Why *Those* Four Chords Are Everywhere
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 чер 2024
- I don't care what anyone says, these four chords are great.
Get 40% off CuriosityStream and a free Nebula account: www.curiositystream.com/12tone and use promo code "12tone"
I'm sure you've all seen the Axis of Awesome video where they show that every hit song of the last few decades uses this one four-chord progression. For a lot of people, this looked like proof that pop music is stale and unoriginal, but as a music theorist, I have a slightly different take. If so many songs are using this same progression, then the obvious question to me is... why? Clearly there's something great about these chords, but what is it, and why do so many artists in so many genres feel drawn to them? What makes them so great?
Patricia's video: • How to Write Four Chor...
My chord-loop video: • My Brand-New Take On F...
Patreon: / 12tonevideos
Merch: standard.tv/12tone
Discord: / discord
Mailing List: eepurl.com/bCTDaj
Facebook: / 12tonevideos
Twitter: / 12tonevideos
Twitch: / 12tonevideos
Instagram: / 12tonevideos
Email: 12tonevideos@gmail.com
Last: • Understanding Toxic
Script: tinyurl.com/y2oxr6va
Huge thanks to our Elephant of the Month Club members:
Susan Jones
Jill Jones
Duck
Howard Levine
Ron Jones
Brian Etheredge
Khristofor Saraga
Paul Ward
Len Lanphar
Ken Arnold
Elaine Pratt
William (Bill) Boston
Chris Prentice
Jack Carlson
Christopher Lucas
Andrew Beals
Dov Zazkis
Hendrik Payer
Thomas Morley
Jacob Helwig
Davis Sprague
Darius Rudominer
Alex Knauth
Braum Meakes
Hendrik Stüwe
Dan Bonelli
Kevin Boyce
Allyson
Luke
Kevin Wilamowski
Nicholas Lennox
And thanks as well to Henry Reich, Gabi Ghita, Owen Campbell-Moore, Gene Lushtak, Eugene Bulkin, Logan Jones, Oliver, Anna Work, Bina Thiessen, Adam Neely, nico, Rick Lees, Dave Mayer, Paul Quine, CodenaCrow, Nikolay Semyonov, Arnas, Caroline Simpson, Favrion The Man, Michael Alan Dorman, Dmitry Jemerov, Michael McCormick, Blake Boyd, Luke Rihn, Charles Gaskell, Ian Seymour, Trevor, Tom Evans, Elliot Jay O'Neill, Max Wanderman, Chris Borland, Alex Atanasyan, Elliot Burke, JH, Tim S., Elias Simon, David Conrad, Jerry D. Brown, Chris Chapin, Lamadesbois, Ohad Lutzky, Jake Lizzio, James A. Thornton, Benjamin Cooper, Ken Bauso, Brian Dinger, Todd Davidson, Stefan Strohmaier, Shadow Kat, Adam Wurstmann, Kelsey Freese, Angela Flierman, Richard T. Anderson, Kevin Johnson, Peter Leventis, Ryan, Matthew Kallend, Rodrigo Roman, Jeremy Zolner, Patrick Callier, Danny, Francois LaPlante, Volker Wegert, Joshua Gleitze, Britt Ratliff, ml cohen, Darzzr, Charles Hill, Alexey Fedotov, Joshua La Macchia, Alex Keeny, Emilio Assteves, Valentin Lupachev, John Bejarano, Aaron Epstein, Blake White, Phillip N, Chris Connett, Scott Frazer, Niko Albertus, Luke Wever, Gary Butterfield, Kenneth Kousen, James, h2g2guy, W. Dennis Sorrell, Steve Brand, Rene Miklas, Connor Shannon, Melvin Martis, max thomas, Professor Elliot, Jozef Paffen, Jamie Price, Red Uncle, Doug Nottingham, Roming 22, Nicholas Wolf, Scott Howarth, Andrew Engel, Robert Beach, ZagOnEm, Peter Brinkman, Thomas McCarthy-Ward, Tuna, Hexa Midine, Mathew Wolak, T, Lincoln Mendell, Vincent Engler, Sam Rezek, Matt McKegg, Beth Martyn, Lucas Augusto, Marcus Doyle, Caitlin Olsen, Naomi Ostriker, Alex Mole, NoticeMK, Anna, Evan Satinsky, James Little, RaptorCat, Kaisai Morihito, Jigglypuffer, leftaroundabout, Jens Schäfer, Mikely Whiplash, room34, Austin Amberg, Francisco Rodrigues, Elizabeth, Michael Tsuk, Betsy, Stephen Jones, Tonya Custis, Mike Lin, Dave Shapiro, Jacopo Cascioli, David Van der Linden, Carter Stoddard, ThoraSTooth, Robert McIntosh, Brandon Legawiec, Brx, Fernando Gonzalez, CoryC, Rafael Martinez Salas, Walther, Jim Hayes, Evgeni Kunev, Graeme Lewis, Jake Sand, Kayla Sparks, Max Glass, Alon Kellner, Özgür Kesim, Rob Hardy, Patrick Chieppe, Eric Stark, Jon Prudhomme, David Haughn, Gordon Dell, Aditya Baradwaj, Matt Ivaliotes, Yuval Filmus, Byron DeLaBarre, Matty Crocker, anemamata, Brian Miller, Lee-orr Orbach, Eric Plume, Kevin Pierce, Jon Hancock, Richard Goldberg, Caleb Meyer, Juan Madrigal, Jason Peterson, Peggy Youell, EJ Hambleton, Mark Henning, Byron Williams, Symmetry, Jos Mulder, Daryl Banttari, Tarragon Eames, J.T. Vandenbree, David Taylor, John Carter, Cereus, Marcus Radloff, Wayne Robinson, kay rhodes, Gabriel Totusek, Geoffrey Edwards, Dragix PL, Nicolas Gort Freitas, SecretKittehs, Mnemosyne Music, and AkselA! Your support helps make 12tone even better!
