Verse chorus verse: an analysis of repetition in popular music

Popular music is often criticized by academics for being too repetitive. However, repetition is the mechanism by which music makes sense of itself. It is a conduit for meaning â€" separating music from noise, poetry from ambient chatter. By showing that in most verse-chorus songs, the amount of verbatim repetition and new material are approximately equal, this study questions these criticisms and illustrates how essential variant repetitions are the continuity of popular songs. The biggest challenge for this study was representing a spectrum of all the ways new and previously stated musical ideas can mix and interact while maintaining a method of categorization simple enough to provide an effective analytical tool. The study breaks down repetition into four categories: new material, literal repetition, modified repetition, and variation. These categories are based on whether or not a section is a change from its original version, and if those changes serve a structural function. Since few authoritative scores are available for popular music, aural analysis of the album version was the best option for the creation of a chart containing the duration, in seconds, of each phrase-level section (what Richard Middleton calls discursive repetitions), and assigning each section to one of the four categories. The proportion of the total seconds in each category to the length of the song provides a “repetition profile” which can be compared to other songs. A dataset of 52 songs systematically selected from Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Songs list created the basis for the sample. The study also looks at four of the songs in detail: The Beatles’ Let it Be, Missy Elliot’s Get Ur Freak On, The Strokes’ Last Night, and Derek and the Dominoes’ Layla. These illustrate how the analysis works not only on different styles of music, but also different permutations of the verse-chorus paradigm. The minority of songs that did not display equality between new material and literal repetition were often compound verse-chorus forms (such as Radiohead’s Paranoid Android), or represent the beginnings of their genre (Little Richard’s Tutti Frutti, Grandmaster Flash’s The Message). These outliers were just as revealing as the songs that fit the model. Macroanalysis of the sample revealed more than the equality between new material and literal repetition. Because the 52 songs are spread out equally over the last 50 years, the study also noticed fluctuations in the use of repetition over time, the most apparent being the “cultural revolution” in the late 1960s. These fluctuations reflect those found in another study (Mauch et al., 2015), which uses a completely different metric. Slight differences in repetition between three broad genres (rock, R&B, and rap) were also evident.

VERSE CHORUS VERSE: AN ANALYSIS OF REPETITION IN POPULAR MUSIC by Nathan A. Wilks A dissertation submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Music The University of Utah May 2017 Copyright © Nathan A. Wilks 2017 All Rights Reserved THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH GRADUATE SCHOOL STATEMENT OF DISSERTATION APPROVAL This dissertation of Nathan A. Wilks has been approved by the following supervisory committee members: Steven Roens 11/1/2016 , Chair Date Approved Miguel Chuaqui 11/1/2016 , Member Date Approved John V. Costa 11/1/2016 , Member Susan Neimoyer , Member Date Approved 11/1/2016 Date Approved Howard Horwitz , Member 11/1/2016 Date Approved and by Miguel Chuaqui , Director of the School of and by David B. Kieda, Dean of The Graduate School. Music ABSTRACT Popular music is often criticized by academics for being too repetitive. However, repetition is the mechanism by which music makes sense of itself. It is a conduit for meaning - separating music from noise, poetry from ambient chatter. By showing that in most versechorus songs, the amount of verbatim repetition and new material are approximately equal, this study questions these criticisms and illustrates how essential variant repetitions are the continuity of popular songs. The biggest challenge for this study was representing a spectrum of all the ways new and previously stated musical ideas can mix and interact while maintaining a method of categorization simple enough to provide an effective analytical tool. The study breaks down repetition into four categories: new material, literal repetition, modified repetition, and variation. These categories are based on whether or not a section is a change from its original version, and if those changes serve a structural function. Since few authoritative scores are available for popular music, aural analysis of the album version was the best option for the creation of a chart containing the duration, in seconds, of each phrase-level section (what Richard Middleton calls discursive repetitions), and assigning each section to one of the four categories. The proportion of the total seconds in each category to the length of the song provides a "repetition profile" which can be compared to other songs. A dataset of 52 songs systematically selected from Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs list created the basis for the sample. The study also looks at four of the songs in detail: The Beatles' Let it Be, Missy Elliot's Get Ur Freak On, The Strokes' Last Night, and Derek and the Dominoes' Layla. These illustrate how the analysis works not only on different styles of music, but also different permutations of the verse-chorus paradigm. The minority of songs that did not display equality between new material and literal repetition were often compound verse-chorus forms (such as Radiohead's Paranoid Android), or represent the beginnings of their genre (Little Richard's Tutti Frutti, Grandmaster Flash's The Message). These outliers were just as revealing as the songs that fit the model. Macroanalysis of the sample revealed more than the equality between new material and literal repetition. Because the 52 songs are spread out equally over the last 50 years, the study also noticed fluctuations in the use of repetition over time, the most apparent being the "cultural revolution" in the late 1960s. These fluctuations reflect those found in another study (Mauch et al., 2015), which uses a completely different metric. Slight differences in repetition between three broad genres (rock, R&B, and rap) were also evident. iv "Intelligibility in music seems to be impossible without repetition." -Arnold Schoenberg TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ vii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 Chapters 1 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................. 6 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................ 11 Analytical Parameters ......................................................................................................... 16 2 DETAILED ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 30 The Beatles - Let it Be ........................................................................................................ Missy Elliot - Get Ur Freak On ......................................................................................... The Strokes - Last Nite ...................................................................................................... Derek and the Dominoes - Layla .................................................................................... 3 30 34 36 40 MACROANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 50 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................62 APPENDIX: SAMPLE ANALYSES .............................................................................................64 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 104 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Wundt/Berlyne Curve (adapted from Berlyne 1971, p. 193) ...................................... 26 2 Outkast: Verse 1A and Verse 1B of Hey Ya ................................................................... 28 3 Primary harmonic patterns in Let it Be ............................................................................ 43 4 Melodic reduction of verse material in Let it Be ............................................................. 43 5 Melodic reduction of chorus material in Let it Be .......................................................... 43 6 Verse 1A of Last Nite ......................................................................................................... 47 7 Lead guitar solo from Last Nite ........................................................................................ 47 8 Difference between new material and literal repetition compared to random ......... 60 9 Repetition profiles by decade ........................................................................................... 61 10 Repetition profiles by genre ............................................................................................... 61 INTRODUCTION The cultural significance of popular music is undeniable. While, in the first half of the twentieth century, composers and academics tended to ignore vernacular forms of music, leading to a ‘high' and ‘low' duality in music, in the latter part of the century, changes in culture and technology saturated the western world with popular music, which undoubtedly influenced young composers and music scholars. No longer was rock'n'roll the music of delinquents and outcasts, but the music of one's childhood. The music itself changed too, and by the late 1960s "popular music was seen increasingly as part of an ‘alternative culture' to which not just hippies but educated people of all stripes, even ‘intellectuals' could adhere" (Taruskin, 2010, p. 326). However, the duality between "art" and "vernacular" forms of music remained, and while casual appreciation of popular music was viewed as open-mindedness, professional involvement was risky. The most well-known criticisms of popular music come from Theodore Adorno (1941), who wrote about the "standardization" of popular music by the emerging music industry. While this sentiment is reasonable on its own, Richard Middleton (1990) points out that "‘popular common-sense' criticisms have probably ‘filtered down from the discussions of mass culture theorists" (p. 268) - theorists like Adorno. These "common-sense criticisms" claim all popular music is the same, predictable, simplistic, and most frequently, too repetitive. The notion that an entire style of music is too repetitive assumes that there is, to 2 borrow Adorno's term, a standardization of how much repetition is acceptable in a wellformed piece of music, and that such a standard applies equally to all music. It also seems to take for granted how essential repetition is in the experience of music. Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis posits three essential functions of repetition in music: learning, segmentation, and expectation (Margulis, 2014, p. 22), all of which are indispensable in the perception of the organization of musical sounds. The amount of repetition required in the unfolding of a piece of music is largely dependent on the aesthetic goals of a particular style of music. Though the focus of this study is musical repetition and its role in popular music, a sizeable portion of research was drawn from cognitive and behavioral psychology concerning the role of repetition in our everyday lives. From the perspective of an experimental psychologist, music is yet another kind of stimulus. Overall, there is more literature on repetition in the fields of psychology and music psychology than in music theory. Although this may be surprising given how essential repetition is in a listener's perception of musical form, it is true that repetition can be a rather unwieldy topic when applied to music since it occurs in many different ways with different meanings. In Temperley and de Clercq's (2011) research on harmony in popular music, there was a clear method for the analysis of the songs in their corpus. Although harmonic analysis is fairly straightforward in popular music, they used it to great effect; showing how popular music has its own harmonic language similar to, but distinct from, that of common practice music. However, no such analytical method suitable for popular music was available to analyze repetition, so one had to be invented. For this study to make any conclusive assertions about repetition itself, and not just the repetition within specific songs, analysis of each song required results that could readily be compared to other analyses. A statistical approach appeared to be the best option to 3 accomplish this. To compare the use of repetition, each song needed to have the same basic form to avoid comparing forms instead of the use of repetition within a single form. The verse-chorus paradigm was the obvious choice because it is the primary song form in late twentieth century popular music. To avoid cherry picking data, the songs were systematically selected from Rolling Stone Magazine's 500 Greatest Songs (2010), a metric that focuses on the quality and longevity of a song rather than its chart position or monetary success. There are seldom any authoritative scores available for popular music but there are authoritative recordings, and these were analyzed aurally. The analysis parses the song into sections, noting the duration of each section, and then assigns each section one of four categories: New Material, Literal Repetition, Modified Repetition, and Variation. The categories are chosen based on whether material is a repetition (or not), if repeated material is changed from its original version (or not), and if those changes have a particular structural function (or not). The duration of each section in seconds allows the analyst to quickly see how the song breaks down into the four categories and assess how repetition is employed in the composition of the recording. Four songs were chosen to discuss in detail to provide further insight into the analytical process and illustrate the similarities and differences in the use of repetition by different artists composing in varied styles. The Beatles' Let it Be was chosen because of its popularity among listeners and more generally the influence of The Beatles on countless musicians since the early 1970s. The song is widely considered a classic even with younger generations. A more recent song, Last Nite, by The Strokes is analyzed in detail because while it is in verse-chorus form, the roles of the verse and chorus are essentially reversed from the traditional verse-chorus paradigm. Missy Elliot's Get Ur Freak On was chosen because its style contrasts with rock style and is more representative of rap and hip-hop. 4 Layla, originally recorded by Derek and the Dominoes, was an outlier in the sample due to its compound verse-chorus form, but its in-depth analysis is revealing. It is an example of songwriting that pushes the limits of the verse-chorus paradigm. Each of the 52 songs in the sample employed repetition in its own way, but there are simply too many to discuss each in great detail, so a succinct chart is presented for every song and provides the essential information on how it was parsed into sections, and the repetition categories assigned to each section. Some notes made during the analysis were preserved to assist the reader in understanding how some of the sections were determined or why a particular category was applied. The final part of this study examined all 52 analyses and compared the use of repetition among the various styles and artists in the sample. From song to song, each category varied more than expected, but given the diversity of styles and influences represented in the sample it is not surprising. One pattern did emerge and is present in a majority of the songs in the sample: the relationship between new material and literal repetition. Despite the variety of styles, these two disparate categories tended to be roughly equivalent, albeit to varying degrees. This study will show that, in most verse-chorus forms, the amount of verbatim repetition of new or variant material is roughly equal to the amount of new material presented in the song. Since the sample spans over 50 years of music, the data can also be used to examine the use of repetition by decade. The most significant change was from the late 1950s and early 1960s to the late 1960s. Though it wasn't the only shift in