@@SignalsMusicStudio the only thing you missed is when it goes back to C it modulates via a common chord. He brings the G in from mixolydian/minor and then uses it to get back to C. Smart stuff
Your lesson made me fall in love with this song, and, as a result, I chose this as my first dance at my wedding. So despite never having met, never knowing me at all, you inadvertently hand a hand in my wedding day. Keep the great lessons coming!
Hey no way it was my wife's and I first dance song too. and then I surprised her and played it and sang it to her later that night. We had a Beatles themed wedding
One thing I like the Beatles most is that they are always original in their crafs. Each of them had contributed a lot for every song they have done. It's a collective efforts from vocal arrangements, chord progressions, melodic baselines, melodic riffs to original drums fill ins. In my own terminology, I dubbed them as the avant-garde rock band and such feat is beyond compare.
Not only in Something cause I've figure out that Paul McCartney has been playing melodic bass runs to most of their songs, be it simple or complicated ones.
that was George same goes for the lic in ' and I love her' George was a master although he ducked away from that focus , he truly was a master even with subtle touches of his bass leads.
“You’re not supposed to analyze music” Guess what!? The Beatles “analyzed” music. They knew, and many occasions admitted plainly, that their chord and melodic writing was inspired by understanding Bach, Mozart, Chopin and other great classical composers. And... it clearly shows in their results. No one “composes” music theory. But understanding how music works allows a level of craftsmanship that is unmistakable. I like your grandma’s recipe example. Another might be carpentry. Maybe you could just figure out how to make a chair from scratch. But having knowledge of woodworking, and studying the work of a master, would probably allow you to build a much more sturdy and even beautiful chair with many details you wouldn’t have known how to do without that higher understanding. Music IS feeling and emotion... but it’s also science, math, and precision. And that’s why it’s so freaking cool. Good job breaking down one of my all time favorite songs!!! 👍🏻👍🏻
@Jack Say what about Bach and Mozart? I never quoted anything they said about any composer. Only that they listened to and specific songs were directly inspired by classical composers like Bach and others. Paul McCartney talks about that a lot actually. So I have no idea what your beef is. The guy in the video discusses analyzing music and why and is the one says, or quotes others in his comments as saying "You're not supposed to analyze music". He's right, they're wrong. Every great composer analyzed and assimilated the music of masters before him or her. As does any craftsperson in any skill or trade. So... chill out dude.
Beatles did the same. They “borrowed” from anything and everything that sounded good to them. Giftted listeners make gifted composers. Their “analysis” was aural.
When I was studying for my first degree in Music, I read a great book called "Bach the Borrower" which went into great depth about how Bach would borrow from anything and everything - from folk music to other composers' stuff... and I then did a seminar based around splicing together bits of Bach (that he borrowed from his own works)... to illustrate this. Read Bob Dylan's autobiography "Chronicles" and you'll see the same thing. Same in any genre, music, poetry or whatever... Yep - you gotta listen!!! ;-)
Thought they were simple, I though was all major/minor chords but every Beatle book surprises me! I know almost every Beatles harmony, but now learning to play em..Alohaas
I'm glad you commented on the analysing vs. feeling "debate", I agree with you 100%! And the Newton quote is apt in my opinion, because it relates very well to some people's perception of science in general. I've had multiple people tell me that they feel trying to understand something somehow takes away from it... and I can see where they're coming from, but I couldn't disagree more. To me, understanding why a sunset has these awesome colors, or indeed why a certain chord progression makes people feel a certain way, makes me appreciate it _even more_ .
I concur. The fact that somebody wouldn't want to understand how something works, and rather simply blindly accept that it does and leave it at that, just boggles my mind. I can't understand people who have no desire to understand. Knowledge doesn't stifle creativity. It enhances it.
The arguments revolving around feel-writing versus rational-theory analysis are BOTH valid. The former comes BEFORE the recording and the LATTER comes after. All composers desire to "make great music". Some play feel-licks, some write structured notes on paper. The objection i and many others have to these kinds of music theory analysis videos is that they are produced for likes, subs and money, hence ANYTHING can be imagined and said to pad out a video to 10 mins for the YT algorithms. Also, so much left brain post-analysis never equates with what the composer actually did.
@@thedolphin5428 Nobody suggested that feel-writing was invalid. You say of composers that "Some play feel-licks, some write structured notes on paper", I'd argue that most do *both* . Post-analysis isn't necessarily a way to understand what the composer _intended_ , it is a way to try and understand why and how the music they made works. And if someone thinks that's a pointless endeavor, well nobody is forcing them to listen. As for the objection that analysis videos are produced for likes, subs and money... I mean, as opposed to what? Composers also write music for album sales and concert ticket sales. It's their job, of course they expect to be paid for it.
seban678 Well you may argue that most musos do both (feel AND scripted) but I would strenuously argue that NOWADAYS, and certainly outside of orchestral music (because that's what we are seeing all over YT in such analyses), they do not. Many many great player-composers do not even read music! Mississippi blues? Riff based, improv prog rock? Also, many of these analytical theorists do in fact make wildly speculative statements about WHAT THEY THINK the composer intended, like "... this is what they did here ..." or "... this is how they made this work there", not to mention all the pop-psychology they superimpose into mystical lyrical fantasies. Total bullshit in many situations. And, the fact that many other musos in the comments sections beg to disagree with the chordal summaries PROVES their analyses are subjective presuppositions and proves that so much of musical theory analysis (of pop and rock and blues and jazz) is not actually real but an intellectual fabrication. As regards remuneration for music writing, you completely missed my point. All power and money to people who write and perform music. My beef is with music students who intentionally blurt out imaginative crap on YT for advert and Patreon income. Mate, I am old enough to remember when EVERYTHING on the web was free (prior to 1995) before safe banking and EFT. People shared online for love of their hobby, to increase the cyber database of human knowledge for FREE. But nowadays, any mug with a computer and video editing software and a diploma in basket making can earn a living by entertaining people weaving rafia into waste paper baskets or put up a clickbaity title like "How Beethoven Wrote His 9th" or "How Jimi Hendrix Broke All The Musical Rules" or "How George Harrison Wrote the Perfect Progression".
I tried to figure out this song when I was 15 with no idea of music theory whatsoever. This analysis really brought me back and gave me some cool new insight. Now I can define more precisely what got me fascinated in the first place. Thanks for that!
Miguel A. Cazajous. I was only singing this to myself the other day and thought how sweet the chord changes were. The F Eb G C is such a sweet turn around. I had just knocked out a country song for a friend’s wedding present that covered much of his colourful history and how they were perfect together. The song is pretty straight forward with a usual arrangement with verse, prechorus, chorus/hook and bridge but I managed to use 7 chords and 2 modal interchanges. Just put it together by feel, trying to work out what was going to work without sounding boring, or too jarring. No analysis until after, when I listen back and went, oh that goes to Lydian, that goes to myxolydian, and that’s a relative minor substitution or deceptive resolution. It was written by feel Having the theory helps me remember what the hell I’ve just done and how I can reuse it elsewhere. I also use it to give some of my songs a distinct familiarity, without being outright plagiarism
Something else that people don't understand about music analysis: it's a way to understand how to expand your expressive vocabulary. Consider a parallel example: the average person has a vocabulary of about 20,000 words. However, authors tend to have much larger vocabularies... For example, James Joyce used over 30,000 unique words in Ulysses. By having a more expressive vocabulary you have greater control how you present your ideas. Do you need a larger expressive vocabulary? Not necessarily (Hemingway wasn't less expressive with the more limited vocabulary presented in his works), however, knowing the range of possibilities allows you to make the choice of limiting or expanding your vocabulary as you choose.