Also, thanks to Jareth Arnold for proofreading the script to make sure this all makes sense hopefully!
Get 40% off CuriosityStream and a free Nebula account: www.curiositystream.com/12tone and use promo code "12tone"
Some additional thoughts/corrections:
1) In the paper where he proposed the name Axis Progression, Dr. Mark Richards also suggested naming the various rotations of it based on what the first chord would be if you transposed it such that you were only using the white keys on a piano, so starting on the major I chord would be Axis-C, starting on VI minor would be Axis-a, and so on. I've chosen not to do that here because a) I find it confusing to use note names to refer to structures that may not be in the key those note names imply, and b) his naming convention focused on which chord comes _first,_ whereas mine focuses on the implied tonality, and while those are related they're not always the same thing, so it seemed more appropriate to use a different set of names.
2) I should also note that Dr. Richards argues that many Axis-a songs are actually heard in their major axis form, and on that point I don't really agree. Of the examples he provides, only one actually sounds major to me (If I Were A Boy, by Beyonce) and that I think comes down to the vocal phrasing complicating the implied meter: The melodic lines tend to start over the major chord, so even though the sections don't, it still carries a bit of that first chord bias with it. That's not to say Dr. Richards is wrong, just that he apparently hears these songs differently from me, and because of that, my experience is not well-explained by his model. That's not a criticism, it's just how music works.
3) That said, while to my ears, the minor key is generally stronger than Dr. Richards implies, I'm not sure that distinction actually matters all that much, because the real point is that in most cases there are shades of both tonalities present. Which one wins is less important than that they're both there.
I just want to say, first of all, I've really enjoyed you and Patricia Taxxon talking about this topic. But, I want to ask you something that I'm still a little confused about.
Around 9:50 you mention how Bbm is in a stronger metric position than the Db chord. I don't really understand this idea, I've heard people talk about this in other videos, but I don't really understand. My thinking has been that because we often associate section lengths in groups of 4, that we will think about the strength of a chord in a progression in the same way that we think about strong beats and weak beats in a measure of 4/4.
Other 'metrical logic' may apply, but they aren't often as used in chord progressions. This is how I've thought about it. But, in the video you claim the 4th chord in the loop has a stronger emphasis than the 2nd chord. But, I've heard this as being the opposite when it comes measures of 4/4.
You mention this later on, as 'metric positioning.' Could you explain this topic? Or point to another source on this idea? If so, I would appreciate it.
Oooh, idea- analyze “You Know I’m No Good” by Amy Winehouse. I love that song.
Some people like to use the Axis progression as proof that modern pop music “all sounds the same”, but the original Axis of Awesome medley actually proves the opposite: despite keeping the same 4 chords, it’s perfectly easy to recognise each individual song. It just goes to show that harmony might not be the most important defining aspect of popular music, and that melody, lyrics and production are more likely to make a song memorable.
Exactly. Actually, the fact that so much of pop music is loop-based should on its own make people realize that harmony isn't really _that_ important in pop. I mean, if you play a Bach piece, nobody would criticize it for its rhythmic simplicity, and they wouldn't say that "all Bach sounds the same because it's just constant 16th notes" (well, obviously not all Bach is constant 16th notes, but you get the point). People would understand that the musical interest of the piece comes from other elements than rhythm. But for whatever reason, people have a hard time with applying similar logic when they approach pop music - as if (tonal/functional) harmony was the only thing that matters.
I understand why people tend to focus on harmony, though - that's what most of traditional Western music theory focuses on, so people have limited tools to focus on any other musical elements. This makes people think that harmony is the only thing that matters. And while harmony is very important in classical (much more important than in pop), even in that style, it isn't the only thing that matters, and classical theory would also benefit from other points of view. Basically, "music theory" is almost equivalent to "theory of tonal harmony".
@@MaggaraMarine There's also a lot of intentions that come with the argument that "pop sucks because only 4 chords". It always feels that this kind of argument doesn't come from a genuine place, but instead is used as a ridiculous excuse to put forth the mantra "old music good, new music bad". Western music theory has the tools to properly analyze pop in the rythmic and melodic departments, but a lot of people just don't want to in order to strenghten their flawed point that all pop music is the same
@MaggaraMarine
People will absolutely say "iT's JuSt coNsTaNt siXtEentH nOtEs." Maybe not about Bach, but certainly about, for example, Yngwie Malmsteen or Eddie Van Halen.
I enjoy hearing all the various ways musicians have used that same progression. Any situation where a group of musicians give their own take on the same musical idea, stuff like that is where creativity comes from.
@@MaggaraMarine Even in classical music, there is a tendency to bifurcate the composition into a major section and a minor section, and to use mainly “functional” chords in order to support the tonic. The harmony in that respect is actually fairly basic up until composers like Ravel, Chopin, Debussy, Schubert, Rachmaninoff, Bartók, and Schoenberg, the latter often described as if he were the last grace of classical’s linear progress due to his exploration of atonality and serialism, increasingly added the complexity of modes (a notable circularity of musical progress that borrows from folk and pre-CCM European music), nonstandard rhythmic forms, tone clusters, and nonfunctional extended harmony.
Classical, like other musical worlds, in other words found many multiples of ways to build its scenery than to use the most sophisticated harmonic progressions possible (often relying on layers of 1-4-5-1 as jazz often does extended layers of 1-2-5-1), and often coloring its harmony in ways that did not deter from basic harmonic clarity - that is, often nothing veering overly toward atonality or excess dissonance. It’s not necessary to explore all complexities of harmony just as oftentimes, 4/4 in four bars, a periodic melody with a humble range, and a small number of instruments will do. There are so many things you can do with it, and honestly 1-4-5-1 and 1-2-5-1 grant space to explore different harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, timbral, and expressive devices while not overwhelming the acoustic space. It’s the musical equivalent of speaking softly and carrying a big stick, as well as of brevity being the soul of wit.