popular music in the last 60 years, the Cultural Revolution and technological advances of the time changed how music is created and subsequently consumed by audiences, and this is what the data seem to reflect. The analyses also showed differences in use of repetition by genre, in particular reflecting the 5 emphasis of lyrics (especially in regards to rhyme and rhythm) in the structure of rap music compared to rock music. This study focuses on repetition, and discusses in depth the relationship between an idea and its verbatim repetitions, but it should not be confused with semiotic methods of analysis such as those associated with Nicolas Ruwet and Jean-Jacques Nattiez. Ruwet's (1987) paradigmatic analysis explores the internal syntax and grammar of a piece of music by examining its repeated material. While semiotic approaches may be promising in the analysis of popular music (Dunbar-Hall, 1991), the focus of this study is not on the syntactical aspects of a song, but is rather more concerned with the broad manifestation of repetition in the popular music canon. Compared to pieces in the art music canon, popular songs are far more numerous. However, they tend to be shorter and work within a more familiar harmonic and melodic framework, and this makes a statistical approach more effective when examining the role of repetition in popular music. Chapter 1 will lay out this approach and includes an example of how this analysis is performed on each song in the sample. Chapter 2 provides a detailed analysis of four representative songs in the sample and briefly discusses how they compare or contrast with other songs. Chapter 3 discusses the findings of the analyses, proffering possible reasons for them and ideas for future research. The appendix provides charts of all 52 songs in the sample, including a succinct overview for all of them. CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Scholarly inquiry into repetition as it pertains to music is less straightforward than it may seem at first glance. Musical repetition is always in relation to another aspect of the music: this melody repeats, this rhythmic pattern repeats, or even the repetition of an entire section. Further complicating matters are the constantly changing attitudes and trends regarding repetition. In the early 20 th century, there was a general aversion to repetition that ranged from a preference for varied forms to an outright rejection of thematicism. Thus, early on, most scholarly work to directly approach repetition did so from the field of music psychology. The so-called ‘father' of experimental psychology himself, Wilhelm Wundt (1902), theorized that a pleasurable response to arousal would reach a critical point and then yield to displeasure. The graphical relationship between pleasure and repeated exposures creates an inverted U, appropriately known as the Wundt curve (Fig. 1). Many authors have seen their data reflect this curve, most notably Jakobovits (1966), who was able to use it to accurately predict the rise, peak, and decline in popularity of songs on radio stations. In the first half of the twentieth century, there was a steady stream of experiments that found a positive affective response to repetition 1 (Gilliland & Moore, 1924; Krugman, 1 It should be noted that these studies did not include enough stimulus to produce a negative affective response. 7 1943; Meyer, 1903; Verveer, Barry, & Bousfield, 1933). The study that came to define what is now known as the "mere-exposure" effect was done by Robert Zajonc. Not content with previous studies that he felt largely concerned music appreciation, he used a variety of stimuli including nonsense words and photographs. His results were consistent with previous studies, concluding, "mere repeated exposure of an individual to a stimulus object enhances his attitude toward it." (Zajonc, 1968, p. 23) "Stimulus objects" can certainly be musical elements or entire pieces, but it can also be styles of music; for instance, someone who prefers country music more than likely has had previous exposure to it. Moreover, it appears that even when the subject is unaware of the stimulus, there will still be a positive affective response, perhaps even to a greater degree (Murphy, Monahan, & Zajonc, 1995). It is not surprising then that some listeners have difficulty describing precisely what is it they like about a particular song. There are two leading hypotheses to account for this effect. Bornstein and D'Agostino note that both subliminal and supraliminal stimuli contribute to a positive affective response and posit the perceptual fluency/attributional model. Previous exposure is thought to activate context-free representations of stimuli, resulting in perceptual fluency (Jacoby, 1983; Jacoby & Kelly, 1987; Jacoby & Whitehouse, 1989; as cited in Szpunar, Schellenberg, & Pliner, 2004), which refers to rapid and efficient processing of previously encountered stimuli. …participants [misattribute] their apparent ease of processing as a positive disposition toward the stimulus (Bornstein, 1992; as cited in Szpunar, Schellenberg, & Pliner, 2004). (Szpunar, Schellenberg, & Pliner, 2004, p. 370) Once there have been enough supraliminal exposures for the subject to recognize that the perceptual fluency is due to exposures and not a positive quality of the stimulus, positive affect for that stimulus will decrease, resulting in the aforementioned Wundt curve. (Bornstein & D'Agostino, 1994) The other hypothesis is Berlyne's (1970, 1971) two-factor model, which views the effect as a biologically evolved response with two opposing processes. 8 "One [process] involves the dissipation of neophobia…which generates enhanced affect as a stimulus becomes more familiar. … The second process is boredom… [which] outweighs the benefits of learned safety, resulting in satiation, or decreases in liking." (Szpunar, Schellenberg, & Pliner, 2004, p. 371) In the context of biological evolution, creatures that embraced every new stimulus did not live to reproduce, nor did those who never sought new opportunities. Repetition within music does more than just influence the affective response of the listener; it also determines how the audience perceives form. Huron (2006) makes an excellent case for listener expectation as central to music psychology. He points out that accurately predicting what will happen at a given moment in a piece of music is experienced as pleasure, and this pleasure is ascribed to some positive quality of the music itself. The listener makes these predictions based on learned musical conventions, his or her own listening preferences, and most importantly, expectations set up by repetitions in the piece. "Repetition facilitates the development of dynamic expectations.2 The work itself then provides background experiences that increase the predictability of subsequent events as the work unfolds." (Huron, 2006, p. 367) Composers may not have control over the listener's musical background, but they do control the amount of repetition in their music-an essential part of how music is experienced. There is now support in the realm of cognitive science for what Huron claims (and what many musicians already knew). A recent study by Neuhaus et al. (2009) used eventrelated potentials3 (ERPs) to examine how the brain perceives musical form. Subjects 2 Huron describes dynamic expectations as short term and piece-specific, as opposed to schematic expectations, which are more general and stylistic (Huron, 2006). 9 listened to melodies with two patterns; an AABB and ABAB pattern, then were asked if they were hierarchical or sequential. The analysis of the data "demonstrates that repetition is a necessary form-building principle to facilitate the perception of overall architecture in music." (Neuhaus, Knosche, & Friederici, 2009). Repetition, it seems, works on two levels: delineating formal boundaries by pattern recognition, and influencing affective response via mere exposure. Clearly, repetition has a profound psychological effect on an individual's response to music. However, from a musician's perspective, repetition is not so simple. The elements of music are able to work independently and thus both new and repeated material can operate simultaneously. A repeated musical segment can be long, short, varied, and have different structural functions. It's what keeps music interesting but can make repetition a slippery subject. Leonard Meyer (1956) wrote about two types of repetition that he called recurrence and reiteration. Recurrence, or return, is a repetition after some intervening material. Reiteration is a repetition directly following the musical material being repeated. The two types have opposite functions within the theater of a piece: recurrence tends to emphasize the similarities to the musical segment it is repeating and reiteration tends to emphasize the differences between a segment and its repetitions. Middleton (1990) also described two types of repetition but they are more concerned with the length of the repeating units. Discursive repetition is when longer, phrase length segments repeat, whereas musematic repetitions are typically shorter segments that, more often than not, repeat immediately - like riffs in a rock 3 Event-related potentials are electrophysiological responses by the brain to stimuli measured by an electroencephalography (EEG) machine. 10 song. The distinction between long and short segments is a significant one, especially in the context of popular music. While Meyer pointed out that repetition can have contrasting formal functions, Middleton took this a step further and profiled different types of repetition, detailing how they differ in the amount of information they carry, how they behave, and most importantly how "[musematic repetition] tends toward a one-levelled structural effect, [and discursive] to a hierarchically ordered discourse." (Middleton, 1990, p. 269) It is already clear that repetition is important to form, but what is essential here is that not all repetition is equal. For instance, the repetition of an eight-bar melodic phrase is more structurally significant than the repetition of a two-bar harmonic pattern. Similarly, Lidov (2004) discussed three "classes" of repetition based on their semiotic function. He described them as "formative repetition, which interprets what is repeated; focal repetition, which is a self-referential type that focuses attention on the fact of repetition, per se; and textural repetition, an index which points away from the repeated material to other musical signs…" (Lidov, 2004, p. 29). Margulis interpreted this as a "spectrum of functions for repetition" (Margulis, 2014, p. 51) in her exhaustive text on musical repetition. While Margulis' book is unique in that it approaches repetition directly from nearly every angle, it stops short of formal analysis. Repetition is undoubtedly a core principle in music, influencing our preferences for a song or style, as well as how music is remembered, our expectations of what we will hear, and the formal hierarchy we perceive when listening. Since repetition has such a direct impact on how listeners respond to music, it might be very useful to analyze the repetitions in a piece of music and compare them to repetitions in other pieces. Accordingly, the rest of this chapter provides a method of analyzing repetition in the context of popular music. 11 Definition of Terms Given all the different types of musicians writing and performing popular music, its lexicon abounds with ambiguous terms and slight variations in meaning. Some have different definitions in reference to form, style, or cultural contexts. It would be helpful here to briefly define these terms in the context of this paper. In the interest of simplicity, the definitions here are what one would expect in the most formulaic verse-chorus song. For a more expansive discussion of some of these terms, see Appen and Frei-Hauenschild (2015). In verse-chorus form, "the focus of the song is squarely on the chorus" (Covach, 2005, p. 71). The chorus is typically the most memorable and not surprisingly the most repetitive part of the song both musically and lyrically. It is usually a point of arrival following a verse. It differs from a refrain, however; a chorus is its own section in a song whereas a refrain tends to be the repeating line or phrase in the verses of a strophic form. A hook is another term for a chorus more often used by hip-hop/rap artists, referring to the catchy nature of chorus material. In contrast to the chorus, the verse is a section with the same musical material but in most cases will have different lyrics on each occurrence, providing a sense of progression throughout the song. It prepares the listener for the chorus, both musically4 and in terms of lyric content. Sometimes the chorus material is presented first, but in the majority of verse-chorus songs, the verse comes first. The introduction, or intro, is exactly that; the beginning of the song. It presents the basic musical material of the song to the listener. While it may not be as compelling as the chorus, it must be interesting enough to draw the listener's attention. In contrast, the coda is 4 This is especially apparent in techno/dubstep music, where, without any lyrics, the verse-like section will build tension to be released during the "drop," or chorus-like section. 12 the material that concludes the song. A coda tends to be far more musically diverse than an intro; from a simple fade-out to incorporating new or obscure material. A solo is an instrumental imitation or elaboration (often improvised) of melodic material in place of the verse and with similar accompaniment. This is different from a break, where instruments most prominent in the texture are removed and attention is shifted towards the rhythmic aspects of the song. In a live performance, it is not unusual for the performer to dance during the break. Similarly to a solo, a break uses a change in timbre to create a contrast with verse sections. A verse-chorus song may also contain a bridge, which introduces material distinctly different from both the verse and the chorus. This bridge material is rarely repeated and sometimes requires a retransition to return to the verse or chorus, depending on its harmonic relationship to the section that follows. Another section distinct from both verse and chorus, though generally to a lesser degree, is a prechorus. This is a transition from a verse to a chorus that prepares the chorus material, most often building up tension just before the onset of the chorus. Another convention worth noting is the indication of time when referring to the length of a song or to points within a song. Digital formats have made it possible to display the time in minutes and seconds at any point in the song, most often in MM:SS. When referencing a specific point in a song, it is sometimes more precise to provide the time of that point rather than indicate the place of that point in the printed score (if it exists at all). For instance, if the chorus begins 1 minute and 10 seconds into the song, it is easier to simply indicate 1:10. In the analysis of the songs in Chapter 3, the charts show the onset of each section in this format. The terms discussed so far are frequently seen in discussions of popular music, and 13 their meanings relatively apparent. They provide a working vocabulary for musicians to communicate with each other. The following four terms are specific to this study, and are used to categorize segments of music with respect to repetition. Their meaning in this context is described in detail. New material (N) simply refers to the musical ideas or combinations of ideas unique to a particular song that an attentive listener, having never heard the song before, would be hearing for the first time. Ideas, in this case, are the specific arrangement of musical elements employed in the creation of the song. Most often this is some distinct harmonic/melodic pattern, timbre, or both. In some cases, a group of musicians may ‘jam' to compose material collaboratively, and those ideas created spontaneously are used in the composition of a song. "Group member ideas [are] received, adjusted, modified or rejected through a process which involve[s] all group members" (Biasutti, 2012, p. 347). Regardless of how it is composed, whether by a single individual or several individuals working together, the end result is the same and analyzed as such. The degree of novelty an individual idea exhibits