I've been rereading James Joyce's "Ulysses" for 50 years, and I still haven't found all of the gems hidden in it. A great example, CerebralAudio. Occasionally I glance at an annotated edition to see a few of Joyce's often obscure references explained, but it's so much more fun to discover them serendipitously by reading other books. That kind of richness and complexity is not unique to James Joyce -- nor to George Harrison either, for that matter. The other Beatles had it too, and so did/do other Irish authors. The arts are FULL of hidden gems to be discovered.
If you are the kind of person inclined to believe that you need more to create something beautiful.The most useful tool you will ever have as a creator, is to use limitations. Limitations will help you create and FINISH your work. Impose yourself limitations, you will be forced to find a way. and not get lost in the many times scary universe of unlimited choices.
@@saxofonistacr Not sure if I understood what you meant, but for the record: music theory is about gaining vocabulary to enhance your expression, richeness, and depth of your songs. But I would add that music theory is about freedom and limitations. It gives you freedom because you understand how music works as a whole, so you're able to manipulate it meaningfully. And yet, it might give you limitations if that's what you want. Sorry, I'm just too tired right now to expand my whole point hahahah
To the Leonard of music theory; thanks for the info.Now I can confirm I'll never learn it. Only thing I know is the emotion found in music. I relate this song to the Beatles Michelle, and I'd be lost without the feeling of creativity. And I am still a beginner at heart.
Man, I don't know what I'd do if your channel ever goes away. This is my favorite UA-cam channel! Keep them coming. I'm learning a lot. They all keep my interest. BTW, "Something" is one of the greatest songs ever! RIP George Harrison.
George Harrison was a musical genius, who unfortunately had to live by the shadow of two other geniuses, who were more vocal and outspoken. Took years to get to know George Harrison exceptional talent. RIP George!
I'm a songwriter and enjoy nerding out on theory and totally agree with your example of how analyzing songs helps us learn from the great songs we know and love. This was one of the best in-depth analyses on a complex and rich progression. That meow, meow, meow popup was friggin' hilarious! Awesome job!
Please do not stop making these "analysing" videos. I don't understand how someone can ask you to not analyse them and just feel them. Analysing them itself is feeling the music deeply with understanding why we feel that.
You got a good singing voice man. The interesting thing about Harrison was that he shows that everyone has something special inside but they don't know how to unlock it. John and Paul were naturals and he picked up the technique from them.
I've been a practicing musician and composer for more than 30 years and I love your videos because I learn stuff that even after all that time - and music school, I still didn't know. Yes, music is to be felt, and when you listen to the music of those people who don't study and practice the art, it sounds like they feel shitty. Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Star didn't just fall off a log and write all those gorgeous tunes, they knew exactly what they were doing, and when you listen to their progression over time, it's obvious that their skills vastly improved as they became more and more experienced songwriters and composers. They went from simplistic (but really fun) rock 'n' roll tunes like Love Me Do and I Want to Hold Your Hand, to compositional masterpieces such as A Day in The Life, and the entire Abbey Road record, (and they were rarely in the studio with each other when that one was made). I just wanted to mention a couple of things I noticed that might add clarity. The modulations in the IV V I where a non-diatonic chord is inserted between the IV and V chords is usually best with chords from the parallel Minor key, in this case C Minor, with the passage being in C Major. Also the modulation from C Major to A Major isn't actually a tonal drop of a Minor third, but instead it's an ascent of a Major sixth because A Major sharps the note C giving the impression of a lift rather than a drop. Now a movement to an A Minor would sound like a descent because the notes C and E are common to both chords and the root drops to A, but with A Major the rise of C to C sharp causes us (usually) to have an inclination to perceive the tonally inverted interval of an ascending sixth rather than the falling third, regardless of what the bass line does. That's why that change sounds so "bright" or "uplifting". Ascending leaps of a sixth are quite dramatic. For that reason I look for opportunities (as tastefully as possible) to use them in my melodies as well as my harmonic structures. Great video.
RD Bury he didn’t drop it an octave, maybe a whole tone. In any event George and Paul knocked this ,and Here Comes the Sun out of the park vocally. George never stretched his voice on his earlier songs, but on Abbey Road he showed what he was capable of as a singer. The bridge on Something says it all. “ I don’t know, I don’t know “ George sings natural voice, the falsetto ,and Paul of course could sing over a castrado ( joke there . But Paul had an unbelievable range )
George’s voice improved dramatically over time. In Something Paul is singing the high harmony . With that said, Georges voice was at its peak. George sings much higher in Here Comes The Sun which was only George,Paul, and Ringo, NO John anywhere in the song. Paul also sings the high harmonies, but George was up there as well. Sun sun sun -here it comes- :I I the sun,sun,sun is where it gets up there. There’s a falsetto in there. Perfection. On Something both George,and Paul both sing very high on the bridge which is where the high parts come in vocally. “ I don’t know, I don’t know “ the verses are don’t take a huge range, but when you hit the bridge both are getting up there natural voice. I don’t know why he brings it down vocally,rather than keeping in the original key of C, even if he had to sing falsetto. Regardless a good post by this man.
Something is one of the greatest songs ever written. Something and Here Comes the Sun were George's best songs for me.. Paul's bass part adds so much to this song, I think. THis guy explains the music theory part very well.
I know nothing about music - except appreciating the sound of it. It's fascinating listening to you talk about the chords. It's like a complicated math or an exotic language. I cannot fathom how you 've been able to master it. And it is pure joy to listen to you analyze one of an exquisite song.
For years I played music by "feel" and decided I didn't need to learn music theory, and, although it has taught me a lot about the feel of music, I'm still a crap musician stuck with a very limited understanding of how a good song is constructed, and what chords sound good together. So, recently I decided to bite the bullet and start to learn theory. Your channel has been very helpful in this so far, thanks. Even though I have only recently started to learn theory, it has been a real eye-opener and it feels like I have had a blindfold or blinkers removed and I can now see a much wider and more beautiful musical landscape, than I could before.
I learned saxophone first, then guitar, and a bit of piano. I knew how to read sheet at this point. When I took music theory classes my playing improved significantly on all those instruments. I can now listen to a song and hear the intervals happening and know there names. It helped with me identifying keys and soloing. I’m so happy that you decided to open the toolkit that is music theory.
Many of us out here. 'Hmmm, I didn't magically transform into a music god like I envisioned I would, I wonder why'? I've gotten so much better in 3 years than in at least the 20 previous...
Regarding the “don’t analyze just feel it”. I agree when listening to music. But you my friend are doing a tremendous service for your viewers. I think the way you present your material is easily understood and extremely generous. Thank you for your applied teaching method. Probably the most practical teachings on UA-cam. Cheers..
It's worth pointing out that this (great vid BTW) Is 'back engineering'. The Beatles and in this case George Harrison didn't have any official music theory. But did have a talent for writing good and often interesting melodies. It's easy to break the rules when you don't know them.