That said, if you have a lot to say, and know how to say it, little’s stopping you. Just know who you’re marketing to. And yes, I’m still learning this lesson as well.
I have come to the conclusion that I have no idea how music works, but it's still nice to listen to someone try and teach me
If you want to learn western music theory, you can! With the power of the internet, search for major scales, chords in a key, basic functional harmony... they are good starting points, I think.
I'm here for the drawing... Music seems so alien to me.
@@junglefett the basics are easy. The advanced topics are chicken oriental
@@lolzlarkin3059 Yeah, that makes sense :P
Hope you stay motivated, you'll get there!
Take your time with it. It took me 14yrs to learn theory
"The Doowop Chords"
Oh, you mean the Aeroplane Over the Sea chords.
That might be the best name for it I’ve heard yet lol.
Dang, I didn't even notice until you pointed it out!
They sound soft and sweet
YUP
…YOU'RE RIGHT. DEAR GOD.
12Tone: "These four chords, called the Axis of -" ME: AWESOME!!
It's either that of fucking Pachelbel.
After watching Sideways, these four chords just sound like Dies Irae to me
After watching sideways everything either ends up tiring back to dies irae or leitmotifs. (And in the case of anything heroic, fanfare for the common man.)
It’s like watching technology connections , at this point it don’t matter what the subject is you half expect it to be tied to the refrigeration cycle somehow.
huh when you played the doowop chords starting on 6mi my brain. didnt fix it, i kept hearing the Emi chord as the start of the loop
everyone talking about chords and im sitting here like dude has a weird left hand...and hes drawing right to left. *beep boop* avoid da robits. im only typing this to make myself laugh by this point as im sure no one gets what im talking about. bye humans.
Great for plugging Patricia, wasn't expecting that!
Whaddup, my name is Alex, I'm 19, and I never learned who the Spice Girls are
You've missed out on something big. But not something important. Or good. I'm 36.
Where do we go to give you suggestions? I'd love to see a blind reaction to a lot of the bands I liked back in the day.
@@violet_broregarde Sallax?
Cool.
he knows why that s*** is bananas now though - i gotta catch up on episodes
I think this is your best video on four chord loops! From the way you, Patricia, and others talk about this, it doesn’t seem like there are basic names for things in the literature, or at least they’re not well known. I’ve been calling “first chord bias” “primacy.” Like your term “cascade loop,” I genuinely wonder whether other people have created a similar term or similar theory already (don’t know if Tagg’s counts). It’s really interesting to try and create four chord loops that confuse the sense of tonic in other ways of course; this video reminds me of when I was trying to do this with “pandiatonicism.”
I'm delighted that this progression is now called the Axis progression. Before Axis of Awesome, afaik it was just called... "That loop, you know THAT one, like the Don't Stop Believing [or whatever song you thought of first] chords"
Dammit by Blink for me. And yes, this is extremely accurate :p
Wagon Wheel
I'll be honest, I use to always see most of the side profile elephant trunks as just really strong chins.
Lololo like the Hacker
I thought I was the only one haha!
Those aren't chins....
@@mynameiskyled00d Same here LOL
Not gonna lie, I had no idea they weren't chins until now
Thank you for including audio clips of the songs you are talking about. I've been waiting for this for years!
my head starts playing drops of jupiter every single time that C chord sounds
I'm sorry.
Aaaaaand now it's in my head, so thanks for that.
"and for some reason me" like these aren't some of the best videos I've seen in my entire life
About 1.5 years ago, I discovered your channel and fell in love with it but I can admit that even though I had fooled around on guitar and bass for years I only knew a little theory. You inspired me to actually start studying music theory with your channel and I can now say I actually understand your videos. Thanks for the inspiration.
In my musical head canon.
You hear lots of songs those four chords because that four chord sequence just fits very well with a singers cadance. And creates a satisfying pattern that someone would want to hear over and over again.
I love your videos, because i listen to a lot of music and i’m learning guitar, so you teaching why music is good is great to watch!
Thank you! I watched this when it first came out. But I am a complete newbie to music theory, so I understood...10%? 15%, maybe? Since then, I have been taking regular bass lessons and my teacher is *really* into theory. So after 10 months of banging my head on this stuff, I understand, maybe, 40%? MASSIVE improvement on my part and makes me appreciate your work even more. I learned a lot on the second watch. Thanks, again.
Throwing me for a loop here tone
has his left thumbnail always been beastly and i just never noticed??
I started seeing it in the recent videos, I don't know for how long
He probably plays fingerpick guitar, classical style, that's why his nails are long on one hand...
@@nihilgeist666, that was my first thought, but don’t you pick with the right and fret with the left?
unless you’re obviously left-handed, hence writing with your left paw so i could see it in the first place... derp ;0P
4:17 well someone's been playing Hades...
And now we sit and wait for an analysis of Good Riddance. :P
Thanks for pointing that out, I almost missed it
"Aphrodite!!"
No mention of my favorite version of this loop: Em G D C, which I usually play on guitar capo'd at the 3rd fret to Gm B♭ F♭ E♭.
Edit: Wtf is up with youtube's alt code lookup?
The Dominant version of the axis progression is actually my favorite of the four, and it makes me a bit sad to hear that it's the least used. Also, I'm surprised you didn't mention that "Hurt" by Nine Inch Nails, which you've now made two videos on, actually uses that progression in the prechorus and chorus
Beat me to it! I love the dominant version 😊
_"Also, I'm surprised you didn't mention that "Hurt" by Nine Inch Nails, which you've now made two videos on, actually uses that progression in the prechorus and chorus"_
Does it, though? If you listen to the melodic phrases, I think the "real" first chord of the progression is the minor chord. That's the chord that starts the phrase. So, the chorus section kind of starts on the last chord of the loop, not on the first one. This was also discussed in 12tone's last video about the song.