is irrelevant to the concerns of this study since the focus is on repetition of material and not a critique of the material itself. When musical material is repeated verbatim or nearly verbatim, it is considered literal repetition (LR). The important distinction between this and other types of repetition is that there are no new ideas or combinations of ideas expressed (including lyrics). Literal repetition provides the listener with a kind of review of material so that it can be more easily recalled when it is heard again. The material that falls under this category tends to be the most engaging and memorable - the "tune" of the song. A single hearing of this tune would likely be unsatisfying, and so it is played again. Most sections labeled literal repetition are choruses or refrains, and they are often repetitions of previous choruses. It is important to 14 point out that literal repetition is apropos to longer segments of music. Verbatim repetitions of short segments in succession5 tend to shift attention onto another element of music, usually a longer segment such as a melodic line. Recognizing when something is new and when it is a literal repetition is fairly straightforward, but music has the ability to vary while still being identifiable, and this makes quantifying repetition difficult. Some aspects are the same, yet some others changed. It is both new and a repetition-both the same and different. But the question of "how different is different enough to be different?" is a problematic one. Perhaps a more useful question would be "what is the reason it is different?" When faced with material that is "the same yet different," examining its function in the formal design and prominence in the overall texture of the song may help to discern just "how different" it is. In this study, variation (Var) is defined as that which alters repeated material for novel, nonstructural reasons, and modified repetition (MR) alters repeated material for formal reasons. Despite variation impacting the music on a local level and modified repetition impacting the music on a more global level, in the context of a verse-chorus song, a variation is far more likely to be featured in the texture as a whole, while a modified repetition will be less pronounced. Because they lie somewhere between new material and literal repetition in the amount of novel information they carry, the difference between these two variant categories can be difficult to discern and even enters the subjective, but when examining a large body of music such as the sample in this study, they tend to occur in relatively predicable sections of the songs. A variation is much like the classical definition of variation in that old material 5 Repetitions that Middleton (1990) would call musematic and Lidov (2005) would consider to be functioning as textural repetition. 15 undergoes some transformation in order to sound fresh to a listener's ear. An attentive listener will recognize the musical and contextual resemblance to the original material, but attention will be drawn to those aspects that have been transformed. In popular music, a variation is generally less technically complex than in art music, but can be just as nuanced. Most often, a variation will alter the musical surface but not the underlying layers of musematic repetition. A common characteristic is a shift in timbre, particularly when a lead instrument replaces the vocals as the featured timbre, for example, a guitar solo. Sometimes the lead part employs melodic material from a vocal melody, sometimes it is improvised based on stylistic schemas (blues traditions for instance), but never does the extent to which the material changes go beyond surface level and merit the designation of new material. On the other hand, modified repetitions are those that are altered to suit formal requirements and contribute to the overall arc of the song. The new information in a modified repetition works to propel the music forward on a global level. A basic example would be a repetition of a section of music in which the end of the harmonic pattern is modified to lead to a different resolution than the original. Harmony is just one of many elements that can be modified for this reason. Another example, and one which could be confused as a variation, is the technique of adding a new instrument or timbre in subsequent verses. Gradually coloring or thickening the texture contributes more to the formal arc of the song than to the individual verse in which that new information begins. Furthermore, it is a background element since any featured material may detract from the words presented in the second verse. If no new words are present, for instance in a typical chorus, altered instrumentation would still qualify that section as modified repetition. A good example of this is The Beatles' Let it Be, discussed in Chapter 2. By far the most common type of modified repetition is new lyrics in what is often 16 the same melodic, harmonic, and timbral setting. They contribute to the form of the song by progressing through a narrative, providing more information about the subject of the lyric content, or transforming (or contrasting) previous rhyme schemes. Some argue that audiences pay little attention to lyrics when listening to music (Frith, 1988), while others contend that lyrics are quite important for some listeners (Moore, 2012, p. 109). It is more likely that lyrics are not equally significant in all songs, and that their contribution to the form varies from song to song. For example, on one extreme, the lyrics of The Trashmen's Surfin' Bird are essentially sonic in nature, with minimal substantive content (some not even actual words); whereas The Mariner's Revenge by The Decemberists has a very compelling narrative, with few repeating lines of text in the course of the nine-minute song. Regardless of scope, nonrepeating lyrics do provide a stream of new information, even if there is no narrative or change in subject matter, and it is that new information that modifies the repetition. Analytical Parameters The broad term ‘popular music' involves a vast amount of music, all of which uses repetition in one way or another. To begin to answer questions about repetition in even a small portion of this diverse body of music, analysis must involve as many individual songs as possible, maintain a consistent application of the analytical method, and avoid any bias on the part of the analyst. To do this, this study will use a statistical analysis of systematically selected songs. Other authors looking to answer questions about what a particular body of music is or is not have taken a similar approach. (Rorhmeier & Cross, 2008; Temperley & de Clercq, 2011; Temperley & de Clercq, 2013). When compiling the sample, there were a few parameters the sample needed to 17 fulfill. First, to avoid an apples-to-oranges comparison, all of the songs chosen needed to be in the same or similar form. Verse-chorus form is ideal since it has been by far the most common song form in Western popular music since the 1960s. Second, to avoid bias, the songs should be taken from a preexisting list. The Billboard Hot 100 initially seemed like a viable metric, but record sales indicate monetary success, not necessarily artistic success. So the third parameter is that the songs needed to be rated favorably among critics and industry professionals. The "best" songs would presumably use repetition in the most effective way and leave an impression on discerning listeners. Rolling Stone Magazine's Top 500 Greatest Songs appeared to be the best option in this regard as it was "chosen by a five-star jury of singers, musicians, producers, industry figures, critics, and of course, songwriters." (Rolling Stone, 2004) It is also the list used by Temperley & de Clercq (2011; 2013) as the basis for their sample, and as they mention: "Whether the songs on the list are actually the greatest rock songs is not important for our purposes (and in any case is a matter of opinion)." (Temperley & de Clercq, 2013, p. 188). One criticism of the Rolling Stone list among readers is that it tends to favor songs from the 1960s and 1970s; an issue that was mitigated in 2010 with an updated list, the version used in this study (Rolling Stone, 2010), but still the vast majority of the songs are from the 1960s and 1970s and less than 6% are from the 2000s. This problem was solved by diversifying the sample both chronologically and by artists/composers. To evenly represent the songs across decades, the sample was limited to approximately ten songs per decade, and two or three per year. To diversify the artists, the sample also omits redundant artists except in the case of The Beatles, who are widely considered to be of particular influence. Three of their songs are included from different periods in their catalogue. Compilation of the sample began with the number one song and continued down the list obeying the set parameters, 18 ending up with 52 songs in the sample. The list in full can be seen in Table 1a. At this point, it is worth mentioning that the list is by no means comprehensive: Not every influential artist who shaped the course of popular music since the late 1950s could be included on the list. To incorporate every reader's favorite would be an impossibly difficult task. The sample derived from the Rolling Stone 500 is only that-a sample. It represents merely a slice of all the great verse-chorus songs written in the second half of the twentieth century. It should be noted that a few substitutions have been made (although these songs are also on the Rolling Stone 500, the set parameters would have excluded them from analysis): The Beatles' She Loves You, in place of I Want to Hold Your Hand; Donna Summer's Hot Stuff, since disco/pop is underrepresented in the 1970s; and The White Stripes' Seven Nation Army, because rock is relatively underrepresented in the 2000s. The Sex Pistols' Anarchy in the U.K. was also included since punk rock is one of two genres 6 that would have a profound influence in the next two decades (Starr & Waterman, 2010, p. 447). Nine other songs were analyzed that are not on the official list; some of these (but certainly not all) were ostensibly "bad" songs that were used to test an emerging model. These songs are shown in Table 1b. Analysis of each song was performed aurally since that is how most audiences would experience the music, as well as how pop musicians usually learn the music. Even if scores of the songs exist, they are nearly always transcriptions of the recording by a third party and their reliability is often questionable.7 Every attempt is made to use the original album 6 The other genre being disco and its influence on hip-hop and rap (Schusterman, 1991, p. 615). 7 One exception to this may be The Beatles: Complete Scores (Beatles et al., 1993). 19 version of each song for analysis. Its approval for release by the artist, composer, or producer can be interpreted as rendering it an authoritative source. Analysis involved creating an outline of each song that shows the onset and duration of structural events (verse, chorus, etc). Each structural event was then assigned one of the four categories (new material, literal repetition, modified repetition, or variation) based on how well that event adhered to the description of each category.8 Once all of the sections were assigned a category, the total number of seconds in each category was then divided by the total number of seconds in the song to get a percentage of that category in the song. By doing this, it became clear what proportion of the song is new material or modified repetition, etc. The difficulty here was parsing the songs in a way that accurately reflects how the song was constructed by the composer and is heard by listeners, so how the song is analyzed into segments is crucial. To perform this analysis, specific guidelines were followed in an attempt to remain as objective and consistent as possible. We know that in music we can characterize the spectrum of repetition as anything from the replaying of an entire work all the way down to individual notes, but what is the most useful in terms of structure? At what level of repetition do listeners make hierarchical sense of the discourse within a song? Middleton argues this occurs with discursive repetitions, or those at the phrase level (Middleton, 1990, p. 269). These are in contrast to musematic repetitions that tend to be shorter, more repetitive, and contain less information. The focus of the analysis will be on discursive repetitions since they "tend to result in ‘developmental' structures" (Middleton, 1990, p. 269). Accounting for repetitions of every guitar chord and drumbeat is not only impossibly 8 The discussion of the four categories is on page 13-16 20 tedious, but ineffective if one wants to explore how repetition works on a level most relevant to song construction and listener consumption. In other words, musematic repetitions are heard as components of structural processes, but they themselves do not operate on a structural level. The primary discursive element used to discern structure was melodic line, typically in the vocals. In popular music, vocal melodies are a focal point - the vocal track is nearly always in the foreground of a recording mix. Vocal melodies usually contain enough repetition to give the listener a sense of a musical idea separate from other ideas in the song, but also differ slightly in each iteration to provide a sense of progression through an entire musical "thought." A very basic example of this would be an antecedent/consequent pairing.9 This is in contrast to repetitive harmonic patterns, which in popular music tend to be more consistent. It would be fair to say that harmonic progressions tend to be a musematic pedestal upon which discursive melodic lines are presented. Since antecedent/consequent structures are so frequent, the analysis generally allows a single repetition, or two similar phrases, to be considered as one musical unit under the same category. For example, at the beginning of a song, the immediate repetition of a fourbar phrase may seem like material similar to the first iteration and thus some kind of repetition, but classifying the second phrase in this way might reflect more repetitions than are actually perceived. Moreover, if a melodic line is to have any motivic significance, at least one repetition is needed to move the melodic information to intermediate-term memory. (Huron, 2006, p. 229) It is no surprise then that Ollen and Huron found that music of many 9 The use of the word "period" is intentionally avoided to sidestep any formalist connotations drawn from the common practice canon. It allows for a more flexible definition applicable to popular music of the latter part of the 20th century. 