@@aaronaragon7838 George Martin didn't write any of the songs. The Beatles maybe couldn't read music, but they had enough knowledge of music theory to know exactly what they were doing. Listen to McCartney's bassline on Lucy in the sky, for instance. It changes the tonality of the song and was done very deliberately.
aaron aragon They didn't know written music, but they knew so many songs in different genres that they had a large chord repertoire and had heard a lot of different chord patterns and key changes. And as George Martin said, they were magpies.
@@catherinewilson3880 George Martin wrote the string quartet/string orchestra arrangements to She's Leaving Home and I think, Eleanor Rigby and Yesterday.
The Fab Four had George Martin who was a graduate of the Royal Academy of Music, so yes they did have musical consulting, training and arranging by a top professional for years.
I've been self-taught for over 45 years. I've got no theory whatsoever. But damn. You make me want to crack open some books. Very inspirational. You move fast but i found myself keeping up with you. Great video. Bravo! from your newest subscriber.
It's so weird that people that come to your channel to watch your videos talk about "not analyzing". What are they here for? I don't know anything about theory but I love watching song breakdowns, be they lyrical, harmonic, both, or otherwise.
Wow, I feel like I've been drilling for oil for 10 years and finally struck black gold!!! This channel is an amazing resource. Thank you so much for taking the time to share your wisdom and the many hours you must have spent editing it. Pure GOLD !!!
There are around 5 episodes of perfect progressions done by Jake and two Beatles' songs are on it which just goes to show the quality of their songwriting. No wonder they are the best band of all time.
My favorite pop/rock song of all-time-regardless of the technical aspects of the song. Perfect lyrics, melody and phenomenal bass line. Just a great song.
Thanks again for this great breakdown. As I finally get my head around the whole song, the macro structure is amazing - - the first part is quiet and about describing her. Then the turnaround ends with that out-of-the-blue A major - - and we get into the heavy introspective feelings of the singer: "you're asking me will my love grow...." And then that deeply emotional guitar solo. Eventually the turnaround comes back with the A at the end - - - and finally he puts the genie back in the bottle: the turnaround landing back on C. Two really distinct movements, with a lovely bow on the end to bring closure. And one last crazy observation - - - in my mind, I always thought of Something as a rather long song - - so much going on and so many different feelings. But somehow the whole thing is only 3:03!! One of the shortest "whole" songs on the album - - completely counterintuitive to me. Almost like a classical jewel-box piece. Anyway - thanks for this analysis - I would not have understood this tune without it. And it makes me want to reach for more in my own song-writing and music study.
I have always been the “feel the music” type too but I love this video! Music has always been kind of a sonic experience but here you have laid it out as if music were poetry with a kind of iambic pentameter and just structures like rhymes that could make poems/music more effective as an expressive art. I love looking at music in this new way. Please make more videos!
I have been playing back yard guitar for 30 yrs and have slowly delved into the theory as I know it's the only way to get pass barriers and get to some sort of expression and freedom. I have learned so much from you and wish I had made the effort to advance earlier. Sometimes it just takes the right voice to get you over the hump. Thank you and don't stop producing these videos.
I learned something new. I have a tendency to toggle btw the major and minor tonic in my writing...but not understanding about borrowing chords like the Eb in the turn around. Great idea to include other options..Ab, Bb...to show how it works. Magical and yet not. But still magical to me✨
The Doors - The End, Riders on the Storm Led Zeppelin - Rain song, No Quarter Excellent examples of fascinating chord progressions and unique production.
Thankyou yes we need to be shown these interesting variants. People who say feel it , either don’t know the answer or don’t want others to know the answer. Never under rate musical jealousies. You’re a legend Jake , a true professional. 🇦🇺 cheers Scott
my theory about that Eb is that George made that intro solo before, playing that Bb note, maybe just an chromatic note, and (maybe) he thought: "alright, now i need some chord to put in that part to it sound better with the melody" When he plays Bb note, Eb chord is playing, Bb is the 5th of Eb, so it is part of that chord maybe it could be just me thinking too much (probably it is).
Alexander Machado he composed it in A and the Eb was originally a C which is very common to play in A when you are playing bluesy/rock progressions, the bIII
Love how passionate you are when analyzing these songs. Makes you appreciate something that would have probably gone unnoticed. Learning tons from you. Grateful to have found you. Big thanks, Jake!
From my point of view, given the number of videos you have out here on YT, and your wonderfully prepared and presented lessons, I’d say you’ve been busting your tail, so I think it’s great that GTR provides you a beautiful instrument with which a great recording might be cut. Kudos to them for their kind generosity! Realizing that you have over 140,000 subs, I’m betting I’m not the only one who appreciates your efforts and thinks it’s nice that you have that guitar in your hands.
The Beatles were just incredible. Their chord progressions were out of this world and Something is certainly no exception (oh, and it's on Abbey Road, not the White Album).
They literally had no idea what they were doing, and took pride in it, and are responsible for people thinking the only way to make music is to have no clue what you are doing.
@@DreamlessSleepwalker I don't know about that. I recall reading an interview in which John talked about about cadences and writing in modes (specifically mixolydian). I don't know about Paul and George though.
@@DreamlessSleepwalker They may have led you to believe that, but you cannot write songs as complex as some of The Beatles stuff without knowing what you are doing.
@Trendz Now Forgot to add this in but "Harmony makes all the difference," and "Only a genius can know how to tread with the harmony."(great wording there. You do have to be a genius to learn how to use harmony. You have to have an IQ of at least 150 to pass AP music theory) are stupid. Do you wanna know why you cannot use harmony? Because you know fucking nothing about it, aren't learning about musical form which limits your ability to use it in context, and are procrastinating and avoiding ear training. Funny how you idiots all believe that "music is talent based" but wouldn't even entertain that "Intelligence is genetic," because the second one is racist in your eyes. God I cannot stand you people.
I, for one, appreciate your explanation of this iconic song. Through it, I am learning why I am playing the specific chord progressions and what makes them work together. Continue, please and thanks.
i have watched 8 hours of your Theory videos over the past 12 hours. my head is going to explode but i seriously feel more excited about playing guitar then I have in years.
Wow, never heard this, staggering praise from someone like Sinatra, who I’m sure had listened to first hand the greatest writers, composers and musicians ever.
Can Someone say, why one of the ‘Greatest Love Songs’ in the music history does not have a word ‘Love’ in it? And would George Harrison be able to produce a music theory analysis of ‘Something’ to match this one? I remember opening a brand new ‘Abbey Road’ when we were able to get it in the USSR. It was like getting laid for the first time. We could not think of music theory while listening to it. We probably played it twenty times in a row on the first day. As valuable as this video is to students of music, and I am one of them , and thank you, analyzing The Beatles, is like explaining, why the cake tastes so good. It is hard to do. But keep the legacy alive. Cheers
1) I haven't watched your videos for a while and I almost forgot it was the best channel on UA-cam. 2) I've just got into the Beatles two months ago and omg what was I missing all my life? (See what I did there?) 3) This song is the best love song ever. 4) The modulation back to C is merveilleux with this EPIC guitar solo. 5) I love the fact that we never go back to the chorus.
Nice work! I enjoy paying attention to changes in any medium, and how they affect our consciousness. Key change up a whole tone, bright and enthusiastic, etc. Well done!