@@MaggaraMarine yeah, I know he said that, but I just can't help but hear that as dominant instead of minor, especially because the lyrics of the chorus are (at least partially) about feeling guilt and remorse and coming to a sense of reckoning. It's an attempt to break that "downward spiral" that the whole album is about. It sounds so hopeful to me, the chorus, and the dominant axis chords reflect that sense of hope and uplifting far more than the minor axis chords do, so I always hear it as dominant, adding brightness to a dark song. That's just my opinion.
@@MaggaraMarine I haven’t watched his other videos on Hurt, but at least in relation to the rest of the song, the loop definitely starts on the A major. The whole song is in sets of 4 bars, and the A is the first chord to follow the last set of the verse.
The way the melody is placed definitely dances around that, though, and emphasizes the chords in a way that feels more like the minor loop. So it’s kind of both at the same time. I’m guessing this is what he said in his other video lol
@@MaggaraMarine Interestingly, I hear it as V being the first chord up until the vocals come in. Every cue in the song points to that; for example dynamics and instrumentation get more intense on the V chord, but the fact that the melody starts directly on the vi chord completely overpowers those cues to me and makes vi sound like the first chord. This actually also happens in the Johnny Cash cover, so they're both clearly intending V-vi-IV-I.
The thing is that in the cover (as well as the second pre-chorus chorus bit in the original), they just skip over the instrumental bit and start directly with the vocals. So I only perceive the original as doing V-vi-IV-I twice with an extra measure of V and then vi-IV-I-V. The cover is the standalone measure of V and then directly vi-IV-I-V.
9:21
12tone: "The classic example is--"
Me: "NUMA NUMA"
12tone: "Umbrella"
Me: "..."
You should do an understanding music for STP by sublime. I think there’s so much to analyze
The Wannabe progression is basically like a bridge or chorus progression. It starts on IV, which is common for a bridge or chorus. The "Tell me what I want" starts on the I, however it's actually minor i, which is just modal mixture.
The rabbit duck reversible figure was brilliant in the context of the script. These Easter eggs are so good. Love this channel!! 👍 🤘
Nicely done. Thanks for sharing.
Sexual Healing by Marvin Gaye is another song using the starting-on-V version of the loop, right?
I don't have this thought fully fleshed out, just wondering if impacts your take on Spice Girls Wanna Be. If you look at the bassline during that B-chord it gets even weirder. I'm speaking from the perspective of a cover band bassist whose band has played this song quite a few times. The bass during that B bounces to the F#, and when played in context it really feels like you land hard on that F#. Maybe its just cuz of the 1st chord bias you brought up, but as a bassist it REALLY feels like a 4-chord loop in F# Mixolydian. And fwiw I've been thinking about that modal approach to 4 chord loops instead of classical key centers, because I think it works for songs like Closer by Chainsmokers too
The 5 6 4 1 is actually fairly popular in P&W music. I think it’s because it gives a sort of ethereal feeling because the 7th (or 3rd of the 5 chord) is usually highlighted in songs with this loop and starting the melody on the 7th really drives home the spacey vibe of worship music.
There are also a lot times where they will leave out the 1 chord, which you’d think would make the 6 the tonic but the melodies are almost exclusively major. 4 6 5 and 5 6 4 are very popular chord loops in the genre.
I think this is because the songs are meant to be able to flow seamlessly so that the audience doesn’t notice and get distracted by a resolution if that makes any sense? It’s sort of like if we never have a solid resolution then there’s nothing that draws so much attention, and then resolving becomes a highly anticipated event that signals something important when it happens
Great video!! Thanks for sharing. Cheers.
I'd love to see a video on the difference between the ii6 and IV chord as predominant...why would you choose one over the other. Since they have the same function, how do choose? How have other composers decided? It may be too obscure or narrow of a question, but I've always been curious.
Another great video! One thing that I'm still not clear on though, after all these vids on four chord loops...why *four*?
It makes sense if you think of it as basically a two-chord shuttle with a couple of chords inserted to get from point A to point B and back again, but Patricia Taxxon's video shows that it's also possible to use two chords to get from the tonic to the medial (and then jump back directly to the tonic), so it seems like you should be able to use two intermediaries in both directions, but nobody seems to ever do that. Why?
I think I have a Minor Chord Bias, probably from listening and writing music that is mostly minor. In the Doo Wop Changes example that starts on Em, my head never switches to hearing G as the starting chord. To me, the Em overpowers G to the point where G doesn't even feel very stable in that loop.
super helpful-ty ty
Thanks for this!
As being from the UK I really appreciated when in the introduction you gave at least a hint of the of in a "a couple of reasons" when it's quite common to drop the of altogether in America it seems!? I don't really understand the precise grammar because I am not that deep in linguistics or American culture.
The "minor axis" progression as "overplayed" it may be, is one of the most beautiful sounding progressions ever.
Because the chords contain all the notes in the scale and cover every harmonic function, the progression can enhance any great melody. It just has such a feel of power and might, think the chorus of Africa.
I think as well that its popularity perpetuates further popularity. As Adam Neely says, "repetition legitimises". Things are more beautiful the more familiar we are with them. The axis progression contains all the emotional backing of every song we've heard before that uses it. And every new song using them adds to that bank of emotions....
..and most importantly we are all free to use them as we please without the fear of plagiarism allegations! 😂
Exactly. I think of it as "instant nostalgia", where the song already feels intimately familiar on the first listen. I tend to prefer things that grow on me or surprise me, but for pop it certainly makes sense. And I think about the plagiarism angle too. You can make the billionth "axis" progression, but if you make the 2nd "Creep" progression you're ripping it off.
@@MitchSumner Actually Radiohead doesn’t own that chord progression because David Bowie used it first in Space Oddity.
@@Eliseo_M_P and Bach probably did it at some point too.
Alternative theory: It is satisfying because the melody and harmonies stay in a range where normal people can sing along with it and still have some chord motion.