21 cultures tended to have "clumps" of repetitions. (Ollen & Huron, 2003) Rather than have sequences of ideas (ABCDE) or even two alternating ideas (ABABA), most music was found to have patterns with "clumps" of ideas (AABBAA or AABBCC; Huron, 2006, p. 255). This may explain why phrases almost always appear in even numbers, especially in popular music. However, depending on how repetition was employed, some sections needed to be divided to reflect two different categories of repetition. Discursive repetitions extending beyond a single iteration are recognized as repetitions using the first pairing as a base unit, for example, 1a, 1b, etc. To help illustrate just where the line was drawn, that is, what the analysis classified as a repetition and what it did not, we can look at one of the songs on the Rolling Stone 500 list. Figure 2 shows the melodic line of the vocals in the first verse of Outkast's Hey Ya, a song that is fairly typical in the construction and style of early 2000s pop music. The verses consist of four nearly identical iterations of the melodic material, supported by a chord progression of the same length. In terms of pure musical repetition, the melody is stated and then repeated three times, but that is not necessarily the division experienced by listeners. The prevalence of antecedent/consequent pairings and a tendency of music to have "clumps" creates a situation in which a listener hearing the melody for the first time doesn't know it is a near verbatim repetition until the end of the second iteration. The analysis, shown in Table 2, labels the first and second iterations of this phrase Verse 1A (N), and the third and fourth iterations Verse 1B (MR). In this way, the possibility of an antecedent/consequent pairing being fulfilled by two nearly identical phrases is permitted while at the same time limiting how many repetitions can be considered as the same category, especially at the beginning of a song where new material is presented. But there is a critical element missing in this discussion that provides further support 22 for this division. The song is more than strictly music; the lyrics and interdependence of rhymes plays a role in the perception of hierarchy. Generally, in a typical period consisting of two phrases, the second phrase has a stronger ending than the first phrase - the second phrase ends what the first phrase started. They are coupled melodically and harmonically. In vocal music, the words incorporated into the melody open the door for a coupling by rhymes. When two phrases end on words that rhyme, 10 those phrases become interdependent - the second phrase ends what the first phrase started. In Hey Ya, the first two phrases are coupled into what is labeled Verse 1A by the rhyming of "sho" and "doh," vernacular forms of "sure" and "door," respectively. The two phrases that make up Verse 1B are coupled in the same way. Not all songs will rhyme in this way, but rhyme schemes and melodic phrases tend to work together in the structure of poetry and music. In order to provide a better understanding of how repetition categories were applied, we can look at the rest of Hey Ya. Music of this style is often somewhat improvisatory, giving it a fresh, spontaneous prosody. We discussed how the first verse was divided based on melodic lines and rhyme schemes in the lyrics, but the reason it needed to be divided is that even at the discursive, or phrase level, Verse 1B is a repetition of Verse 1A, and this needed to be recognized. After the very brief introduction, a listener hears Verse 1A as new material, but in Verse 1B the only substantial change is the lyrics. This would necessitate the label of modified repetition since in this analysis progression through the lyrics is an aspect of the song's form. The entirety of Verse 1 establishes a pattern of two 12 bar phrases played back to 10 This includes all audible types of rhymes: perfect rhyme, half rhyme, pararhyme, assonance, etc. 23 back before moving on to the next section. These pairs11 can be seen in Table 2 as Verse 1A and 1B, Chorus A and B, etc. Note that except for the very brief intro, each section is the same length-approximately 16.5 seconds.12 The harmonic progression remains the same (when it is present) in every section of the song, so listener attention is shifted to melodic and timbral elements, and these outline the form. At 0:35, the introduction of the background vocals, lead synthesizer, and background synth makes the entrance of the chorus apparent with new melodic and timbral material. The chorus follows the same formal pattern as the verse, and so it is analyzed similarly: In the first chorus, Chorus A is new material, and while Chorus B is a literal repetition since there is no difference between the two, the duple division is consistent. At this point, all of the basic materials and the patterns crucial to the song's structure have been presented, so variations are used to maintain listener interest. Verse 2A uses similar but different melodic material, and so is labeled variation; Verse 2B contains different lyrics and develops the melodic material of Verse 2A so it is labeled modified repetition of Verse 2A. Similarly, Verse 3A is varied yet again, and Verse 3B is nearly the same but with different lyrics so it is a modified repetition of Verse 3A. The added vocal parts in the second chorus (at 1:41) indicate development through each appearance of the chorus, so this Chorus A is considered modified repetition; the subsequent Chorus B repeats it verbatim making it a literal repetition. Break A & B follow a similar pattern to the verses. The final Chorus A could have been either variation or modified repetition - there are arguments for 11 One could argue these are related to Huron's "clumps," but at a larger structural level. 12 Rounding to the nearest second results in some sections being 16s and some being 17s on the chart of the analysis. 24 both, but this analysis went with variation because the added vocal ad-libs are a surface feature. The final Chorus B was labeled modified repetition largely because the fade begins here. Fade-outs are a production element of the music and function as the ‘beginning of the end' of a recorded song, and are almost always a structural feature. Once all the sections have been carefully parsed, with one of the four repetition categories applied to each, we can turn our focus to how repetition is used in the song as a whole. Table 3 shows the repetition profile: that is, how much time in seconds is attributed to each category, and what proportion this constitutes relative to the length of the song. We notice that modified repetition accounts for 42.7% of the song's duration, and this is not surprising given that there was a lot of repetition in which the modifications contributed to the formal arc of the song, whether it is progressing through lyrics or the accumulation of timbral changes that serve to move the music forward. The 28.6% attributed to variation makes sense given how much improvised material there is based on the relatively small amount of new material, which totals 14.5% of the song. At 14.1%, literal repetition is roughly equal to the amount of new material - an interesting outcome that, as we will see, is not unusual at all. By now, the analytical parameters and their application in the analysis of the music should be clearer. It is important to understand that the analyst looks to typical listener interaction with the music as a guide on how to carry out the analysis. This style of music can be ill suited to methods of analysis developed for use on common practice music, which tend to be much more notation-centric and usually omit lyrics from consideration. 13 13 Consider, for instance, Walter Everett's application of Schenkerian techniques to the music of The Beatles (Everett, 1992) 25 Knowing how the categories of repetition were applied is essential to interpreting the data across the entire sample. It is also important to note that there were times when more than one category was possible, but the analysis of the corpus as a whole tends to reflect a relatively consistent use of repetition. Interpretation of data from all the analyses is where interesting patterns begin to emerge, as will be discussed later. 26 Figure 1 - Wundt/Berlyne Curve (adapted from Berlyne 1971, p. 193) 27 Table 1a - Sample based on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs Artist/Composer Little Richard Buddy Holly Chuck Berry Ronettes, The Beatles, The Bob Dylan Rolling Stones Beach Boys, The Ike and Tina Turner Aretha Franklin Doors, The Otis Redding Beatles, The Beatles, The Derek and the Dominos John Lennon Marvin Gaye Bob Marley Eagles, The Sex Pistols Clash, The Donna Summer AC/DC Joy Division Grandmaster Flash/Furious Five Michael Jackson Police, The Prince New Order Guns N' Roses Public Enemy Tom Petty Sinead O'Connor R.E.M Nirvana Pavement U2 Beck Notorious B.I.G. 2Pac Song/Piece Tutti Frutti That'll be the Day Johnny B. Goode Be My Baby She Loves You Like a Rolling Stone Satisfaction Good Vibrations River Deep Mountain High Respect Light My Fire Dock of the Bay Hey Jude Let it Be Layla Imagine What's Going On No Woman No Cry Hotel California Anarchy in the U.K. London Calling Hot Stuff Back in Black Love Will Tear Us Apart The Message Billie Jean Every Breath You Take When Doves Cry Bizzarre Love Triangle Sweet Child O' Mine Bring the Noise Free Fallin' Nothing Compares 2 U Losing My Religion Smells Like Teen Spirit Summer Babe One Loser Juicy California Love Year 1955 1957 1958 1963 1964 1965 1965 1966 1966 1967 1967 1968 1968 1970 1970 1971 1971 1975 1977 1977 1979 1979 1980 1980 1982 1983 1983 1984 1986 1988 1988 1989 1990 1991 1991 1992 1992 1993 1994 1995 Genre Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock R&B R&B Rock R&B Rock Rock Rock Rock R&B R&B Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rap R&B Rock R&B Rock Rock Rap Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rap Rap 28 Artist/Composer Radiohead Verve, The Jay-Z feat. UGK Strokes, The Missy Elliott White Stripes, The Outkast Beyonce feat. Jay-Z Kanye West Franz Ferdinand Amy Winehouse Gnarls Barkley Table 1a (continued) Song/Piece Paranoid Android Bittersweet Symphony Big Pimpin' Last Nite Get Ur Freak On Seven Nation Army Hey Ya! Crazy in Love Jesus Walks Take Me Out Rehab Crazy Year 1997 1997 2000 2001 2001 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2006 2006 Genre Rock Rock Rap Rock Rap Rock Rap R&B Rap Rock R&B R&B Table 1b - Other songs analyzed Artist/Composer Jefferson Airplane Metallica Los Del Rio Nathan Wilks Lenny Kravitz Amy Winehouse Black Keys, The Awolnation Kanye West Song/Piece Somebody to Love Master of Puppets Macarena Ghetto Unity Fly Away Back to Black Lonely Boy Sail Black Skinhead Year 1969 1986 1994 1995 1998 2006 2010 2011 2013 Figure 2 - Outkast: Verse 1A and Verse 1B of Hey Ya Genre Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock R&B Rock Rock Rap 29 Table 2 - Outkast: analysis of Hey Ya MM:SS 00:00 00:01 00:18 00:35 00:51 01:08 01:25 01:41 01:58 02:14 02:31 02:47 03:04 03:21 03:37 03:54 Seconds 0 1 18 35 51 68 85 101 118 134 151 167 184 201 217 234 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus A Chorus B Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus A Chorus B Verse 3A Verse 3B Break A Break B Chorus A Chorus B/Fade End Duration (s) 1 17 17 16 17 17 16 17 16 17 16 17 17 16 17 Table 3 - Repetition profile of Hey Ya Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 34 33 100 67 Percent 14.5% 14.1% 42.7% 28.6% Category N N MR N LR Var MR MR LR Var MR Var MR Var MR CHAPTER 2 DETAILED ANALYSIS The Beatles - Let it Be In any series of analyses, it is helpful to start with a relatively standard example and move towards more uncommon ones. The Beatles' Let it Be fits this standard example well given its popularity, straightforward structure, and the general influence the Beatles have on other musicians even forty years after their breakup (Let it Be was in fact the title track on their final album). Upon its release in 1970, the song charted at number one in the US. Its fairly simple verse-chorus form was less adventurous than some of their other hits of the latter part of their career, such as Hey Jude, but it is one that would be emulated by countless songwriters. Let it Be is constructed of two main ideas forming the verse and chorus, and auxiliary material that first acts as an interlude, and then later as a coda. As is typical of this style, the chord progression (Fig. 3a) that will support the vocal melody is first played without vocals. This intro establishes not only the pattern of chords for the verse material, but also the duration of most verse and chorus units (13-14 seconds). Although Let it Be is not the first to use this chord progression, it did help popularize it, and it was used quite often in the 70s and 80s. Its use exploded in the 1990s and by the mid-2000s became nearly ubiquitous on mainstream radio. Punctuating this now common chord progression is the retrogressive I-V- 31 IV-I. The harmonic motion V-IV-I is common in popular music and is observed almost as much as IV-V-I (Temperley & de Clercq, 2011, p. 63). At 0:40, the listener hears the chorus progression (Fig. 3b). This harmonic pattern rearranges the verse pattern and features a descending line in the bass. The descending stepwise bass movement contrasts with the relatively disjunct melody. The last half of the chorus pattern recalls the I-V-IV-I progression that concluded the verse. Melodic material reflects the same sections as the harmonic patterns. The melodic ideas for the verse and chorus contrast with one another, but like the harmonic patterns, both phrases conclude with similar material. As is the case with most popular music, the verse melody is relatively subdued compared to that of the chorus. Its more conjunct motion serves as a platform for the lyrics, and is modified slightly in subsequent verses to accommodate different words, but as shown by the melodic reduction in Figure 4 is essentially the same melodic material. The reduction shows the melody hovering around G for one measure, leaping up to E that is prolonged for another measure before a clear stepwise descent from E to C. As expected, the chorus melody is more compelling, using reinforcement from a stepwise descending bass line to make directed leaps, change direction, and form a more distinct and active melody. Along with the repeated lyrics "let it be," this is the most memorable part of the song. The chorus melody concludes with a stepwise descent from ED-C similarly to the verse. The melodic reduction of this descent is nearly identical to the verse as seen in Figure 5. In the case of Let it Be, that the verse and chorus end with the same material is motivically significant. After hearing the song, if a listener goes away whistling anything it would most likely be this stepwise E-D-C. The listener hears this important motive 32 constructed of the same melodic and harmonic material in both the verse and chorus, however in the analysis of repetition, the first verse and the first chorus are considered to be new material. There are two reasons for this. First, the repetition of the "let it be" motive in both the verse and chorus functions structurally as a concluding gesture, or a cadential formula. Second, like any concluding gesture, the "let it be" motive follows opening material. In this song, the opening material of the verse and chorus are contrasting in nature, placing the concluding "let it be" motive in different contexts. The motive is recontextualized in that it has undergone a "phenomenal transformation of repetition [of a musical idea] induced by change in the musical context". (Hanninen, 2003, p. 61) This recontextualization sets the "let it be" motive in the chorus apart from the same motive in the verse, despite their nearly identical musical material. The intro is the first time the listener hears the verse chord progression and, as mentioned, is new material, as shown in Table 4. Since what would normally be called Verse 1 is actually two iterations of the same melodic phrase but with different words, these two iterations are treated differently with respect to repetition, thus Verse 1A and Verse 1B. Though the two lines of Verse 1 share the same ending, the rhyme schemes are not interdependent. Unlike Hey Ya, the second line doesn't finish what the first line started; both lines simply terminate with "let it be." They are also considerably longer than the verses in Hey Ya. Verse 1A is the first time the listener hears the melodic material of the verse, timbre of the vocals, and lyrics, so it is new material. In Verse 2B, the melody repeats but with different lyrics (except for the end of that line) so it is considered a modified repetition. The first chorus begins at 0:40 with its contrasting melodic material and is labeled new material. In addition, soft organ chords are added to distinguish the chorus from the verse. Verse 2 is also divided in the same way as Verse 1 (Verse 1A and 1B). The listener not 33 only hears new lyrics but also other instruments slowly introduced. In Verse 2A, at 0:52, high-hat is added on beats 2 and 4, and bass enters just before Verse 2B at 1:05. Given the new lyrics and different timbre, both Verse 2A and 2B are a modified repetition. The second chorus is at 1:19 and is now also accompanied by drums and bass, which provide momentum and distinguish it from the first chorus so it is also considered a modified repetition. This momentum propels the music forward towards a repetition of the chorus at 1:32, this time more fully bloomed with prominent brass chords doubling the organ. Instrumentation and vocal technique, and the addition of different lyrics concluding this iteration of the chorus, differentiate it from the others so it too is a modified repetition. The electric piano interlude at 1:46 introduces new harmonic, melodic, and timbral material, so this short section is labeled new material. Its repetition in the organ immediately after is nearly identical but uses a very noticeable change in timbre to extend the interlude. This is quite simply a timbral variation of the electric