All the giants stand on the shoulders of giants, nothing is created in a complete vacuum. Either you feel it or you don't. Analyzing helps to increase your tools to create great music. You can analyze AND feel the music, just like it is possible to sight read AND PLAY by ear, or sight read AND PLAY with feeling. Sure, some only play by ear and with feeling without analyzing, but a lot of great music has come from analysis AND feeling.
All that theory will teach you is rules of common use, I got the melody and chords of some pop songs by ear without any training when I was a kid. But unless you have a very special ability, getting to know at least the basics of chords will be very helpfull. And getting to internalize how those chords sound even better
Music theory teaches you how music works and how to manipulate it to get a disered effect with great expression. Theory is not about "rules". Theory gives you the vocabulary and the understanding, and then it's up to you to create great music.
Oh, the F (IV) Eb (bIII) G (V) C (I) -if you listen to the lead guitar, you’ll hear a melody playing A,Bb,B,C - giving you that cromatic line. That’s why it kinda doesn’t work replacing the Eb with Ab... :)
I'm new to this feed and I have to say I am impressed with how well you are able to explain theory and application. I've been trying to understand key changes and borrowed chords forever now. Your videos have opened a new world to me. Thank you! And please do keep analyzing the music as you are 100% right about it making us better musicians. Also, I love the fact that I can close my eyes for a second and hear Jeff Goldblum talking music theory. Love it! Best guitar instructional channel by far!
Terrific intelligent lesson. You are really enjoying getting to 'why' the progression sounds so perfect. So I found myself really enjoying the lesson, as well. Thank you!
Very interesting and really well presented. I've been listening to the Beatles since the sixties and know a little bit of music theory - now I know a bit more! Understanding how something works increases my enjoyment.
I love the analogy at the end about theory and pie. It’s a good analysis and really effective analogy in my opinion. I’ll definitely show people that when they say you don’t need theory.
Hi, I saw your comment, and although I'm no Jake Lizzio, I thought I'd give it a go myself, albeit in text format: As far as I can tell, the main 4-chord progression running through the song is: G Em7 C#m7 CmMaj7(add6) I'm pretty sure the main focus of this progression is the chromatic descent going from D->C#->C, with the D lasting twice as long as the others. D is found in the G chord, and see how the D is retained in the Em7. Then the following two notes are the roots of their respective chords, of course. The most jarring transition is clearly the Em7->C#m7, and the best way I can interpret this is that the C#m7 constitutes the vi chord in E mixolydian, so E temporarily becomes the tonic, albeit through a major mode despite the Em7 chord obviously being minor. After all, the relationship between the G and Em7 is the same as the (hypothetical) relationship between E and C#m7. If anyone reading this has a better explanation, please do let me know. The CmMaj7 (and subsequent CmMaj7add6 when the A replaces the G) represents a return to the key of G major, and lays the groundwork for a minor plagal cadence upon returning to the original G chord, albeit with the additional dissonance of the major 7th and the 6th, a dissonance that simply accentuates the gut-wrenching tone of the album's lyrical content. I hope you find this somewhat informative, seeing as a video analysing this song's chords doesn't seem to have been made. Once again, if anything I've said is inaccurate or needlessly convoluted, replies are very welcome.
What a fantastic breakdown. I especially loved your explanation about the importance of analysis in the end. Art in its purest form is magic, but magic is just science we’ve yet to understand.
Wasn't "Something" released on Abbey Road? You said White Album in the beginning
LOL WTF I even put abbey road on the screen behind me when I spoke it. I hope at least the theory is correct
@@SignalsMusicStudio lol I was bamboozled mate
Just keeping you on your toes :D
@@SignalsMusicStudio the only thing you missed is when it goes back to C it modulates via a common chord. He brings the G in from mixolydian/minor and then uses it to get back to C. Smart stuff
@@SignalsMusicStudio i believe that in the original song the am chromatism occurs on the bass. great video!
Your lesson made me fall in love with this song, and, as a result, I chose this as my first dance at my wedding. So despite never having met, never knowing me at all, you inadvertently hand a hand in my wedding day.
Keep the great lessons coming!
Raffi Azar that’s awesome?
Be an organ and marrow donor ASAP and adopt and donate to bed nets
This was my first dance song at my wedding, too. My niece came over, after the dance ended, and said, "of course, that was going to be the song." 🙃
Hey no way it was my wife's and I first dance song too. and then I surprised her and played it and sang it to her later that night. We had a Beatles themed wedding
The bass playing on Something is absolutely incredible. Just beautiful.
I am a bass player and this is one of the first songs I wanted to learn note for note. It is beautiful bass.
One thing I like the Beatles most is that they are always original in their crafs. Each of them had contributed a lot for every song they have done. It's a collective efforts from vocal arrangements, chord progressions, melodic baselines, melodic riffs to original drums fill ins. In my own terminology, I dubbed them as the avant-garde rock band and such feat is beyond compare.
Not only in Something cause I've figure out that Paul McCartney has been playing melodic bass runs to most of their songs, be it simple or complicated ones.
that was George same goes for the lic in ' and I love her' George was a master although he ducked away from that focus , he truly was a master even with subtle touches of his bass leads.
I agree. George himself apparently thought that Paul’s bass line was too ”busy”, but relented - and we’re all very grateful!
Could we see like 20 more Beatles analyses
stawberry fields forever is really interesting but there's so much going on that Idk how to analyze it properly
Nice of you to MENTION whether you EVEN LIKED this video all ...before DEMANDING something. Gee.
@@endriu55 google Howard Goodal and Beatles also Google Pedler and Beatles, lotsa analysis for your pleasure
@@FinnBjerke I've seen the Howard's documentary, didn't hear about Pedler though, thanks
@@endriu55 Songwriting secrets of the Beatles... Very good and informative indeed.
George, "I think it needs a simple bass line". Paul, "no problemo".
Ha! Classic!
“You’re not supposed to analyze music”
Guess what!? The Beatles “analyzed” music. They knew, and many occasions admitted plainly, that their chord and melodic writing was inspired by understanding Bach, Mozart, Chopin and other great classical composers.
And... it clearly shows in their results. No one “composes” music theory. But understanding how music works allows a level of craftsmanship that is unmistakable.
I like your grandma’s recipe example. Another might be carpentry. Maybe you could just figure out how to make a chair from scratch. But having knowledge of woodworking, and studying the work of a master, would probably allow you to build a much more sturdy and even beautiful chair with many details you wouldn’t have known how to do without that higher understanding.
Music IS feeling and emotion... but it’s also science, math, and precision.
And that’s why it’s so freaking cool.
Good job breaking down one of my all time favorite songs!!! 👍🏻👍🏻
@Jack Say what about Bach and Mozart? I never quoted anything they said about any composer. Only that they listened to and specific songs were directly inspired by classical composers like Bach and others. Paul McCartney talks about that a lot actually.
So I have no idea what your beef is.
The guy in the video discusses analyzing music and why and is the one says, or quotes others in his comments as saying "You're not supposed to analyze music". He's right, they're wrong.
Every great composer analyzed and assimilated the music of masters before him or her. As does any craftsperson in any skill or trade.
So... chill out dude.
Beatles did the same. They “borrowed” from anything and everything that sounded good to them. Giftted listeners make gifted composers. Their “analysis” was aural.
Quentin Tarantino once said something along the lines of “a true artist steal from other, but find a way to make it their own and improve on it.”