Melodically speaking you can extrapolate a singable melody from nearly any diatonic harmony.
@@oibruv3889 True. But you don't see many gregorian chants hitting the top 10 on the billboard.
@@DavidKirtley actually many famous quasi modern pieces make reference to the 3^ 2^ 3^ 1^ 2^ 7^ 1^ motif from the dies irae chant, but I realise that's besides the point. That wasnt my point, my point was that your reasons for it being satisfying because of singability but also harmonic movement is true of basically any chord progression that is diatonic, as most pop music will end up being anyway
@@oibruv3889 True but there are a lot of other factors as well. Being able it fit it into the timeframe on the radio, familiarity with the musical form, attention span of the listener, reasons for listening (say for dancing as an example) , how much musical information is necessary to fit it into a genre. They also might just be more popular because they are promoted more effectively.
@@DavidKirtley fair, but I was addressing your original point that the fact that the harmony allowed the melody to be singable makes it more satisfying
once you spot the nail you can never unspot or unsee it back
Love it. You've become the David Hume of music theory, proving nobody cares what the tonic is, not even the songwriter(s).
Which one is daft punk's Up All Night To Get Lucky in!? And U2, Beautiful Day; Manic Street Preachers, A Design For Life; Lenny Kravitz, It ain't over til it's over; A-Ha, the sun always shines on TV? If they are actually sharing something I think I can hear. All the time time you talk about what you can hear - resolution and anchoring logic in relation to chords, keys and other relationships between sounds, it's really hard to process. But I'm here because someone I follow on Twitter said Beautiful Day was like a Manic's song as if was on the same album. I wasn't sure. The chorus lines just seemed like they had something in common; and then my brain threw up the Kravitz violins. Then I thought it would fit the Axis of Awesome song. Then listening to those songs UA-cam recommended the A-Ha song which I thought sounded more like Beautiful Day having listened to it again. And then it sort of fit with both of the original mentioned and it all as rocking harder than I remembered with a romantic poppy edge. But then it also was exactly as I remembered it as I remembered just not how I pigeonholed it. Though I am ashamed, embarrassed, don't know if I make any sense at all. And then under one of the songs there was Daft Punk.
Whoa. That's one long nail.
See... I was noticing that myself and wondering why anyone would do that.
Now I know that some will grow their nails longer for finger picking on guitar. But it's usually the right hand. Now even though I'm left handed as well, I still play a right hand style guitar as that makes more sense for my "smart" hand to be the one making chords and melodies. Maybe he plays like Hendrix and McCartney with a left hand style.
Or maybe he just doesn't own a pair clippers and I'm reading too much into it. I don't know.
@@ThoroughlyBaked maybe they just like having long nails lol?
Haha yeah I am one of those people with long nails only on the right fingerpicking hand
At 5:20 I cannot, no matter how much I listen, hear it shift to beginning on G. I can only hesr Emi, C, D, G, in that order, over and over. It sounds like the G is the resolution, but then the E minor is tension immediately after, jumping up higher, and then the C falls all the way back down and uses D as a stepping stone back to G.
"Pop Song Chords. They own the world! They own you! Deal with it." - Todd "in the Shadows" Nathanson, 2012.
At 5:30 I had the opposite reaction, no need to rearrange the g e c d progression but rearranged e c g d as g d e c
I had that reaction too
I very much appreciate the Buster Sword imagery paired with "finality" in the script
I had to watch this at .75 speed but I did finally absorb (more of) the information! It really did end up feeling like the Swiss Army Knife of chord progressions and it was a neat video to watch (slowly!)
Literally thought you were going to say " I - vi - IV - V " at the beginning after 'those 4 chords' and sheepishly went back to my authentically classical hole in the void.
Edit: And then I watched another minute and was satisfied with DooWop changes.
2nd Edit: And then I watched another 20 seconds and was made whole again when you mentioned western classical composition.
Moral of the story: shut up and watch the video.
Would be interested to see what you think of the 3 different chord loops used in Born Ruffians' "I Fall In Love Every Night" - heard it while driving and made me pull over to analyze it in google notes lol.
I've heard this same man say these same things so many times
Doowop loops are great for fireside mashups. Heart and Soul, I Love the Mountains (boom-di-ya-da), Blue Moon, Beyond the Sea, Dream Dream Dream, and so on and so on.
Is there a name for this progression G-C-Em-D (1-4-6m-5)? I think it was a popular alternative to Axis progression when I was learning guitar in the mid-1980’s: Fine Young Cannibals (she drives me crazy), Pat Benatar (hit me with your best shot).
I actually hear the 4 chords a lot less these days. Shame because I love it for better or worse, it just works. That is so true regarding how your brain resets to the vi being home if you start the loop on it. I've played that trick on myself writing my own songs before. Which version of the progression was it again?
That era of pop songs was rubbish and so is this era.
@@badgasaurus4211 Dude pessimism towards pop is so redundant and unnecessary. Yeah there's a lot of pop music just written to make the most money and top the charts, but honestly there's a lot of really creative and interesting artists in the genre. One of my favourite songs of last year was by Dua Lisa despite my personal taste being fairly removed from current radio pop. It's all a matter of subjectivity so trying to dismiss a whole genre as rubbish based on your personal taste is doing your self a disservice.
@@matthewkelleher8442 I don’t feel a disservice at all. You’re right there are great artists (Like Sam Fender) cropping up but they aren’t writing pop music. There’s no pessimism, I never said things can’t get better or its a lost cause, its just this era of what’s popular is weak just like most of the late 2000s up to now.
@@badgasaurus4211 To get popular, you must actively try and make imitative music, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be good
@@stephenweigel I don’t think the first part of your comment is necessarily true (at least in the past). Regardless, you are correct but this era of pop music is still weak.
this is by far not the first 12 tone video i watched, and i like everything about them... but today the first time, i wonder if i should watch these with slower speed next time 😅
Nicely done. Thank you.