piano preceding it and is labeled as a variation. The guitar solo at 1:59 is also considered a variation. The solo uses melodic material from the verses along with elaborations idiomatic on electric guitar. Guitar solos (and by extension other instrumental solos) as variations are discussed in more detail in the analysis of The Strokes' Last Nite. In addition to new lyrics, Verse 3 has a slightly but noticeably different drum pattern, so it is considered a modified repetition. The first chorus of the final three choruses is nearly identical to the previous one just after the guitar solo so it is a literal repetition. At 3:23, lead guitar is introduced giving the impression of a modified repetition; the final chorus is a literal repetition of this. The coda is a modified repetition of the electric piano interlude, slowing the tempo and serving as a concluding gesture. Looking at the repetition profile of Let it Be (Table 5), we can draw some conclusions 34 about the song as a whole. As in the case of Hey Ya, modified repetition was the type employed most. This is largely due to the progression through the lyrics in each verse, but also because of the gradual buildup of timbre throughout the course of the song. The thick sonorities were likely due to Phil Spector's production style, which began to fall out of fashion around this time. 14 New material and literal repetition are approximately the same at 18.6% and 17.8%, respectively, and variation was the least employed at 14%. Missy Elliot - Get Ur Freak On In terms of timbre and style, Missy Elliot's Get Ur Freak On could not be more of a contrast from Let it Be. Released in 2001, Get Ur Freak On was written and produced by Missy Elliot and Timbaland. The song is relatively unique in the realm of hip-hop for its use of instruments typically heard in Bhangra music, a style of dance music from India. The most prominent instruments featured in the main ostinato are a tumbi, accompanied by tabla drums, though these are accentuated by instruments and samples that one would normally hear in hip-hop music. Interestingly, the stark use of "exotic" sounding Indian instruments is comparable to those used in The Beatles' Love You To. The song is one example where a nonmusical intro was included in the analysis. The spoken voice at the beginning (Intro A) is in Japanese and reappears as the song comes to a close. Another voice in Hindi is heard near the end of Verse 2, so spoken words are featured enough to be more than arbitrary, even though at times the languages may appear to be. 14 The 2003 remix of the album, Let it Be: Naked, featured the song with much of the thick orchestration stripped away. An analysis of this version may yield different results. 35 Intros B and C establish the duration and repetition pattern of the song's hooks 15; Intro B is four bars of one repeated vocal pattern, and Intro C is very similar but with a different vocal pattern and words, so they are labeled new material and modified repetition, respectively. Each hook is a total of eight bars, but is divided because patterns in the first hook reflect two different repetition categories. The analysis is shown in Table 6. Because of their emphasis on spoken/rapped words, the verses in this style of music can be difficult to parse. An analysis of the poetry may be more effective than that of melodic or rhythmic material, but in-depth poetry analysis is outside the realm of this paper. However, it is apparent that rhythmic aspects of the words in relation to the pulse do have a distinct pattern, and this pattern changes and recurs in much the same way that melodic patterns do in music where sung melodies are the norm. Because of this, verses in Get Ur Freak On are not divided as they were in Outkast's Hey Ya. In the verses of Hey Ya, rhyme schemes working in conjunction with repeating melodic units indicated repetition beyond that at the phrase level, necessitating a different category (MR) to acknowledge that repetition, whereas the verses of Get Ur Freak On do not. The verses of Get Ur Freak On, like many rap songs, contain repetition on a musematic level, but development at the discursive level. As the first verse the listener hears, Verse 1 is labeled new material, and subsequent verses are labeled modified repetition since they are musically similar but have different words. At 2:47, the ‘tutti' of the final hook gives way to a break. The reduction of instrumental texture could be best described as a variation of the hook. Continuing the divisions established in the intro, the break is divided into three sections: Break A is the 15 In rap/hip-hop, the term ‘hook' generally refers to the chorus. 36 variation, Break B a literal repetition of Break A, and Break C a modified repetition of Break A because of the reintroduction of the synthesizer carrying harmonic material. Like the intro and break, the coda expresses a similar triplicate division. Coda A seems to feature the tabla drums in the overall mix relative to any other section, so it is considered a variation, Coda B a modified repetition of Coda A, and Coda C is a modified repetition because the fade-out begins here, which is a structural feature as it cues the end of the song. As mentioned, Get Ur Freak On is stylistically very different when compared to Let it Be. However, when we look at how the song breaks down into each repetition category, they both display remarkable similarities. Table 7 shows the proportion of each repetition category in Get Ur Freak On. There is by far more modified repetition than any other category, and only a marginal amount of variation. There is slightly more literal repetition than new material, but like Hey Ya and Let it Be, the amount of time in both categories is strikingly similar. The Strokes - Last Nite Last Nite is from the debut album of The Strokes, a New York based garage-rock band. Like many other post-punk bands that found commercial success in the early 2000s, their music captures the gritty spirit of the late 70s punk scene but with more clarity and nuance. The song is in verse-chorus form, but instead of the typical verse-chorus paradigm in which the relatively subdued verse serves as a preparation for the more catchy material of the chorus, the verses of Last Nite are much more compelling than the choruses, which seem to act as a point of departure from the verse material. This reversal of these roles stands in contrast to the other songs analyzed in this paper. The introduction uses a gradual increase in texture to present the listener with 37 elements employed in the rest of the song. There are four distinct instrumental entrances; rhythm guitar starts in Intro A, followed by drums at Intro B, lead guitar at Intro C, and finally bass guitar at Intro D. Despite each instrument being equally present in the mix and the listener hearing each for the first time, not all entrances are new material. In a passage like this, knowing what musical element each instrument introduces is vital for determining which repetition category it belongs in. The rhythm guitar uses a single pitch to establish the tempo and basic rhythm, which would be considered new material, but the entrance of the drums merely embellishes that rhythmic material. This embellishment plays a structural role in the gradual build-up of the texture, and so it is a modified repetition. At Intro C, the lead guitar enters and introduces a simple harmonic progression, which is labeled new material; this is then reinforced by the bass guitar entering at Intro D, a modified repetition. Intros C and D are longer than A and B presumably because this two-chord progression must be repeated to establish itself before moving on. Without this repetition, or "clump," the entire intro might sound less gradual despite each instrument entering separately at equal intervals of time. Analysis of the entire song is shown in Table 8. Tension built up in all four parts of the intro section is released when Verse 1A begins at 0:28. The vocals enter and the listener hears the main verse material (Fig. 6) for the first time. The melodic material within this six-measure phrase contains little repetition outside of basic rhythmic patterns, so its repetition in Verse 1B with different lyrics ensures the listener interprets these six measures as a single phrase unit. Except for Verse 1C (a third consecutive verse iteration that only occurs once), every verse begins in the same pitch space and with the same scratchy vocal technique. Rhyme schemes also play a role in this delineation. In other songs, repeating phrases that contained rhymes were typically coupled into a single phrase, but that generally only happens when rhymes are at the end of the 38 phrase. When the beginnings of the phrases rhyme it often has the opposite effect, making the repetition more salient and the boundaries between repetitive units clearer. The lyrics at the beginning of all A and B verses, "last night…" and "so I…", help to make the repetition apparent by signaling via rhymes (in this case assonance) that the phrase is starting over. This is in contrast to the "rhyme" schemes in the chorus, where each short melodic phrase in the vocals ends with the word "understand." Though this is a less traditional type of rhyme, it functions the same way within the music because of the identical vowel sounds. This is why the four melodic iterations of the chorus are grouped in the analysis, as new material in the first chorus and a modified repetition in the second. It should be noted that the harmonic progression of the chorus is the same as the intro, but in the intro the guitar and bass served a melodic role whereas in the context of more active melodic material in the vocals of the chorus, the guitar and bass are perceived as the background harmony. Breaks A and B act as a truncated version of the introduction leading to the guitar solo. The solo itself is a variation (both because of the category into which it fits and in the traditional sense) of the vocal material from the verses, in particular the "last night" motive. This motive is distinct from the other melodic material not only because of the vocal technique employed by the performer, but also because of the use of quarter tones or "blue notes." Though they are fairly common in rock music, in the context of Last Nite, only this motive contains such emphasis on "blue notes" whereas the rest of the vocal material does not. As shown in Figure 6, the "last night" motive is essentially a descending line from an approximate E-flat through D to C. Looking at the subsequent vocal material, it is clear that the approximate E-flat in the first three measures of Figure 6 is no intonation mistake on the part of the performer since he clearly sings E-naturals in the same octave in the measures that follow. This infers that the approximate E-flat is intended as an expressive device. 39 The only other section of the song where we see an intentional E-flat is in the guitar solo (Fig. 7). The solo begins by sliding up through another blue note between F and G (the sharp 4), but quickly settles onto E-flat and returns to it at the beginning of each measure of the solo except for the last. The most convincing resemblance to the "last night" motive begins in the third measure of the solo, where E-flat descends in the upper voice through D to C after a quick bend up from B-flat.16 This is then immediately repeated in the next measure, the only measure of the solo repeated nearly verbatim. To the casual listener, the guitar solo seems to be new material - and indeed it is very different from the verses - but its melodic material is based on verse material that at this point in the song is very familiar, thus it is considered a variation. As mentioned previously, the choruses in Last Nite act as a point of departure from the more energetic verses, an aspect contrary to the typical paradigm that makes the song unique in terms of form. However, in terms of repetition, Last Nite is quite similar to other songs in the study. Table 9 shows the repetition profile of Last Nite. As with Let it Be and Get Ur Freak On, modified repetition is the most plentiful type, variation the least, and new material and literal repetition roughly equal at 23.4% and 20.8%, respectively. It appears that despite vast differences in style, there seems to be a trend in the repetition profile of the songs in the RS500. 16 On the guitar, the B-flat to C glissando is achieved by bending the G string; the C immediately following this glissando is played on the B string so that it is a C unison on both the G and B strings. This slightly out of tune unison has a distinct tone when processed through a distortion effect as it is in Last Nite. 40 Derek and the Dominoes - Layla Not every song in the sample followed the same trend. At this point, it may be helpful to look in depth at a song that does not fit the emerging model, yet is still considered a classic by fans and critics alike. Derek and the Dominoes' most well-known song, Layla, is one such case. It was written by Eric Clapton and the band's drummer Jim Gordon and released on their 1970 album Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs. At over seven minutes, it is among the longest songs in the sample and its unusual form is apparent on the first listen. In the analysis, the introduction is split into three sections; Intro A announces the recognizable seven-note riff in the lead guitar while the rhythm guitar outlines the harmonic material. Intro B continues this material while drums and bass enter, and the lead guitar introduces yet more melodic material to create a kind of call and response. Intro C repeats this, albeit a truncated version that sets up the direct modulation from D minor (intro/chorus) to C-sharp minor (verses), hence it is a modified repetition. As shown in Table 10, the song then continues in a fairly typical fashion, alternating verse and chorus material, with different words for each verse. The solo section is quite a bit longer than a typical guitar solo, but not surprising given the heavy blues influences of both Clapton and Duane Allman (who was sitting in during the recording 17). After the solo, there is a short transition that slows the song's momentum to accommodate the slower tempo of the second half of the song, commonly referred to as the "coda." The coda is based on two distinct ideas referred to as Coda 1 and Coda 2. Though there are no words in this second half, Coda 1 acts as a verse and Coda 2 like a chorus or a point of departure. What connects the two 17 Clapton (2007), p. 128 41 halves of the song are primarily the lead guitar parts (in particular the use of the slide 18), elaborating on the melodic ideas in the piano and maintaining listener interest. The songs examined up to this point have all had a similar repetition profile, especially with regards to new material and literal repetition. However, despite being the 27 th greatest song of all time according to Rolling Stone, Layla seems to have an abundance of literal repetition compared to other songs on the list, as shown in Table 11. Most songs that were analyzed have a difference between new material and literal repetition of roughly plus or minus 1-3 percentage points, but Layla has a difference of 11.4 - far outside the norm. Knowing how it was composed may provide insight into this aberration. Layla is basically two songs merged into one; the first half by Clapton and the second half by Gordon. According to Uncut Magazine, the story recalled by Clapton is that a week after recording the first part of the song, Clapton came by the studio late at night and heard Gordon, who was secretly using the studio to record his own album, playing the coda material on piano. Clapton was so impressed with what he heard that they allowed Gordon to continue using the studio on the condition that he let them use the coda material for Layla. The band then recorded the second half, and the song was complete. (Williamson, 2006) Unfortunately, upon release the reception was lackluster; the album only made it to No. 16 on the U.S. charts and did not make the charts at all in the U.K. Assuming the story is accurate, a major part of the song's composition seems to be a matter of happenstance rather than intentionality, and so it raises the question: what would the song be like had Clapton never come to the studio that night? 18 The slide is typically a metal or glass cylinder used on the guitar strings to bypass the fixed positions of the frets and create smooth glissandi. 