is Phil Collins' "Something Happen on the way to Heaven". The title is only sung *once* in the *2nd verse*!
50 Cent attributed part of his success to an early mentor telling him to sing the chorus multiple ways, to practice getting good at making hooks, a technique he actually employs on a few songs, like PIMP, where he echoes the chorus with different lyrics in a bridge-like section