You haven’t even watched the damn video
@@socialstoic2099 Why should that prevent them from thanking 12tone for it?
@@socialstoic2099 I can be in the process of watching it and still comment. But, you’re right, I haven’t finished the video yet.
Great video! I’m curious about the convention of writing all chords with “capital Roman numerals” instead of using capital letters for major chords and lowercase letters for minor chords. In my high school/college theory courses I saw the capital/lowercase dichotomy, but that was also 15+ years ago.
Thanks! And again, great video. ☺️
Me too. vi is so much easier to write than VI mi.
i think one of the best things about these chord loops is, because they don't resolve easily (or the resolution is somewhat ambiguous), it helps keep the progression catchy. like you said in the video, if everything resolves all at once, the melody has nowhere to go.
side note that doesn't really have anything to do with anything: I'm not a big fan of Rihanna, but I do like some of her songs, and Umbrella is one of them. perfect example for this idea
I don’t recall a very clear 50s progression in Mozart Sonata 8, but there is in Beethoven’s Sonata 8, the “pathetique”.
Nice track! Blessings
Makes me kinda wonder about the theoretical explanation behind the chord sequence used in loads of Japanese popular music... like C5-D5-B5-E5 just to provide an example (obviously they use it in other keys too)
I've never heard it called the axis progression before, and now I will be calling it that forever
Great stuff but I have an existential question: how do you know when to draw explanatory charts and sync them with your voice since the random doodles are accelerated?
im pretty sure he just leaves it blank for a moment and then edits the pause to be longer or shorter so it fits with his voice
Maybe I missed this somewhere in here but what about the vi/IV/I/V loop? (My favorite example is Save Tonight). Is that considered a minor key because the first chord bias is minor, or is it considered major because it resolves to the major 1?
I love that loop so much because it resolves on the third chord of the progression but then NOPE that pesky V jumps in to lift into the next loop, walking up to vi.
I actually hear the Db as the I chord in Umbrella, interestingly
You can force pretty much any chord to be the I if you're brave enough. Trust me. I had... let's call them harmonic accidents...
It would be cool to do an analysis of an Electric Light Orchestra. Overture 10538 is one of my favourite chord progressions in a pop song.
For some reason, when you loop the "Axis" progression, my brain still switches to G major... I wonder why that is.
I think major scale bias can be very strong; I definitely hear G as tonic when the progression starts on C (C G D Em)
So If I do a set up like minor 5 to major 1 what kinda cadence is that
I usually reject claims of correlations between various traits and how they relate to personality. I think I make an exception for left-handedness. You are absolutely a lefty. And like me, traditionally speaking, your pencil-grip would be described as absolutely atrocious. And yet you have this fantastic ability of conveying your thoughts and ideas through doodles. I love that.
Not to mention that you blow my mind so hard that I must force myself to take breaks between watching your videos, or else I'll just get sucked into a rabbit-hole of music theory; and I'll spend the next week taking apart the ramification of chord changes when I'm supposed to be, oh, writing software for the benefit of national defense, for example.
I dont believe it's strictly these chords that homogenize music.
It's when the chords are the only thing that make the music interesting that's the problem. If a song has no key changes, no verse mixups, no tempo or time sigbature shifts, no dynamics or use of stuff like stops, etc. really anything that adds tension beyond the chords' standard functions, it can get quite stale if most of the songs you hear all do the same thing.
Chord loops are not a sin, uninteresting music is the problem.
i mean, that was not the point of the video in the slightests. im pretty sure 12tone would strongly argue against there being a "problem" with music of any kind, just like i would
Clearly, to me anyway, the axis derives from old baroque canon such as pachellbel canon in D where the melodic line descends diatonically and you get your D-A-Bm, then the resolution (F#m-G-D-G-A) is represented by the G only.
So, the verse of Kate Bush's "Wuthering Heights" is a loop. I wonder how you'd analyze it.
A F E Db
The four chord myth is what happens when you don’t explore other genres of music and want to sound elite above the plebs. The truth is that jazz and classical also follow common patterns.
For example, Mozart would repeat those patterns throughout different works to make them momorable
I think I might have a minor bias. I guess being fair, that progression feels the most traditional, having the dominant chord last, but the deceptive cadence resolving weak. Plus, I just like writing and listening to songs in minor.
I think there could’ve been more flexibility to chord progressions if all we need is the tonic, a dominant, and a chord that indicates the key.
There are of course, the close cousin to the Axis progression, the Doo-Wap changes (1M, 6m, 4M, 5M). Because of the 5 chord at the end resolving to the 1, any transformation will be less stable than the 1645 version.
Another relocation of the dominant could be here: (1M, 6m, 5M, 4M). In my opinion, I think it might be best to start at the minor tonic, though I think the Major tonic and even the Dominant can make good starts too. This is pretty much if Doo-Wap and Axis has a child.
Swapping the 4 with the 6 in the Axis progression gives us this: (1M, 5M, 4M, 6m). Not really particularly stable with the 1 tonic, but makes a good Lydian progression.
A chord progression I kind of like is this: (1M, 6m, 5M, 2m). The baseline for this progression generally descends until it leaps up a perfect 5th somewhere in this progression. Well, again, not really stable with the 1 tonic, but makes a good Dorian or Minor progression. It’s actually better off as (1M, 6m, 5M, 2M), a variant of (1M, 5M, 4M, 6m).
A Phrygian progression I can think of is (1m, b2M, b3M, 4m) or in the context of Major, (3m, 4M, 5M, 6m). Variant (1m, 5m, b6M, b7M) also appears valid, being a minor version.
But alas, the Axis progression appears to be the most common.
i think alex goes bananas is what will finally make me subscribe to curiositystream
I was kinda hoping you'd also bring up the variant used in Purple Rain. In G (not the original key) it's G-Em-D-C
I would love to see you do a vid on the difference between NuMetal and "metal" Metal. Is there a difference? If so, does it matter? I've noticed that as diverse as metal is, all of the other subgenres(and fans of those subgenres) overlap more than NuMetal and (x)Metal.