42 The same analysis can be used to calculate the repetition profile up to the transition to the coda. If the song were to stop at the end of the solo where the transition begins at 3:06, as it does in Table 12, the repetition profile would be as it is in Table 13. Using only the part of the song that Clapton composed, the new material and literal repetition are nearly equal, falling in line with the model. Interestingly, it was rereleased a year later as a single, without the piano coda, similar to the "hypothetical" version in Table 12, and the critical reception was much warmer than before. This is not to say that adherence to the model is solely responsible for the improved chart performance, but given that so many successful songs display equality between new material and literal repetition, it might have been a contributing factor. 43 Figure 3 - Primary harmonic patterns in Let it Be Figure 4 - Melodic reduction of verse material in Let it Be Figure 5 - Melodic reduction of chorus material in Let it Be 44 Table 4 - Analysis of Let it Be MM:SS 00:00 00:14 00:27 00:40 00:52 01:05 01:19 01:32 01:46 01:52 01:59 02:26 02:41 02:55 03:09 03:23 03:37 03:51 04:02 Seconds 0 14 27 40 52 65 79 92 106 112 119 146 161 175 189 203 217 231 242 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Chorus Interlude A Interlude B Gtr Solo Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Chorus Chorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 14 13 13 12 13 14 13 14 6 7 27 15 14 14 14 14 14 11 Table 5 - Repetition profile of Let it Be Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 45 43 120 34 % 18.6% 17.8% 49.6% 14.0% Category N N MR N MR MR MR MR N Var Var LR MR MR LR MR LR MR 45 Table 6 - Analysis of Get Ur Freak On MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:15 00:26 00:48 00:59 01:10 01:31 01:42 01:53 02:25 02:36 02:47 02:58 03:08 03:19 03:30 03:41 03:54 Seconds 0 5 15 26 48 59 70 91 102 113 145 156 167 178 188 199 210 221 234 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Hook A Hook B Verse 2 Hook A Hook B Verse 3 Hook A Hook B Break A Break B Break C Coda A Coda B Coda C End Duration (s) 5 10 11 22 11 11 21 11 11 32 11 11 11 10 11 11 11 13 Category N N MR N N MR MR LR LR MR LR LR Var LR MR Var MR MR Table 7 - Repetition profile of Get Ur Freak On Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 48 54 110 22 % 20.5% 23.1% 47.0% 9.4% 46 Table 8 - Analysis of Last Nite MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:10 00:19 00:28 00:40 00:51 01:02 01:21 01:33 01:44 01:49 01:58 02:12 02:30 02:42 02:53 02:58 03:07 03:12 Seconds 0 5 10 19 28 40 51 62 81 93 104 109 118 132 150 162 173 178 187 192 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Intro D Verse 1A Verse 1B Verse 1C Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Break A Break B Solo Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Coda A Coda B Coda C End Duration (s) 5 5 9 9 12 11 11 19 12 11 5 9 14 18 12 11 5 9 5 Category N MR N MR N MR MR N LR MR Var Var Var MR LR LR MR MR LR 47 Figure 6 - Verse 1A of Last Nite Figure 7 - Lead guitar solo from Last Nite Table 9 - Repetition profile of Last Nite Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 45 40 79 28 % 23.4% 20.8% 41.1% 14.6% 48 Table 10 - Analysis of Layla (original version) MM:SS 00:00 00:09 00:18 00:25 00:42 00:57 01:14 01:30 01:46 02:03 02:19 03:06 03:11 03:36 03:53 04:10 04:26 04:51 05:08 05:24 05:40 06:05 06:46 07:02 Seconds 0 9 18 25 42 57 74 90 106 123 139 186 191 216 233 250 266 291 308 324 340 365 406 422 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Chorus Chorus Solo Transition Coda intro Coda 1A Coda 1B Coda 2 Coda 1A Coda 1B Coda 1C Coda 2 Coda 1A Coda 1B Fade End Duration (s) 9 9 7 17 15 17 16 16 17 16 47 5 25 17 17 16 25 17 16 16 25 41 16 Category N N MR N N MR LR MR LR LR Var MR N N Var N LR MR LR MR LR LR MR Table 11 - Repetition profile of Layla (original version) Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 108 156 94 64 % 25.6% 37.0% 22.3% 15.2% 49 Table 12 - Analysis of a hypothetical version of Layla MM:SS Seconds Section Duration (s) Category 00:00 0 Intro A 9 N 00:09 9 Intro B 9 N 00:18 18 Intro C 7 MR 00:25 25 Verse 1 17 N 00:42 42 Chorus 15 N 00:57 57 Verse 2 17 MR 01:14 74 Chorus 16 LR 01:30 90 Verse 3 16 MR 01:46 106 Chorus 17 LR 02:03 123 Chorus 16 LR 02:19 139 Solo 47 Var 03:06 186 "End" Table 13 - Repetition profile of a hypothetical version of Layla Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 50 49 40 47 % 26.9% 26.3% 21.5% 25.3% CHAPTER 3 MACROANALYSIS After looking at several songs in detail, we can turn our attention to the sample as a whole. Each song was analyzed in the same way as the four discussed in the analysis section. While individual songs varied greatly in style and form, the same analytical method was applied consistently to the entire sample. In the discussion of the songs analyzed in this paper, there was a noticeable similarity in the amount of new material and literal repetition (except for Layla, as discussed before). Analysis of the entire sample was also revealing in terms of stylistic changes over time and genre. Table 14 is an overview of all the analyses. The relative equality of new material and literal repetition in a surprisingly high number of songs was a compelling finding when looking at the entire data set. Although only one song was exactly equal, for far more songs to display this relative equality than not is something that is difficult to ignore. To ensure that this was not something that occurred in any random song, it was tested on songs chosen because they intuitively seemed very repetitive, such as Lenny Kravitz's Fly Away, and the abundance of literal repetition compared to new material reflected that intuitive impression. 19 Out of any of the four categories that could display a pattern in their relationship to 19 In the case of Fly Away, new material was 29.4% and literal repetition was 38%. 51 one another, new material and literal repetition are the most compelling because their identifiers are the most easily discerned. A musical idea, that is, some combination of musical elements that distinguishes itself from other ideas, is recognizable as a segment unto itself. If the original idea is recognizable, it will be just as recognizable when it repeats verbatim, as a literal repetition. It is perceived as its own unit of sound (Meyer, 1956, p. 129; Margulis 2010, p. 39). In contrast, modified repetition and variation, despite having concrete theoretical definitions, are, in practice, much more prone to subjectivity on the part of the analyst. At times, certain segments of music have properties of both, but rarely to an equal degree. Typically, there was a stronger argument for one over the other, but it is completely possible for another analyst to have a differing opinion. One example is at the beginning of The Eagles' Hotel California,20 where the introductory material (Intro A) is repeated with a subtle guitar line and extra percussion. In this analysis, it is labeled a modified repetition because it is thickening the texture to lead to the verse, however it could also be called a variation because it could be argued that the same guitar and percussion parts maintain listener interest without contributing to the formal arc of the song in a significant way. Regardless, this analytical grey area would not affect the equality of new material and literal repetition. There were, however, instances in which a section of a song contained such a marginal amount of modification or variation that distinguishing between a literal repetition and one of the variant categories (Var and MR) was difficult. Analytical listening will undoubtedly be more attentive to such slight changes in the song's content, so these changes were recognized as either a modified repetition or variation despite the changes being 20 A full analysis of Hotel California can be found in the appendix. 52 relatively minor. It is probable that a more casual listener in a different setting may miss these subtle changes and interpret that section not as a variant but as a literal repetition. This has the effect of increasing a song's proportion of literal repetition, but as with other analytical methods, the effect of a listener's environment and focus on that analysis is something that is impossible to predict. The repetition profiles of the songs in the Rolling Stone 500 list more often than not reflected this equality of new material and literal repetition. As shown in Table 15, the average amount of new material in each song was 27.0% and the average amount of literal repetition was 25.0%; a difference of only 2 percentage points. This is fascinating given the diversity of styles represented in the sample; artists from Chuck Berry to Michael Jackson to Nirvana. The average modified repetition, 33.7%, and average variation, 14.1%, were consistent with the songs previously analyzed, however those two categories tended to vary from song to song more than that of new material and literal repetition. The relationship between new material and literal repetition is visually clear in Figure 8, which shows the percentage point difference of all 52 songs in descending order compared to a random 21 sequence of 52 single-decimal point integers within the same range found in the analysis (35.1 to -22.9). Of course, the sample was not without its outliers. When looking at the set of differences (in percentage points) between new material and literal repetition, the statistical outliers can be calculated fairly simply.22 In the case of the Rolling Stone 500 sample, these 21 22 Generated in Microsoft Excel using the ‘=randbetween' function Statistical outliers were any data point more than 1.5 interquartile ranges below the first quartile or above the third quartile. In this data set, the upper fence was 19.1 and lower fence -15.4. 53 outliers are the highest four and lowest four in the set (Kanye West, Jesus Walks; Radiohead, Paranoid Android; John Lennon, Imagine; The Beach Boys, Good Vibrations; Little Richard, Tutti Frutti; The Bealtes, Hey Jude; The Verve, Bittersweet Symphony; and Grandmaster Flash, The Message). Statistically speaking, this brings the average difference to 1.51pp. However, statistical outliers do not tell the full story. There are several possible reasons a song may not fit the model. Songs that are in a compound form, such as the previously discussed Layla, tend to lie well outside the range set by more straightforward verse-chorus songs. Often, these compound forms are songs within songs, or made up of two or more disparate ideas. Examples from the sample include Paranoid Android, Good Vibrations, Take Me Out, and Hey Jude.23 Songs like these are nonstandard versions of the verse-chorus paradigm in which scholars are beginning to take more interest. (see Osborn, 2011) Given that the Rolling Stone 500 was compiled by pop/rock music experts, it is highly possible that a few songs on the list were chosen because they reflect the very beginnings of their genre. The two oldest songs on the list, Tutti Frutti (1955) and That'll be the Day (1957), contain a high amount of literal repetition compared to other songs written less than a decade later. They fit the basic verse-chorus paradigm, lack any analytical ambiguity, and yet are still far more repetitive than a majority of the other songs. It would be tempting to claim that they lack complexity or are poorly crafted, but this might be an overly simplistic explanation. In this case, it is important to remember that these two songs were written and recorded at a time when the mainstream public was just being introduced to 23 Hey Jude is an example of what Brad Osborne calls a terminally climactic form (Osborn, 2013) 54 rock music.24 Lidov makes an important observation in this regard: "Since repetition can be perceived in an unfamiliar style, innovations which lack the support of an established musical language can appeal to repetition to clarify their vocabulary and procedures" (Lidov, 2004, p. 27). There is a song on the list that represents the beginnings of another style of music: Grandmaster Flash's The Message, was among the first rap songs and is now considered a classic, but it contains the greatest amount of literal repetition in the entire sample. Perhaps it is this abundance of repetition that allowed rap music to establish its vocabulary in the early 1980s in the same way rock music did in the 1950s. At this point, the tendency for verse-chorus songs to have roughly an equal amount of new material and literal repetition is clear, but the reason for this is not. However, it is possible to deduce what this means in the case of a verse-chorus song. It is clear from the analyses that every new idea in a song is not simply repeated verbatim only once, and that certain new ideas are repeated verbatim more than once while others are not. This would indicate a hierarchy of ideas, where one is compelling enough to be repeated verbatim while others require repetition through some variation or modification. This fits the verse-chorus paradigm whereby the focal point of the song is the chorus (Covach, 2005) since the chorus is often repeated verbatim and verses are modified with new words. If this is the case, then the equality of new material and literal repetition may just be the repetition ‘footprint' of the verse-chorus form. This would mean other forms have their own patterns of repetition and opens the door for further research (as discussed later). Aside from the relationship between new material and literal repetition, analysis of 24 The first nationally televised rock song was Rock Around the Clock by Bill Haley and the Comets on the Ed Sullivan Show in August of 1955. 55 the sample sheds light onto other aspects of repetition regarding time period and genre. Given that the sample includes songs from 1955 to 2006 chosen in a roughly uniform manner, we are able to see how the use of repetition has changed over time. If the repetition profiles are averaged for each decade,25 there are a few interesting findings. One is that the amount of new material in songs throughout the entire sample remained fairly constant compared to other categories, peaking at 28.6% in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and at its lowest at 25.4% in the 2000s.26 On the surface, this seems to indicate that an "optimal" verse-chorus song requires just over a quarter of its total length to be new material. However, that it is relatively constant says more about repetition - how the new material is used is much more significant in creating variety than how much new material is available to work with. The graph in Figure 9 makes clear another shift that has frequently been noted in the history of popular music, at least anecdotally. Between the late 1950s and late 1960s, literal repetition became less prominent while at the same time modified repetition increased, and this arrangement persists with little change for the next 41 years represented in the sample. 27 In the late 60s, literal repetition and new material settle into a consistent relationship (difference of four percentage points) that continues through the 1970s, changes in the 1980s, and then returns for the 1990s and 2000s. Interestingly, these changes correspond to 25 By decade from 1970-2000. Since the sample contains only three songs from the late 1950s and two from the early 1960s, these two were made a single category. This works out to five songs from 1955-1964, eight songs from 1965-1969, and ten in each decade from 1970-2006. 26 Note that the 2000s also contain the highest amount of modified repetition. 27 More data from the late 50s and early 60s would make this finding more definitive. 56 a 2015 study by Mauch et al. that examined popular songs from 1960-2010 and found three "revolutions" in 1964, 1983, and 1991. The study found that the diversity of "topics," or stylistic features associated with different genres, increased in 1964, then decreased in 1983, and once again increased in 1991. (Mauch et al., 2015) While Mauch's study focused on harmony and timbre rather than repetition, it is possible that songs in different genres (often most readily apparent by timbre) can be distinguished by different patterns of repetition. When the repetition profiles of the sample are separated by genres, as in Figure 10, there are noticeable differences. Songs were determined to be in one of three broad genres 28 (rock, rap, and R&B), and then averaged for comparison. Unfortunately, the Rolling Stone 500 list heavily favors rock music of the 1960s and 1970s, and while the sample corrected for this chronologically (approximately 10 songs per decade), it could not correct for genre. 