When I was studying for my first degree in Music, I read a great book called "Bach the Borrower" which went into great depth about how Bach would borrow from anything and everything - from folk music to other composers' stuff... and I then did a seminar based around splicing together bits of Bach (that he borrowed from his own works)... to illustrate this. Read Bob Dylan's autobiography "Chronicles" and you'll see the same thing. Same in any genre, music, poetry or whatever... Yep - you gotta listen!!! ;-)
This is awesome. I loved you in Shazam too dude
lol
how?
nailed!
Wahahaha!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH
The Beatles loved to keep you guessing what chord you're in. It's one of the reasons they could write simple songs with a magic sound to them.
Thought they were simple, I though was all major/minor chords but every Beatle book surprises me!
I know almost every Beatles harmony, but now learning to play em..Alohaas
@@konarain You should google Alan Pollack
@@bernardfinucane2061 Thanks man..I met George @ A&M, (Dark horse) btw.. Alohaas
No, they didn't, bernard. Where'd you get that?
@@chipgaasche4933 They might have. Paul certainly got a kick out of it.
I'm glad you commented on the analysing vs. feeling "debate", I agree with you 100%! And the Newton quote is apt in my opinion, because it relates very well to some people's perception of science in general.
I've had multiple people tell me that they feel trying to understand something somehow takes away from it... and I can see where they're coming from, but I couldn't disagree more. To me, understanding why a sunset has these awesome colors, or indeed why a certain chord progression makes people feel a certain way, makes me appreciate it _even more_ .
sounds like Dawkins' ” unweaving the rainbow” or something) i totally agree. knowing how the stuff works adds to the awe, be it nature or art.
I concur. The fact that somebody wouldn't want to understand how something works, and rather simply blindly accept that it does and leave it at that, just boggles my mind. I can't understand people who have no desire to understand. Knowledge doesn't stifle creativity. It enhances it.
The arguments revolving around feel-writing versus rational-theory analysis are BOTH valid. The former comes BEFORE the recording and the LATTER comes after. All composers desire to "make great music". Some play feel-licks, some write structured notes on paper. The objection i and many others have to these kinds of music theory analysis videos is that they are produced for likes, subs and money, hence ANYTHING can be imagined and said to pad out a video to 10 mins for the YT algorithms. Also, so much left brain post-analysis never equates with what the composer actually did.
@@thedolphin5428 Nobody suggested that feel-writing was invalid. You say of composers that "Some play feel-licks, some write structured notes on paper", I'd argue that most do *both* . Post-analysis isn't necessarily a way to understand what the composer _intended_ , it is a way to try and understand why and how the music they made works. And if someone thinks that's a pointless endeavor, well nobody is forcing them to listen.
As for the objection that analysis videos are produced for likes, subs and money... I mean, as opposed to what? Composers also write music for album sales and concert ticket sales. It's their job, of course they expect to be paid for it.
seban678
Well you may argue that most musos do both (feel AND scripted) but I would strenuously argue that NOWADAYS, and certainly outside of orchestral music (because that's what we are seeing all over YT in such analyses), they do not. Many many great player-composers do not even read music! Mississippi blues? Riff based, improv prog rock?
Also, many of these analytical theorists do in fact make wildly speculative statements about WHAT THEY THINK the composer intended, like "... this is what they did here ..." or "... this is how they made this work there", not to mention all the pop-psychology they superimpose into mystical lyrical fantasies. Total bullshit in many situations. And, the fact that many other musos in the comments sections beg to disagree with the chordal summaries PROVES their analyses are subjective presuppositions and proves that so much of musical theory analysis (of pop and rock and blues and jazz) is not actually real but an intellectual fabrication.
As regards remuneration for music writing, you completely missed my point. All power and money to people who write and perform music. My beef is with music students who intentionally blurt out imaginative crap on YT for advert and Patreon income. Mate, I am old enough to remember when EVERYTHING on the web was free (prior to 1995) before safe banking and EFT. People shared online for love of their hobby, to increase the cyber database of human knowledge for FREE. But nowadays, any mug with a computer and video editing software and a diploma in basket making can earn a living by entertaining people weaving rafia into waste paper baskets or put up a clickbaity title like "How Beethoven Wrote His 9th" or "How Jimi Hendrix Broke All The Musical Rules" or "How George Harrison Wrote the Perfect Progression".
I tried to figure out this song when I was 15 with no idea of music theory whatsoever. This analysis really brought me back and gave me some cool new insight. Now I can define more precisely what got me fascinated in the first place. Thanks for that!
We need more of this, great analysis, you're great at teaching. Thank you.
Miguel A. Cazajous. I was only singing this to myself the other day and thought how sweet the chord changes were. The F Eb G C is such a sweet turn around.
I had just knocked out a country song for a friend’s wedding present that covered much of his colourful history and how they were perfect together.
The song is pretty straight forward with a usual arrangement with verse, prechorus, chorus/hook and bridge but I managed to use 7 chords and 2 modal interchanges. Just put it together by feel, trying to work out what was going to work without sounding boring, or too jarring. No analysis until after, when I listen back and went, oh that goes to Lydian, that goes to myxolydian, and that’s a relative minor substitution or deceptive resolution. It was written by feel
Having the theory helps me remember what the hell I’ve just done and how I can reuse it elsewhere. I also use it to give some of my songs a distinct familiarity, without being outright plagiarism
My favorite is where it moves from the subtonic to the subtropical. Just beautiful . . .
Something else that people don't understand about music analysis: it's a way to understand how to expand your expressive vocabulary. Consider a parallel example: the average person has a vocabulary of about 20,000 words. However, authors tend to have much larger vocabularies... For example, James Joyce used over 30,000 unique words in Ulysses. By having a more expressive vocabulary you have greater control how you present your ideas.
Do you need a larger expressive vocabulary? Not necessarily (Hemingway wasn't less expressive with the more limited vocabulary presented in his works), however, knowing the range of possibilities allows you to make the choice of limiting or expanding your vocabulary as you choose.
excellent analogy
I've been rereading James Joyce's "Ulysses" for 50 years, and I still haven't found all of the gems hidden in it. A great example, CerebralAudio. Occasionally I glance at an annotated edition to see a few of Joyce's often obscure references explained, but it's so much more fun to discover them serendipitously by reading other books. That kind of richness and complexity is not unique to James Joyce -- nor to George Harrison either, for that matter. The other Beatles had it too, and so did/do other Irish authors. The arts are FULL of hidden gems to be discovered.
If you are the kind of person inclined to believe that you need more to create something beautiful.The most useful tool you will ever have as a creator, is to use limitations. Limitations will help you create and FINISH your work.
Impose yourself limitations, you will be forced to find a way. and not get lost in the many times scary universe of unlimited choices.
@@saxofonistacr Not sure if I understood what you meant, but for the record: music theory is about gaining vocabulary to enhance your expression, richeness, and depth of your songs. But I would add that music theory is about freedom and limitations. It gives you freedom because you understand how music works as a whole, so you're able to manipulate it meaningfully. And yet, it might give you limitations if that's what you want. Sorry, I'm just too tired right now to expand my whole point hahahah
Great analogy. We have to study, but when we incorporate what we study on an unconscious level, we can use it to play by feel.