You'll get a lot of elitists and gatekeepers refusing to acknowledge numetal at all, to be warned.
It depends on what you classify as "metal" Metal. Metal arguably starts with the adoption of nihilist attitudes and aggression into early psychedelic rock, think Arthur Brown, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple. From there the first few big iterations are just applying various amounts of cocaine and punk rock where maybe the New Wave of British Heavy Metal (Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Saxon, Motorhead, et al) is folding that first round of early British punk into the early metal sound. Then it hits the States where we have our own particular brand of punk rock called "hardcore punk" that was MUCH more abrasive than its cousin from the UK. Rub hardcore punk and the NWOBHM together, add a dash of cocaine (or jazz fusion, whatever you wanna call it), and you get Thrash Metal. Incidentally I've always pointed to this as why Anthrax sounded so different from the other "Big Four" bands (Anthrax, Megadeth, Metallica, and Slayer), since Anthrax was from New York while the other bands started in the San Francisco Bay area. NY/DC punk was WAY different from SoCal punk.
Thrash was sort of the prototypical sound of metal for a long time (I consider Glam/hair metal to be an outlier since it borrows more from arena rock than any existing metal tradition), and I think _most_ of the other subgenres since then have come about as a result of crossing other genres over with thrash. Groove metal (Pantera, Exhorder, Lamb of God) is sort of the result of slowing thrash down, pulling in some death metal riffing and in Pantera's case rubbing up against some Texas blues. (Side note: In all seriousness some of the country blues stuff out of the Appalachians in the late 1800's/early 1900's is some extremely heavy shit and what seems to me to be an untapped source of inspiration. DevilDriver and a few other bands have been cross-pollinating with outlaw country to interesting effect, so I don't see why it couldn't be done if you respect it and don't just lean on it as a gimmick) Add some grunge and you get a more generalized Alternative Metal sound that's still heavy but stripped down and usually guitar solo-less.
Nu metal and Alt metal get sort of used interchangeably but I've always thought nu metal deserved to be a bit of a different label since while it did grow out of that same hodge-podge of heavy metal crossovers with other genres that was going on a lot of other alternative metal bands leaned much more on grunge, punk, and industrial where nu metal mostly incorporated funk and hip hop. Like, I have no problems putting bands like Tool, White Zombie, Helmet, NiN together under the same banner but putting in those first few KoRn or Slipknot albums, or P.O.D. just doesn't feel right.
But I guess to the point nu metal is an offshoot of an offshoot rather than a variant of one of the more foundational genres within metal which may be why it seems so different.
And that's not even getting into all the *Core subgenres which _I think, but may be wrong about_ is this weird incestuous thing where hardcore punk bands re-incorporated aspects of thrash/death/groove metal that had been influenced already by previous generations of hardcore punk and turned it into something even more punky and metal-y. It all feels very vague to me, and I say this having spent 2 years in a melodic metalcore band in the early 00's when Killswitch Engage was a big deal.
@@BuildEnvironmentTV Just speaking from a musical perspective. There's a percussive/heavy aggression that is nearly universal among music that you can classify under the modern definition of metal. For diverse group that proves this idea: Pantera, Meshuggah, Avenged Sevenfold, Behemoth, Dillinger Escape Plan, Isis, In Flames, Animals As Leaders---One could argue that these bands are all from a fairly broad group of sub-genres, but unquestionable (x)metal. Numetal feels like it uses actual structure and techniques that differentiate it from that entire group.
I honestly don't think that "metal" is very vague if you look at it strictly musically. There are a collection of techniques that are not exclusive to metal, but with high usage, makes it metal.
@@NelsonBlakeII Oh certainly didn't mean to say "metal" is vague. Just poking fun at my lack of full understanding of the various "_________Core" genres. Metal in general is pretty well defined. My friends used to have this sort of debate about whether GNR was metal (because apparently that was a question in the 90s?), but it was in jest. I always came down on the side of hard rock since they have a very loose swagger as compared with the extremely rigid way most metal bands lock in with each other.
One of the things nu metal shares with the rest of the alternative metal landscape is the tendency towards funkier grooves, but that hip hop/rap influence I think is what sets it apart from most other categories. Like if there's going to be a point of commonality between a band like KoRn and Godsmack that also separates both of them from like In Flames or A7X, it's probably going to be stop/start chunky rhythms. Not so much Meshuggah or the rest of the Djenty bands, but their approach is much more regimented and I think based in jazz rhythms or as a compositional technique while alt metal's coming from a feel. But I think what I was getting at originally was that it's harder to compare nu metal to "the rest" of metal than it is to compare it to some other specific subgenre where you can really point to the influences since the borders between subgenres get a lot fuzzier than some more militant/elitist metalheads would like to acknowledge.
Fascinating. As an amateur guitar hack with next to no musical theory it's interesting to see how this explains my incompetent noodling. When a chord progression just "clicks" in my brain I see there's actually centuries of theory that explains why some things feel satisfying to my ear and others are just scraps of phrases that go nowhere.
Do you do the drawings first or the narration?
When you played the Doo-Wop Changes I immediately started humming In The Aeroplane Over the Sea.
Can you do a video on sonata form please?
It's interesting. I've been playing guitar for almost 15 years now, and when I was learning, I mainly focused on learning the 4 chords in various keys. To this day, I find it weird to say that a song is in a "minor" key. In my head, I'm always thinking about it in terms of the major key. For instance, if a song's progression is Em-C-G-D, I don't think about in terms of the "minor Axis" - to me, it's still in G because it uses the G family of chords. it just starts on an Em
I almost wonder if this is because when I was learning, I played a lot by ear, often to pop songs that used the Axis progressions. It was never really important to distinguish the two. If I was playing song in Em, I would likely just be using D, C, and G as well, so what's the overall distinction between Em and G? There isn't really much; the lines just kinda blur. It's easier to just think of them as a cohesive whole
But maybe I'm weird that way 😛
You’re technically right to think this way: A real “minor Axis” progression should be Em B C Am. As you can see, it has a chord that is outside of the G family of chords.