29 When broken down by genre, the sample contained 34 rock songs, 10 R&B songs, and only 8 rap songs. Nevertheless, there is one notable finding here in the difference between rap and rock in terms of repetition. While new material and literal repetition were relatively similar in all three genres, rap had a significantly greater amount of modified repetition, 43.5%, to rock's 31%. This is likely due to longer verses and more words overall in rap songs than rock, which is not surprising since rap lyrics are, in essence, poetry that is "delivered in a rhythmic cadence" (Salaam, 1995, p. 305) and any melodic material (if present at all) is secondary. In the absence of harmonic and melodic phrasing, verses can be difficult to parse by the same parameters as rock or R&B. This is a difficulty that further research on poetry 28 29 Genre according to www.allmusic.com This would have been impossible since rap, as separate from funk and disco music, did not develop until the late 1970s. (Salaam, 1995; Shusterman, 1991) 57 and phrasing in rap lyrics could make easier. Since the serious study of popular music by music scholars is still in its adolescence, speculation by less academically minded yet well-meaning musicians tends to saturate the channels of information for the majority of musicians who perform this music. To avoid such speculation, the goal of this study was to remain as objective as possible and make inferences based on the aggregate data. One aspect the parameters of the analysis did not account for, and one for which further research would be helpful, was the difference between what Meyer calls recurrence and reiteration. "Recurrence is the repetition which takes place after there has been a departure from whatever has been established as a given in a particular piece. … Reiteration, whether exact or varied, is the successive repetition of a given sound term…" (Meyer, 1956, p. 152) In terms of listener perception, according to Meyer, reiterated passages tend to emphasize differences between an idea and its repetitions, and recurrence tends to emphasize the similarities. The problem is that listener perception is essentially unquantifiable and therefore something that this analysis couldn't account for, especially when a comparison to other songs is one of the goals of the study. It may be possible to identify the recurrence of a single idea in a piece of music, such as the chorus in a song, and compare its length, number of instances, and how it varies (or not) from occurrence to occurrence. This would be insightful for popular music where these ideas are typically easier to identify, especially in the verse-chorus paradigm, where recurrence of the chorus is a unifying feature within the song. This study briefly experimented with the idea by looking at how much chorus material was in each song, but with limited success. Because this type of analysis strays too far from the focus of this study and other complicating factors, the analysis of recurring ideas was abandoned for the time being. However, since analysis of the sample is complete, research on this facet of repetition 58 would be much easier to accomplish and may shed light on the recurrence of ideas in versechorus forms. Another area for further research would be to look at different song forms. While AABA and 12-Bar Blues forms are seen less frequently than they were prior to the 1960s, these are still active and viable forms. Likewise, compound forms of the verse-chorus paradigm and other eclectic forms are appearing more and more as technology changes both the way songwriters compose and record music, and how their audiences listen to their music. It is likely that similar forms display similar patterns of repetition, just as verse-chorus forms do, and a broad comparison of these would be enlightening to many types of musicians. The time-consuming nature of the kind of macroanalysis this study has undertaken can be a prohibitive factor in further research, especially when a larger sample is desired. Unfortunately, authoritative scores are typically not available in popular music, so analysis must come through the lens of transcription, especially when the focus is on melodic and harmonic aspects of the music. There are, however, authoritative sound recordings in digital formats that can be processed and interpreted using specially designed software. This not only includes techniques for transcription (Klapuri & Davy, 2006), but also those for analysis of timbre, segmentation, pattern recognition (Aucouturier et al., 2005), and other data retrieval techniques (Mauch et al., 2015). The bottleneck in the analysis of a corpus of audio files will be the human performing the analysis, so the advantage of using these techniques to increase the sample size is obvious. Further research in the repetitive patterns of a large sample of music could benefit greatly from these techniques and leave more time for interpretation of the analysis by the researcher. 59 Table 14 - Overview of all 52 songs in the sample Artist/Composer Sex Pistols AC/DC Ronettes, The Jay-Z feat. UGK Michael Jackson Verve, The New Order Public Enemy 2Pac Gnarls Barkley Beyonce feat. Jay-Z Otis Redding Police, The Tom Petty Missy Elliott Beach Boys, The Beatles, The Outkast Donna Summer Eagles, The John Lennon Kanye West Chuck Berry Notorious B.I.G. Strokes, The Derek and the Dominos Beatles, The Doors, The Bob Dylan Clash, The Beck R.E.M Joy Division Bob Marley Sinead O'Connor U2 Radiohead Amy Winehouse Aretha Franklin Ike and Tina Turner Rolling Stones White Stripes, The Beatles, The Nirvana Pavement Guns N' Roses Franz Ferdinand Buddy Holly Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five Little Richard Marvin Gaye Prince Song/Piece Anarchy in the U.K. Back in Black Be My Baby Big Pimpin' Billie Jean Bittersweet Symphony Bizzarre Love Triangle Bring the Noise California Love Crazy Crazy in Love Dock of the Bay Every Breath You Take Free Fallin' Get Ur Freak On Good Vibrations Hey Jude Hey Ya! Hot Stuff Hotel California Imagine Jesus Walks Johnny B. Goode Juicy Last Nite Year 1977 1980 1963 2000 1983 1997 1986 1988 1995 2006 2003 1968 1983 1989 2001 1966 1968 2003 1979 1977 1971 2004 1958 1994 2001 Genre Rock Rock Rock Rap R&B Rock Rock Rap Rap R&B R&B R&B Rock Rock Rap Rock Rock Rap Rock Rock Rock Rap Rock Rap Rock Length (s) 211 253 156 284 292 356 260 221 282 177 234 160 249 251 234 215 422 234 291 387 180 194 158 300 192 N 37.0% 30.0% 33.3% 19.7% 30.8% 18.8% 21.9% 24.9% 30.9% 20.9% 35.0% 35.0% 28.1% 23.1% 20.5% 38.6% 19.2% 14.5% 33.3% 16.8% 42.8% 37.6% 32.9% 30.7% 23.4% LR 40.3% 28.5% 31.4% 24.6% 31.2% 39.9% 21.5% 12.2% 33.3% 11.3% 35.9% 30.6% 39.0% 24.7% 23.1% 14.9% 39.8% 14.1% 35.4% 9.3% 12.2% 2.6% 32.9% 16.0% 20.8% MR 19.9% 8.3% 19.2% 44.0% 20.9% 35.1% 34.2% 59.3% 20.9% 58.2% 18.8% 34.4% 20.1% 43.0% 47.0% 28.4% 27.0% 42.7% 21.6% 47.0% 45.0% 45.4% 23.4% 46.7% 41.1% Var 2.8% 33.2% 16.0% 11.6% 17.1% 6.2% 22.3% 3.6% 14.9% 9.6% 10.3% 0.0% 12.9% 9.2% 9.4% 18.1% 14.0% 28.6% 9.6% 26.9% 0.0% 14.4% 10.8% 6.7% 14.6% Layla Let it Be Light My Fire Like a Rolling Stone London Calling Loser Losing My Religion Love Will Tear Us Apart No Woman No Cry Nothing Compares 2 U One Paranoid Android Rehab Respect River Deep Mountain High Satisfaction Seven Nation Army She Loves You Smells Like Teen Spirit Summer Babe Sweet Child O' Mine Take Me Out That'll be the Day 1970 1970 1967 1965 1979 1993 1991 Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock 422 242 425 365 198 233 265 25.6% 18.6% 8.9% 22.7% 23.2% 28.8% 29.1% 37.0% 17.8% 9.9% 20.0% 24.2% 29.2% 23.4% 22.3% 49.6% 21.2% 54.5% 35.4% 24.5% 40.4% 15.2% 14.0% 60.0% 2.7% 17.2% 17.6% 7.2% 1980 1975 1990 1992 1997 2006 1967 Rock R&B Rock Rock Rock R&B R&B 202 218 304 273 381 212 142 29.2% 22.9% 18.4% 20.5% 39.9% 31.6% 29.6% 31.7% 23.4% 21.1% 11.0% 8.1% 18.4% 25.4% 22.3% 45.0% 46.1% 48.0% 37.3% 50.0% 39.4% 16.8% 8.7% 14.5% 20.5% 14.7% 0.0% 5.6% 1966 1965 2003 1964 1991 1992 1988 2004 1957 R&B Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock Rock 217 222 230 138 276 193 353 236 134 40.6% 33.3% 18.7% 27.5% 33.0% 25.9% 30.9% 31.8% 25.4% 24.9% 37.8% 17.4% 26.8% 35.1% 15.5% 17.8% 42.8% 34.3% 26.7% 28.8% 43.5% 28.3% 22.8% 22.8% 29.7% 16.9% 23.1% 7.8% 0.0% 20.4% 17.4% 9.1% 35.8% 21.5% 8.5% 17.2% 1982 1955 1971 1984 Rap Rock R&B R&B 411 143 231 227 12.4% 23.8% 25.5% 28.2% 34.3% 44.1% 20.8% 24.7% 41.8% 21.7% 29.4% 33.5% 11.4% 10.5% 24.2% 13.7% The Message Tutti Frutti What's Going On When Doves Cry 60 Table 15 - Average of repetition profiles in the RS500 N LR MR Var Avg. N-LR 27.0% 25.0% 33.8% 14.1% 1.99pp 40.0 Random RS500 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0 28.0 29.0 30.0 31.0 32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0 39.0 40.0 41.0 42.0 43.0 44.0 45.0 46.0 47.0 48.0 49.0 50.0 51.0 52.0 53.0 -10.0 -20.0 -30.0 Figure 8 - Difference between new material and literal repetition compared to random 61 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% N 25.0% LR 20.0% MR 15.0% Var 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 1955-1964 1965-1969 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s Figure 9 - Repetition profiles by decade 50.0% 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% N LR MR Var Rock R&B Rap Figure 10 - Repetition profiles by genre CONCLUSION Repetition is the mechanism by which music makes sense of itself. It is a conduit for meaning - separating music from noise, poetry from ambient chatter. Despite it being arguably more essential than pitch, rhythm, or timbre, repetition is too often overlooked or taken for granted. This is understandable given that repetition isn't as apparent in music notation, which is designed primarily to show pitch and rhythm. Granted, the tables provided in this study do not show repetition per se, but are used to view at a glance what the listener experiences over the course of several minutes. The biggest challenge for this study was representing a spectrum of all the ways new and previously stated ideas can mix and interact while maintaining a method of categorization simple enough to provide an effective analytical tool. By this measure, it would be fair to claim success. In addition, this study has provided a method of analyzing repetition in an enormous body of music that music scholars label popular (though most people would simply call it music, leaving the qualifier for classical or art music). This analytical method is straightforward enough to be understood by a majority of musicians and flexible enough to be adapted to vastly different styles of music. It showed that most verse-chorus forms have a distinct temporal equality between an idea and its verbatim repetition relative to nonverbatim repetitions. This means that while popular music repeats in abundance, the variants in those repetitions, however nuanced, are essential to the progress of the music. Since the data from the sample spanned over 50 years of music, the study also showed a relationship between repetition and the changes in music seen in other musical elements, and even nonmusical 63 aspects. Differences and similarities concerning repetition in three main genres were apparent as well. Hopefully, this study reveals something about popular music to fans and critics alike, and works to dispel "common sense" criticisms of excessive repetitiveness in all popular music. As Middleton says in his discussion of repetition "There is no universal norm or convention here. All music contains repetition - but in differing amounts and of an enormous variety of types." (Middleton, 1990, p. 268) This is certainly true for music as a whole, but this study proffers a norm with respect to repetition in verse-chorus songs based on pop culture's most enduring music of the latter part of the twentieth century. It is the music of the current generation's childhood, and classics for the generations to come. APPENDIX SAMPLE ANALYSES To ensure the reader has access to all of the analytical data, the repetition profiles and analyses for all 52 songs are included here in Tables 16-67. The charts are fairly simple to follow, but for the sake of clarity, a brief explanation would be prudent. The analyses are in alphabetical order by song title. Each table in this appendix provides both the repetition profile (above) and the sectional analysis (below). The repetition profile totals the time in seconds attributed to each category, including the percentage of the song's total length. The sectional analysis displays the onset of each section in both MM:SS format and seconds, the name of the section, its duration in seconds, and what category most accurately described that section. While not always needed, the notes made when analyzing the song were preserved to provide the reader with a brief explanation of the parsing or categorization where it may otherwise seem to be ambiguous. Due to copyright laws, audio files of the songs could not be provided, but because of their popularity they are easily accessible online.30 30 Please note that the timing provided in these analyses could vary greatly when compared with versions found online. 65 Table 16 - Anarchy in the U.K. (1977) - The Sex Pistols Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 78 85 42 6 211 % 37.0% 40.3% 19.9% 2.8% MM:SS 00:00 00:08 00:15 00:29 00:44 00:58 01:13 01:32 01:46 02:00 02:15 02:29 02:44 02:58 03:12 03:25 03:31 Seconds 0 8 15 29 44 58 73 92 106 120 135 149 164 178 192 205 211 Section Intro V. Intro Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Bridge Verse 3 Chorus Bridge Verse 4 Chorus Chorus Chorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 8 7 14 15 14 15 19 14 14 15 14 15 14 14 13 6 Category N N N N MR LR N MR LR N MR LR LR LR LR Var Notes Contrasting harmony and guitar solo Tonicization, new melodic material Table 17 - Back in Black (1980) - AC/DC Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 76 72 21 84 253 % 30.0% 28.5% 8.3% 33.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:06 00:16 00:27 00:48 01:08 01:29 01:49 02:31 02:51 03:10 03:31 03:50 04:13 Seconds 0 6 16 27 48 68 89 109 151 171 190 211 230 253 Section Intro A Intro B1 Intro B2 Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Solo Chorus Break Chorus Coda Fade out End Duration (s) 6 10 11 21 20 21 20 42 20 19 21 19 23 Category N N LR N N MR LR Var LR N LR Var Var Notes Var of verse material Improv during fade 66 Table 18 - Be My Baby (1962) - The Ronettes Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 52 49 30 25 156 % 33.3% 31.4% 19.2% 16.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:04 00:08 00:22 00:37 00:52 01:07 01:22 01:37 01:52 02:07 02:11 02:26 02:36 Seconds 0 4 8 22 37 52 67 82 97 112 127 131 146 156 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1 Prechorus Chorus Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Instrumental Chorus Break Chorus Fade End Duration (s) 4 4 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 4 15 10 Category N N N N N MR MR LR Var LR LR LR Var Notes Is like Intro A Based on chorus material Table 19 - Big Pimpin' (2000) - Jay-Z & UGK Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 56 70 125 33 284 % 19.7% 24.6% 44.0% 11.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:14 00:28 00:56 01:24 01:38 01:52 02:20 02:47 03:01 03:15 03:43 03:57 04:11 04:25 04:44 Seconds 0 14 28 56 84 98 112 140 167 181 195 223 237 251 265 284 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1A Verse 1B Hook Hook Verse 2A Verse 2B Hook Hook Verse 3 Hook Hook Coda Fade End Duration (s) 14 14 28 28 14 14 28 27 14 14 28 14 14 14 19 Category N LR N MR N LR MR MR LR MR MR LR LR Var Var Notes Synth added Slight change in texture at end Var of hook texture. Further var of hook 67 Table 20 - Billie Jean (1983) - Michael Jackson Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 90 91 61 50 292 % 30.8% 31.2% 20.9% 17.1% MM:SS 00:00 00:29 00:53 01:09 01:26 01:46 01:50 02:15 02:31 02:48 03:04 03:29 03:45 03:53 04:18 04:52 Seconds 0 29 53 69 86 106 110 135 151 168 184 209 225 233 258 292 Section Intro Verse 1 Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Retrans. Verse 3 Verse 4 Prechorus Chorus Chorus Chorus/Solo Solo end/chor Chorus Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 29 24 16 17 20 4 25 16 17 16 25 16 8 25 34 Category N N MR N N MR MR MR LR LR LR Var LR LR Var Notes Truncated chorus Var of chorus material Var of chorus material 68 Table 21 - Bittersweet Symphony (1997) - The Verve Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 67 142 125 22 356 % 18.8% 39.9% 35.1% 6.