Either George was a genius
OR
He was like " Eh... That's sounds quite right "
😂
One doesn't have to be a genius to use these harmonic tools.
@@MichaelCrutcher I agree! I'm in love with George's works in Beatles or solo!!!
Double genius! one to know how to create it-then AGAIN to know it sounds "quite right"
Can’t it be both?
To the Leonard of music theory; thanks for the info.Now I can confirm I'll never learn it.
Only thing I know is the emotion found in music.
I relate this song to the Beatles Michelle, and I'd be lost without the feeling of creativity. And I am still a beginner at heart.
Love these perfect progressions videos. Keep them coming. Cheers.
Man, I don't know what I'd do if your channel ever goes away. This is my favorite UA-cam channel! Keep them coming. I'm learning a lot. They all keep my interest. BTW, "Something" is one of the greatest songs ever! RIP George Harrison.
George Harrison was a musical genius, who unfortunately had to live by the shadow of two other geniuses, who were more vocal and outspoken. Took years to get to know George Harrison exceptional talent. RIP George!
As an inexperienced guitar player, I really appreciate your videos.
Thank you
As a beginner piano player I wish knew what he's talking about.
I'm a songwriter and enjoy nerding out on theory and totally agree with your example of how analyzing songs helps us learn from the great songs we know and love. This was one of the best in-depth analyses on a complex and rich progression. That meow, meow, meow popup was friggin' hilarious! Awesome job!
'Beware of Darkness' has some gorgeous unexpected chord changes.
I need this so bad
Great one..Alohaas
Please do not stop making these "analysing" videos. I don't understand how someone can ask you to not analyse them and just feel them. Analysing them itself is feeling the music deeply with understanding why we feel that.
Awesome breakdown but that Meow Mix was the gem I really needed to see this morning
That was a great clip that showed exactly the same descending line. Funny too, and excellent!!!
You got a good singing voice man. The interesting thing about Harrison was that he shows that everyone has something special inside but they don't know how to unlock it. John and Paul were naturals and he picked up the technique from them.
I've been a practicing musician and composer for more than 30 years and I love your videos because I learn stuff that even after all that time - and music school, I still didn't know. Yes, music is to be felt, and when you listen to the music of those people who don't study and practice the art, it sounds like they feel shitty. Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Star didn't just fall off a log and write all those gorgeous tunes, they knew exactly what they were doing, and when you listen to their progression over time, it's obvious that their skills vastly improved as they became more and more experienced songwriters and composers. They went from simplistic (but really fun) rock 'n' roll tunes like Love Me Do and I Want to Hold Your Hand, to compositional masterpieces such as A Day in The Life, and the entire Abbey Road record, (and they were rarely in the studio with each other when that one was made).
I just wanted to mention a couple of things I noticed that might add clarity. The modulations in the IV V I where a non-diatonic chord is inserted between the IV and V chords is usually best with chords from the parallel Minor key, in this case C Minor, with the passage being in C Major. Also the modulation from C Major to A Major isn't actually a tonal drop of a Minor third, but instead it's an ascent of a Major sixth because A Major sharps the note C giving the impression of a lift rather than a drop. Now a movement to an A Minor would sound like a descent because the notes C and E are common to both chords and the root drops to A, but with A Major the rise of C to C sharp causes us (usually) to have an inclination to perceive the tonally inverted interval of an ascending sixth rather than the falling third, regardless of what the bass line does. That's why that change sounds so "bright" or "uplifting". Ascending leaps of a sixth are quite dramatic. For that reason I look for opportunities (as tastefully as possible) to use them in my melodies as well as my harmonic structures.
Great video.
I don't think there is ANYTHING simple about I WANT TO HOLD YOUR HAND- maybe just me
@@lamper2 I always thought it was fabulously dramatic and visceral.
Great theory! Makes people realize that music is a very complicated art. Thanks!
Dropping the vocals an octave -- Good choice; not sure if anyone has noticed but Harrison's natural range is somewhere in the stratosphere.
RD Bury he didn’t drop it an octave, maybe a whole tone. In any event George and Paul knocked this ,and Here Comes the Sun out of the park vocally. George never stretched his voice on his earlier songs, but on Abbey Road he showed what he was capable of as a singer. The bridge on Something says it all. “ I don’t know, I don’t know “ George sings natural voice, the falsetto ,and Paul of course could sing over a castrado ( joke there . But Paul had an unbelievable range )
@@jacquescousteau217 But George grinds a little edge in right there. You really feel it.
George’s voice improved dramatically over time. In Something Paul is singing the high harmony . With that said, Georges voice was at its peak. George sings much higher in Here Comes The Sun which was only George,Paul, and Ringo, NO John anywhere in the song. Paul also sings the high harmonies, but George was up there as well. Sun sun sun -here it comes- :I I the sun,sun,sun is where it gets up there. There’s a falsetto in there. Perfection.
On Something both George,and Paul both sing very high on the bridge which is where the high parts come in vocally. “ I don’t know, I don’t know “ the verses are don’t take a huge range, but when you hit the bridge both are getting up there natural voice.
I don’t know why he brings it down vocally,rather than keeping in the original key of C, even if he had to sing falsetto. Regardless a good post by this man.
Something is one of the greatest songs ever written. Something and Here Comes the Sun were George's best songs for me.. Paul's bass part adds so much to this song, I think. THis guy explains the music theory part very well.
Music theory makes me salivate.
Ikr
Uhh...abbey road. Second song after come together, preceding Maxwell's silver hammer
That is an amazing video. The most different angle on the creation of music that I have seen on you tube and one of the most musically intelligent.
I know nothing about music - except appreciating the sound of it. It's fascinating listening to you talk about the chords. It's like a complicated math or an exotic language. I cannot fathom how you 've been able to master it. And it is pure joy to listen to you analyze one of an exquisite song.
For years I played music by "feel" and decided I didn't need to learn music theory, and, although it has taught me a lot about the feel of music, I'm still a crap musician stuck with a very limited understanding of how a good song is constructed, and what chords sound good together. So, recently I decided to bite the bullet and start to learn theory. Your channel has been very helpful in this so far, thanks. Even though I have only recently started to learn theory, it has been a real eye-opener and it feels like I have had a blindfold or blinkers removed and I can now see a much wider and more beautiful musical landscape, than I could before.
fishy paw same here
I learned saxophone first, then guitar, and a bit of piano. I knew how to read sheet at this point. When I took music theory classes my playing improved significantly on all those instruments. I can now listen to a song and hear the intervals happening and know there names. It helped with me identifying keys and soloing. I’m so happy that you decided to open the toolkit that is music theory.
Many of us out here. 'Hmmm, I didn't magically transform into a music god like I envisioned I would, I wonder why'?
I've gotten so much better in 3 years than in at least the 20 previous...
Now you get why music theory is so important. Happy to hear! :)
Regarding the “don’t analyze just feel it”. I agree when listening to music.
But you my friend are doing a tremendous service for your viewers. I think the way you present your material is easily understood and extremely generous. Thank you for your applied teaching method. Probably the most practical teachings on UA-cam. Cheers..
It's worth pointing out that this (great vid BTW) Is 'back engineering'. The Beatles and in this case George Harrison didn't have any official music theory. But did have a talent for writing good and often interesting melodies. It's easy to break the rules when you don't know them.