It isn't really weird. I feel like this is how pop often approaches tonality - the fact that the chords come from the same scale is more important than which chord sounds like the tonic. When the music is loop-based, there is really no clear harmonic direction, so which chord sounds like the tonic isn't that important.
The progression can be used as a part of a song, where you don't just loop the progression, but also use other chords, and that's when the tonal center of the progression becomes more important. But if you just loop it, tonal centers don't really matter that much. That's also why the tonal center of the progression is more ambiguous - as was said in the video, too strong resolutions kind of disrupt the "flow" of the loop. When the loop lacks stronger resolutions, it can just keep on going without ever feeling 100% "complete" or "final", which is a good thing if you just want to loop the chords.
Also, as was mentioned in the video, the progression isn't clearly in either the relative major or minor. It's kind of in both at the same time. Depending on which chord you start on, you can give a specific chord more emphasis, but you can't really get 100% rid of the feeling of a "secondary tonic".
Do you think "Otherside" by RHCP is also in major key? It also uses other chords, which makes the minor chord sound more clearly like the tonic of the progression.
What about "The Evil that Men Do" by Iron Maiden, or "Still Loving You" by Scorpions? They also use the progression at one part of the song, but also use other chords.
@@MaggaraMarine I don't really know those songs all that well, but I just took a listen to them. I wouldn't say they're in a major key, per se. I think that's kinda what I was getting at before. For "Otherside", for instance, it's not that it's in C major; it's that it uses the C family of chords. And in the family, you have the C, F, and G, and their relative minors, Am, Dm, and Em. You can moreso mix and and match all these however you like.
From this frame of view, "Otherside" leans heavily on that Am-Em progression. The song certainly sounds minor, and I wouldn't say it's in a major key. But to my ear, I'm not hearing that as i-v, I'm hearing as vi-iii. My frame of reference is almost always centered on the relative major. So if you have a minor I or V chord, you're doing some really unorthodox chord progressions 😅 I think it helps me associate how the chords will be related to each other, independent of whether the song is major or minor.
If I was playing this with other people and they asked what key I'm playing it in, I would probably say "C / Am". To me it makes sense just to say C, but I've come to learn that trips up a lot of musicians who don't think like me 😅
@@alsatusmd1A13 The chord sequence that to me feels lost like a minor analog to the axis sequence is i VI VII v, featured in "Saturday In Silesia", which is similar to the Andalusian cadence, but with the middle two chords swapped and the v chord minor.
how many times have you made this video?
SO I was thinking about this while playing my favourite four chords, which are vi V iii IV (yeah I know it's minor but) and realized that oh shit, that's like the same thing if vi is tonic and iii is I dunno whatever so THAT'S COOL
Me learning today that Jimi Hendrix's "Axis : Bold As Love" used the Axis Progression.
:-o
I tend to call I-V-vi-IV "Blink chords" and vi-IV-I-V "Bad Religion chords". Obviously that betrays my punk rock bias 🤣
However, the V-vi-IV-I shows up in a handful of other (probably fairly niche depending on your preferences) songs that are favourites of mine.
"Hurt" by Nine Inch Nails includes it in the pre-chorus, "What have I become?" and chorus, "You could have it all..."
"Salt In Our Wounds" by HIM, which is mostly in the minor key, uses it in the chorus, "Love is insane..."
"Down In The Park" by Tubeway Army hints at it in its main synth riff and vocal melody, although it does sound a little mixolydian.
"Infrared" by Strike Anywhere uses it in its bridge section, "Blank eyes...", and uses a splintered version of it in its opening riff, although the V at the beginning before the vi is very short.
Oh, and "Pure Shores" by All Saints loops it almost throughout. That threw me when I realised!
You maybe used the word betray incorrectly
11:37 (Pokemon capsule) "Encapsulation" 🤣🤣🤣
Oh my gosh! It *weakens* so it's Aphrodite's symbol from Hades! I love it
The only video on UA-cam that I don't have to speed up
A big part of it is that, despite being such an industry standard, the chords just sound good, no matter what. Record labels may be in the wrong for pushing that onto artists but they know it sells because it satisfies the listeners. Almost all the songs on that Axis video are absolute bangers and I will listen to them till the day I die
Even in 17-tone equal temperament with sawtooth waves?
@@stephenweigel yes.
9:56 I've been making a playlist with all of the examples that I can find of V-vi-IV-I : ua-cam.com/play/PLrIvfnYBdD_pN_HBjXHln3F0-ELR2NQNL.html&si=UCYyt17crZFIlOZb
There's also a 2010s instrumental EDM track that I'm fairly sure does it, though I might have been hearing it wrong. It's kind of in the same vein as OMFG's Hello, but the rhythm is more frantic. Last time I heard it was Halloween 2022, and I'd already heard it before then, but my phone was dead and I wasn't making this playlist yet, so I regret not asking someone. If anyone knows what it is, please do tell.
Lol im trying to using these chords in a song for once. It's honestly hard cuz I'm so used to making sexy Jazz chord progressions 😂
I would take the CuriosityStream/Nebula deal but I don't have a cellphone to verify my credit card. Is there another payment way?
thumbs up for navi as guiding light
Thanks
Great video. 😎😏
Please analyse either Baker Street by Gerry Rafferty or Year of the Cat by Al Steward in a future video!
Normally I can read comments and listen to the video at the same time. But the jargon is so strong in the video that when I reach a comment using the same language my brain stops and rejects both. I'm sure it will figure it out eventually... It seems to insist on learning this language through osmosis.