All pop musicians are folkies in a way...not a lot of theory required. But the Fab 4 had George Martin.
@@aaronaragon7838 George Martin didn't write any of the songs. The Beatles maybe couldn't read music, but they had enough knowledge of music theory to know exactly what they were doing. Listen to McCartney's bassline on Lucy in the sky, for instance. It changes the tonality of the song and was done very deliberately.
aaron aragon They didn't know written music, but they knew so many songs in different genres that they had a large chord repertoire and had heard a lot of different chord patterns and key changes. And as George Martin said, they were magpies.
@@catherinewilson3880 George Martin wrote the string quartet/string orchestra arrangements to She's Leaving Home and I think, Eleanor Rigby and Yesterday.
The Fab Four had George Martin who was a graduate of the Royal Academy of Music, so yes they did have musical consulting, training and arranging by a top professional for years.
I've been self-taught for over 45 years. I've got no theory whatsoever. But damn. You make me want to crack open some books. Very inspirational. You move fast but i found myself keeping up with you. Great video. Bravo! from your newest subscriber.
go for it!
It's so weird that people that come to your channel to watch your videos talk about "not analyzing". What are they here for? I don't know anything about theory but I love watching song breakdowns, be they lyrical, harmonic, both, or otherwise.
Wow, I feel like I've been drilling for oil for 10 years and finally struck black gold!!! This channel is an amazing resource. Thank you so much for taking the time to share your wisdom and the many hours you must have spent editing it. Pure GOLD !!!
There are around 5 episodes of perfect progressions done by Jake and two Beatles' songs are on it which just goes to show the quality of their songwriting. No wonder they are the best band of all time.
My favorite pop/rock song of all-time-regardless of the technical aspects of the song.
Perfect lyrics, melody and phenomenal bass line. Just a great song.
Thanks again for this great breakdown. As I finally get my head around the whole song, the macro structure is amazing - - the first part is quiet and about describing her. Then the turnaround ends with that out-of-the-blue A major - - and we get into the heavy introspective feelings of the singer: "you're asking me will my love grow...." And then that deeply emotional guitar solo. Eventually the turnaround comes back with the A at the end - - - and finally he puts the genie back in the bottle: the turnaround landing back on C. Two really distinct movements, with a lovely bow on the end to bring closure.
And one last crazy observation - - - in my mind, I always thought of Something as a rather long song - - so much going on and so many different feelings. But somehow the whole thing is only 3:03!! One of the shortest "whole" songs on the album - - completely counterintuitive to me. Almost like a classical jewel-box piece.
Anyway - thanks for this analysis - I would not have understood this tune without it. And it makes me want to reach for more in my own song-writing and music study.
Dude that's one heck of an analysis! The world needs more musos like you. Thanks heaps for sharing your knowledge!
I have always been the “feel the music” type too but I love this video! Music has always been kind of a sonic experience but here you have laid it out as if music were poetry with a kind of iambic pentameter and just structures like rhymes that could make poems/music more effective as an expressive art. I love looking at music in this new way. Please make more videos!
I have been playing back yard guitar for 30 yrs and have slowly delved into the theory as I know it's the only way to get pass barriers and get to some sort of expression and freedom. I have learned so much from you and wish I had made the effort to advance earlier. Sometimes it just takes the right voice to get you over the hump. Thank you and don't stop producing these videos.
I learned something new. I have a tendency to toggle btw the major and minor tonic in my writing...but not understanding about borrowing chords like the Eb in the turn around. Great idea to include other options..Ab, Bb...to show how it works. Magical and yet not. But still magical to me✨
Your explanation and understand is assuredly a natural instructional form of genius.
Fantastic review! It has got me thinking outside my box...
George Harrison could play, write, and always my favorite Beatle. Excellent dissection of a great song.
That acoustic sounds exceptional too- I'm checking them out as I need a good acoustic guitar. Thanks for the link.
Keep analyzing these songs. I love learning why they work.
The Doors - The End, Riders on the Storm
Led Zeppelin - Rain song, No Quarter
Excellent examples of fascinating chord progressions and unique production.
Thankyou yes we need to be shown these interesting variants. People who say feel it , either don’t know the answer or don’t want others to know the answer. Never under rate musical jealousies. You’re a legend Jake , a true professional. 🇦🇺 cheers Scott
Most satisfying video I've watched in a while, and I watch a lot of music lesson videos. I CRAVE the theoretical insight. Great job.
Your comments about analyzing a song are absolutely right. Deconstruct to reconstruct! I liked the recipe analogy.
Bro I absolutely love these in depth analysis videos man, very useful knowledge ✌💯💯
I love how you break down songs very clear and concise Being into music theory like I am really makes it enjoyable to watch
my theory about that Eb is that George made that intro solo before, playing that Bb note, maybe just an chromatic note, and (maybe) he thought: "alright, now i need some chord to put in that part to it sound better with the melody"
When he plays Bb note, Eb chord is playing, Bb is the 5th of Eb, so it is part of that chord
maybe it could be just me thinking too much (probably it is).
I was thinking the same thing, maybe you’re right!
Alexander Machado he composed it in A and the Eb was originally a C which is very common to play in A when you are playing bluesy/rock progressions, the bIII
This comment is legendary.
Love how passionate you are when analyzing these songs. Makes you appreciate something that would have probably gone unnoticed. Learning tons from you. Grateful to have found you. Big thanks, Jake!
That was fantastic. Thanks for doing it. Revealing to say the least.
This song is a once in a lifetime masterpiece
From my point of view, given the number of videos you have out here on YT, and your wonderfully prepared and presented lessons, I’d say you’ve been busting your tail, so I think it’s great that GTR provides you a beautiful instrument with which a great recording might be cut. Kudos to them for their kind generosity! Realizing that you have over 140,000 subs, I’m betting I’m not the only one who appreciates your efforts and thinks it’s nice that you have that guitar in your hands.
The Beatles were just incredible. Their chord progressions were out of this world and Something is certainly no exception (oh, and it's on Abbey Road, not the White Album).
They literally had no idea what they were doing, and took pride in it, and are responsible for people thinking the only way to make music is to have no clue what you are doing.
@@DreamlessSleepwalker I don't know about that. I recall reading an interview in which John talked about about cadences and writing in modes (specifically mixolydian). I don't know about Paul and George though.
@@DreamlessSleepwalker They may have led you to believe that, but you cannot write songs as complex as some of The Beatles stuff without knowing what you are doing.
@@catherinewilson3880 They weren't writing that complex music to be honest. Anybody with music theory can write more complex music.
@Trendz Now Forgot to add this in but "Harmony makes all the difference," and "Only a genius can know how to tread with the harmony."(great wording there. You do have to be a genius to learn how to use harmony. You have to have an IQ of at least 150 to pass AP music theory) are stupid. Do you wanna know why you cannot use harmony? Because you know fucking nothing about it, aren't learning about musical form which limits your ability to use it in context, and are procrastinating and avoiding ear training. Funny how you idiots all believe that "music is talent based" but wouldn't even entertain that "Intelligence is genetic," because the second one is racist in your eyes. God I cannot stand you people.
Nicely put together. Will watch this again.
Jake, you are the Mr. Rogers of music education!
I, for one, appreciate your explanation of this iconic song. Through it, I am learning why I am playing the specific chord progressions and what makes them work together. Continue, please and thanks.
The melody sounds nice in the lower baritone range.
No
@@stuartmunro1319 Yes
i think it would sound nice to us in any range. it's just one of the best ever created.
@@mattmarkus4868 true
@@mattmarkus4868 true words
That explanation in the turnaround about replacing chord from borrowed key was really helpful.... Thank you :)
Randomly came across this and was enjoying it - then the Meow Mix cat made me really chuckle and I had to hit subscribe.
i have watched 8 hours of your Theory videos over the past 12 hours. my head is going to explode but i seriously feel more excited about playing guitar then I have in years.
Woah, that exquisite Red Letter Media reference right in the middle. That was as pleasant as it was unexpected.
(:
With Master Beato, easily the best music theory channel on UA-cam. So accessible and engaging, keep it up Jake!
The greatest love song ever written according to Sinatra.
john mccaffrey yes and to Harrison’s amusement said it was his favourite Lennon/McCartney composition
Wow, never heard this, staggering praise from someone like Sinatra, who I’m sure had listened to first hand the greatest writers, composers and musicians ever.
@@xirknight Christ, you have issues
@@daveclarke68 i forgot he said that-ha ha-he never cared to correct himself i think
Can Someone say, why one of the ‘Greatest Love Songs’ in the music history does not have a word ‘Love’ in it? And would George Harrison be able to produce a music theory analysis of ‘Something’ to match this one? I remember opening a brand new ‘Abbey Road’ when we were able to get it in the USSR. It was like getting laid for the first time. We could not think of music theory while listening to it. We probably played it twenty times in a row on the first day. As valuable as this video is to students of music, and I am one of them , and thank you, analyzing The Beatles, is like explaining, why the cake tastes so good. It is hard to do. But keep the legacy alive. Cheers
1) I haven't watched your videos for a while and I almost forgot it was the best channel on UA-cam.
2) I've just got into the Beatles two months ago and omg what was I missing all my life? (See what I did there?)
3) This song is the best love song ever.
4) The modulation back to C is merveilleux with this EPIC guitar solo.
5) I love the fact that we never go back to the chorus.
zz top la grange modulates from A to C then back down. from C to A. nice job by the way.
i enjoyed this very much.
Nice work! I enjoy paying attention to changes in any medium, and how they affect our consciousness. Key change up a whole tone, bright and enthusiastic, etc. Well done!
Franki Valí - can’t take my eyes off you has the same progression it’s really cool
That's a great song. Andy Williams did it too. And Muse - I really like their version.
I'm very happy for you to analyze songs in this way. It provides another level of appreciation of the music.
All the giants stand on the shoulders of giants, nothing is created in a complete vacuum. Either you feel it or you don't. Analyzing helps to increase your tools to create great music. You can analyze AND feel the music, just like it is possible to sight read AND PLAY by ear, or sight read AND PLAY with feeling. Sure, some only play by ear and with feeling without analyzing, but a lot of great music has come from analysis AND feeling.
All that theory will teach you is rules of common use, I got the melody and chords of some pop songs by ear without any training when I was a kid. But unless you have a very special ability, getting to know at least the basics of chords will be very helpfull. And getting to internalize how those chords sound even better
Music theory teaches you how music works and how to manipulate it to get a disered effect with great expression. Theory is not about "rules". Theory gives you the vocabulary and the understanding, and then it's up to you to create great music.
Excellent Analysis Video of a Masterpiece Song! Bravo!
The F Eb G C is also chromatic A Bb B C
One of my all-time favorite songs. Beautifully explained
This song and its original arrangement is pure genius. Thank you for such a detailed analysis.
I died when the meow mix clip came in! 😂
I think this tutorial is kind of a master work I've made my living mostly teaching songwriting over the past 25 years and this is just great work
Oh, the F (IV) Eb (bIII) G (V) C (I)
-if you listen to the lead guitar, you’ll hear a melody playing A,Bb,B,C - giving you that cromatic line. That’s why it kinda doesn’t work replacing the Eb with Ab... :)
That made me think the chord was actually an E
I kinda like F Bbsus4 Bdim C lol
I'm new to this feed and I have to say I am impressed with how well you are able to explain theory and application. I've been trying to understand key changes and borrowed chords forever now. Your videos have opened a new world to me. Thank you! And please do keep analyzing the music as you are 100% right about it making us better musicians. Also, I love the fact that I can close my eyes for a second and hear Jeff Goldblum talking music theory. Love it! Best guitar instructional channel by far!
LOL I laughed so hard with the grandma analogy and the video graphics for it 😆
Terrific intelligent lesson. You are really enjoying getting to 'why' the progression sounds so perfect. So I found myself really enjoying the lesson, as well. Thank you!
The descending chromatic on the A minor in "Something" reminds me of "Fixing a Hole".
Never thought of all those chord changes yet they are all in the song. Enjoyed
10:42 you can hear this in "while my guitar gently weeps"
Is this the best video I have come across on application of chromatic scale music theory?
Hell Yeah!
Thanks a ton!!
For the people that told you "you're not supposed to analyse music" i have something to say, we are never dumber for knowing more.
Very interesting and really well presented. I've been listening to the Beatles since the sixties and know a little bit of music theory - now I know a bit more! Understanding how something works increases my enjoyment.
This is what set George Harrison and The Beatles apart from other song writers
I love that they dgaf about scales and theory, they just throw stuff together and see if it sounds good
I love the analogy at the end about theory and pie. It’s a good analysis and really effective analogy in my opinion. I’ll definitely show people that when they say you don’t need theory.
could you make a video explaining the chord changes in The End by my chemical romance? if you listen to it you'll understand what I'm talking about
Hi, I saw your comment, and although I'm no Jake Lizzio, I thought I'd give it a go myself, albeit in text format:
As far as I can tell, the main 4-chord progression running through the song is: G Em7 C#m7 CmMaj7(add6)
I'm pretty sure the main focus of this progression is the chromatic descent going from D->C#->C, with the D lasting twice as long as the others. D is found in the G chord, and see how the D is retained in the Em7. Then the following two notes are the roots of their respective chords, of course.
The most jarring transition is clearly the Em7->C#m7, and the best way I can interpret this is that the C#m7 constitutes the vi chord in E mixolydian, so E temporarily becomes the tonic, albeit through a major mode despite the Em7 chord obviously being minor. After all, the relationship between the G and Em7 is the same as the (hypothetical) relationship between E and C#m7. If anyone reading this has a better explanation, please do let me know.
The CmMaj7 (and subsequent CmMaj7add6 when the A replaces the G) represents a return to the key of G major, and lays the groundwork for a minor plagal cadence upon returning to the original G chord, albeit with the additional dissonance of the major 7th and the 6th, a dissonance that simply accentuates the gut-wrenching tone of the album's lyrical content.
I hope you find this somewhat informative, seeing as a video analysing this song's chords doesn't seem to have been made. Once again, if anything I've said is inaccurate or needlessly convoluted, replies are very welcome.
The Eb chord part made this song so iconic and unique
Something was off the Abby Road album, and just imagine, Harrison was only the third best composer in the band. Wow.
Composer is a strong word for rock musicians.
What a fantastic breakdown. I especially loved your explanation about the importance of analysis in the end.
Art in its purest form is magic, but magic is just science we’ve yet to understand.
40 other youtubers tried to do as good a job as this and failed.