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:12 00:23 00:34 00:45 00:57 01:08 01:30 01:53 02:15 02:26 02:49 03:11 03:34 03:45 04:07 04:30 04:52 05:15 05:26 05:38 05:56 Seconds 0 12 23 34 45 57 68 90 113 135 146 169 191 214 225 247 270 292 315 326 338 356 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Intro D Intro E Intro F Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Reintro Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Reintro Verse 3A Verse 3B Chorus Chorus Coda A Coda B Coda C/Fade End Duration (s) 12 11 11 11 12 11 22 23 22 11 23 22 23 11 22 23 22 23 11 12 18 Category N N MR MR MR LR N MR N LR MR MR LR Var LR LR LR MR Var LR LR Notes melodic hook introduced adding inner lines adds synth sounds all other parts enter LR of Intro E Generously calling this a Var vocals patterns change slightly new melodic material 69 Table 22 - Bizarre Love Triangle (1986) - New Order Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 57 56 89 58 260 % 21.9% 21.5% 34.2% 22.3% MM:SS 00:00 00:08 00:25 00:41 00:57 01:13 01:21 01:29 01:46 02:02 02:18 02:34 02:50 03:08 03:24 03:40 03:56 04:12 04:20 Seconds 0 8 25 41 57 73 81 89 106 122 138 154 170 188 204 220 236 252 260 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Prechorus Chorus Reintro A Reintro B Verse 2A Verse 2B Prechorus Chorus Chorus Reintro Solo A Solo B Solo C Solo D Coda End Duration (s) 8 17 16 16 16 8 8 17 16 16 16 16 18 16 16 16 16 8 Category N N MR N N Var LR MR MR LR LR LR Var Var Var MR MR MR Notes Var of reintro material Var of chorus material changed accomp texture 70 Table 23 - Bring the Noise (1988) - Public Enemy Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 55 27 131 8 221 % 24.9% 12.2% 59.3% 3.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:12 00:46 00:55 01:04 01:30 01:39 01:47 02:22 02:31 02:40 02:48 02:57 03:21 03:41 Seconds 0 12 46 55 64 90 99 107 142 151 160 168 177 201 221 Section Intro Verse 1 Hook A Hook B Verse 2 Hook A Hook B Verse 3 Hook A Hook B Break A Break B Verse 4 Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 12 34 9 9 26 9 8 35 9 9 8 9 24 20 Category N N N MR MR LR MR MR LR MR Var LR MR MR Notes split because of "reintro" to verses similar to intro Var of texture, timbre vocal improv Table 24 - California Love (1994) - 2Pac Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 87 94 59 42 282 % 30.9% 33.3% 20.9% 14.9% MM:SS 00:00 00:03 00:13 00:45 01:27 01:58 02:09 02:19 03:01 03:33 03:43 03:54 04:04 04:15 04:25 04:42 Seconds 0 3 13 45 87 118 129 139 181 213 223 234 244 255 265 282 Section Intro A Intro B Hook Verse 1 Hook Bridge A Bridge B Verse 2 Hook Bridge A Bridge B Coda A Coda B Coda C Fade End Duration (s) 3 10 32 42 31 11 10 42 32 10 11 10 11 10 17 Category N N N N LR Var LR MR LR LR LR Var Var Var MR Notes Auto tuned vocals enter Var of hook LR of Bridge A Ad lib begins Vocal improv MR of hook/coda material 71 Table 25 - Crazy (2006) - Gnarls Barkley Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 37 20 103 17 177 % 20.9% 11.3% 58.2% 9.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:03 00:20 00:37 00:54 01:11 01:28 01:45 02:02 02:20 02:37 02:54 02:57 Seconds 0 3 20 37 54 71 88 105 122 140 157 174 177 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Chorus Coda Outro/fade End Duration (s) 3 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 17 17 3 Category N N MR N MR MR MR MR MR LR Var LR Notes Words changed slightly Vocal ad lib Table 26 - Crazy in Love (2003) - Beyonce feat. Jay-Z Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 82 84 44 24 234 % 35.0% 35.9% 18.8% 10.3% MM:SS 00:00 00:15 00:24 00:29 00:49 01:08 01:18 01:37 02:01 02:20 02:25 02:45 02:59 03:09 03:28 03:45 03:54 Seconds 0 15 24 29 49 68 78 97 121 140 145 165 179 189 208 225 234 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Chorus Re-intro Verse 2 Chorus Break A Break B Break C Bridge A Bridge B Chorus Chorus Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 15 9 5 20 19 10 19 24 19 5 20 14 10 19 17 9 Category N N LR N N LR MR LR N MR MR Var Var LR LR LR Notes same material as Intro B MR of Intro A material MR of Break A Var of chorus material Var of verse material 72 Table 27 - Dock of the Bay (1968) - Otis Redding Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 56 49 55 0 160 % 35.0% 30.6% 34.4% 0.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:10 00:19 00:28 00:47 01:05 01:24 01:33 01:43 02:01 02:20 02:29 02:40 Seconds 0 10 19 28 47 65 84 93 103 121 140 149 160 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Bridge A Bridge B Verse 3 Chorus Coda A Coda B/Fade End Duration (s) 10 9 9 19 18 19 9 10 18 19 9 11 Category N N MR N MR LR N MR MR LR N LR Notes Verse 2 not split modified to return to verse new melodic material, new timbre Table 28 - Every Breath You Take (1983) - The Police Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 70 97 50 32 249 % 28.1% 39.0% 20.1% 12.9% MM:SS 00:00 00:17 00:34 00:50 01:06 01:23 01:43 02:00 02:16 02:32 02:49 03:01 03:09 03:17 03:25 03:33 03:42 04:09 Seconds 0 17 34 50 66 83 103 120 136 152 169 181 189 197 205 213 222 249 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2 Bridge Reintro Solo Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Coda A Coda B Coda C Coda D Coda E Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 17 17 16 16 17 20 17 16 16 17 12 8 8 8 8 9 27 Category N N MR N MR N MR Var LR LR LR Var LR LR Var LR LR Notes Var of verse material truncated verse vocal improv 73 Table 29 - Free Fallin' (1989) - Tom Petty Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 58 62 108 23 251 % 23.1% 24.7% 43.0% 9.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:12 00:35 00:40 01:03 01:26 01:49 02:11 02:23 02:34 02:57 03:20 03:31 03:42 03:54 04:11 Seconds 0 12 35 40 63 86 109 131 143 154 177 200 211 222 234 251 Section Intro Verse 1 "Buffer" Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Chorus Break 1a Break 1b Verse 4 Chorus Break 2 Chorus Chorus Chorus/Fade End Duration (s) 12 23 5 23 23 23 22 12 11 23 23 11 11 12 17 Category N N MR MR N MR LR Var LR MR MR Var MR LR LR Notes space between verses, MR of intro Back-up vocals added Var of main riff Adds material from Break 2 74 Table 30 - Get Ur Freak On (2001) - Missy Elliot Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 48 54 110 22 234 % 20.5% 23.1% 47.0% 9.4% MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:15 00:26 00:48 00:59 01:10 01:31 01:42 01:53 02:25 02:36 02:47 02:58 03:08 03:19 03:30 03:41 03:54 Seconds 0 5 15 26 48 59 70 91 102 113 145 156 167 178 188 199 210 221 234 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Hook A Hook B Verse 2 Hook A Hook B Verse 3 Hook A Hook B Break A Break B Break C Coda A Coda B Coda C End Duration (s) 5 10 11 22 11 11 21 11 11 32 11 11 11 10 11 11 11 13 Category N N MR N N MR MR LR LR MR LR LR Var LR MR Var MR MR Notes Spoken voice Main intro Synth added Var of hook texture MR of Break A Tabla drums featured MR of Coda A 75 Table 31 - Good Vibrations (1965) - The Beach Boys Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 83 32 61 39 215 % 38.6% 14.9% 28.4% 18.1% MM:SS 00:00 00:13 00:26 00:51 01:04 01:16 01:42 01:55 02:01 02:08 02:14 02:22 02:29 02:36 02:54 02:58 03:14 03:35 Seconds 0 13 26 51 64 76 102 115 121 128 134 142 149 156 174 178 194 215 Section Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Interlude A Interlude B Interlude C Interlude B Break A Break B1 Break B2 Break B3 Retrans Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 13 13 25 13 12 26 13 6 7 6 8 7 7 18 4 16 21 Category N MR N MR MR LR N N N LR N N MR Var N MR Var Notes Ascending harmonic movement Intro to brief interlude material Intro to the break material Descending harmonic movement Var of chorus material 76 Table 32 - Hey Jude (1966) - The Beatles Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 81 168 114 59 422 % 19.2% 39.8% 27.0% 14.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:01 00:27 00:52 01:33 01:58 02:39 03:02 03:09 03:22 03:35 03:48 04:02 04:15 04:28 04:41 04:54 05:06 05:19 05:32 05:45 05:58 06:10 06:23 06:36 06:49 07:02 Seconds 0 1 27 52 93 118 159 182 189 202 215 228 242 255 268 281 294 306 319 332 345 358 370 383 396 409 422 Section Anacrusis Verse 1 Verse 2 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Trans Coda 1 (C*) Coda 2 (C ) Coda 3 (C ) Coda 4 (D) Coda 5 (D) Coda 6 (D) Coda 7 (D) Coda 8 (E) Coda 9 (E) Coda 10 (E) Coda 11 (E) Coda 12 (E) Coda 12 (E) Coda 13 (E) Coda 14 (E) Coda 15 (E) Coda 16 (E) Coda 17 (E) End Duration (s) 1 26 25 41 25 41 23 7 13 13 13 14 13 13 13 13 12 13 13 13 13 12 13 13 13 13 Category N N MR N MR MR MR Var N LR LR Var LR LR Var Var LR LR LR LR LR Var LR LR LR LR Notes both iterations because of rhymes Different lyrics Var of verse material Beginning of terminal climax String material Vocal improv *Letters in parenthesis refer to rehearsal letters in the score. (Beatles et al., 1993) 77 Table 33 - Hey Ya! (2003) - Outkast Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 34 33 100 67 234 % 14.5% 14.1% 42.7% 28.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:01 00:18 00:35 00:51 01:08 01:25 01:41 01:58 02:14 02:31 02:47 03:04 03:21 03:37 03:54 Seconds 0 1 18 35 51 68 85 101 118 134 151 167 184 201 217 234 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus A ChorusB Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus A Chorus B Verse 3A Verse 3B Break A Break B ChorusA Chorus B/Fade End Duration (s) 1 17 17 16 17 17 16 17 16 17 16 17 17 16 17 Category N N MR N LR Var MR MR LR Var MR Var MR Var MR Notes count off is basis for claps at the ends of phrases Varied vocal material Slight change to Verse 2a LR of Chorus A at 101s Varied vocal material MR of Break A 78 Table 34 - Hot Stuff (1979) - Donna Summer Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 97 103 63 28 291 % 33.3% 35.4% 21.6% 9.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:09 00:16 00:24 00:32 00:48 01:04 01:20 01:28 01:36 01:52 02:08 02:24 02:56 03:04 03:12 03:28 03:44 03:52 04:00 04:15 04:31 04:39 04:51 Seconds 0 9 16 24 32 48 64 80 88 96 112 128 144 176 184 192 208 224 232 240 255 271 279 291 Section Intro A1 Intro A2 Intro B1 Intro B2 Verse 1 Chorus A Chorus B (Re)Intro B1 (Re)Intro B2 Verse 2 Chorus A Chorus B Solo Retrans 1 Retrans 2 Chorus A Chorus B (Re)Intro B1 (Re)Intro B2 Verse 3 Chorus A Coda Fade out End Duration (s) 9 7 8 8 16 16 16 8 8 16 16 16 32 8 8 16 16 8 8 15 16 8 12 Category N LR N LR N N N LR LR MR LR MR N Var LR LR MR LR LR MR LR Var Var Notes Split up intro Rhyming syllable on the end of each phrase Varied vocal material New harmonic material, melodic material Var of verse material Is slightly different from first and second "Chorus B" Var of chorus material with sax 79 Table 35 - Hotel California (1977) - The Eagles Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 65 36 182 104 387 % 16.8% 9.3% 47.0% 26.9% MM:SS 00:00 00:26 00:52 01:18 01:44 01:57 02:10 02:36 03:02 03:15 03:28 03:54 04:20 04:46 05:12 05:38 06:04 06:27 Seconds 0 26 52 78 104 117 130 156 182 195 208 234 260 286 312 338 364 387 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus A Chorus B Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus A Chorus B Break/Verse 3A Verse 3B Solo A Solo B Solo C Solo D Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 26 26 26 26 13 13 26 26 13 13 26 26 26 26 26 26 23 Category N MR N MR N MR MR MR LR MR MR MR Var Var Var Var LR Notes Is a whole phrase Slight melodic change in part of this section Transition to break Guitar solo Varied guitar timbre Exactly like Solo D Table 36 - Imagine (1970) - John Lennon Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 77 22 81 0 180 % 42.8% 12.2% 45.0% 0.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:13 00:39 00:52 01:17 01:30 01:55 02:20 02:33 02:55 03:00 Seconds 0 13 39 52 77 90 115 140 153 175 180 Section Intro Verse 1 Prechorus Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Verse 3 Prechorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 13 26 13 25 13 25 25 13 22 5 Category N N N MR MR N MR MR LR MR Notes Strings added Slightly different words 80 Table 37 - Jesus Walks (2004) - Kanye West Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 73 5 88 28 194 % 37.6% 2.6% 45.4% 14.4% MM:SS 00:00 00:18 00:29 01:13 01:34 02:02 02:07 03:02 03:14 Seconds 0 18 29 73 94 122 127 182 194 Section Intro Hook Verse 1 Hook Hook Reintro Verse 2 Hook/Coda End Duration (s) 18 11 44 21 28 5 55 12 Category N N N MR Var LR MR MR Notes Truncated hook MR and full iteration of hook at the beginning Different instrumentation, MR? Modified as an ending Table 38 - Johnny B. Goode (1958) - Chuck Berry Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 52 52 37 17 158 % 32.9% 32.9% 23.4% 10.8% MM:SS 00:00 00:18 00:35 00:52 01:09 01:26 01:43 02:01 02:18 02:35 02:38 Seconds 0 18 35 52 69 86 103 121 138 155 158 Section Intro Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Solo Solo Verse 3 Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 18 17 17 17 17 17 18 17 17 3 Category N N N MR LR Var LR MR LR MR Notes 81 Table 39 - Juicy (1994) - Notorious B.I.G. Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 92 48 140 20 300 % 30.7% 16.0% 46.7% 6.7% MM:SS 00:00 00:22 01:12 01:32 02:22 02:42 03:32 03:52 04:12 04:32 04:52 05:00 Seconds 0 22 72 92 142 162 212 232 252 272 292 300 Section Intro Verse 1 Hook Verse 2 Hook Verse 3 Hook Vamp Hook Coda Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 22 50 20 50 20 50 20 20 20 20 8 Category N N N MR LR MR LR Var MR MR LR Notes Drums enter Var of hook material Drums absent for part of this section Improv Table 40 - Last Nite (2001) - The Strokes Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 45 40 79 28 192 % 23.4% 20.8% 41.1% 14.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:10 00:19 00:28 00:40 00:51 01:02 01:21 01:33 01:44 01:49 01:58 02:12 02:30 02:42 02:53 02:58 03:07 03:12 Seconds 0 5 10 19 28 40 51 62 81 93 104 109 118 132 150 162 173 178 187 192 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Intro D Verse 1A Verse 1B Verse 1C Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Break A Break B Solo Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Coda A Coda B Coda C End Duration (s) 5 5 9 9 12 11 11 19 12 11 5 9 14 18 12 11 5 9 5 Category N MR N MR N MR MR N LR MR Var Var Var MR LR LR MR MR LR Notes Gtr 1, single pitch MR because of building texture Gtr 2, introduces chord prog MR because of building texture LR of Verse 1A Var of Intro A & B Var of Intro C & D Var of verse material MR of chorus material LR of Intro B 82 Table 41 - Layla (1970) - Derek & the Dominoes Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 108 156 94 64 422 % 25.6% 37.0% 22.3% 15.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:09 00:18 00:25 00:42 00:57 01:14 01:30 01:46 02:03 02:19 03:06 03:11 03:36 03:53 04:10 04:26 04:51 05:08 05:24 05:40 06:05 06:46 07:02 Seconds 0 9 18 25 42 57 74 90 106 123 139 186 191 216 233 250 266 291 308 324 340 365 406 422 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Chorus Chorus Solo Transition Coda intro Coda 1A Coda 1B Coda 2 Coda 1A Coda 1B Coda 1C Coda 2 Coda 1A Coda 1B Fade End Duration (s) 9 9 7 17 15 17 16 16 17 16 47 5 25 17 17 16 25 17 16 16 25 41 16 Category N N MR N N MR LR MR LR LR Var MR N N Var N LR MR LR MR LR LR MR Notes Truncated, direct modulation to verse key Var of intro and chorus material Piano solo intro Var of Coda 1A Acts as "chorus" in this second half LR of Coda 1A at 216s Acoustic guitar added Repeats first half of phrase several times 83 Table 42 - Let it Be (1970) - The Beatles Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 45 43 120 34 242 % 18.6% 17.8% 49.6% 14.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:14 00:27 00:40 00:52 01:05 01:19 01:32 01:46 01:52 01:59 02:26 02:41 02:55 03:09 03:23 03:37 03:51 04:02 Seconds 0 14 27 40 52 65 79 92 106 112 119 146 161 175 189 203 217 231 242 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Chorus Interlude A Interlude B Gtr Solo Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B Chorus Chorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 14 13 13 12 13 14 13 14 6 7 27 15 14 14 14 14 14 11 Category N N MR N MR MR MR MR N Var Var LR MR MR LR MR LR MR Notes Instrumentation changed New piano material Var of verse material Drum beat modified Same material as Interlude A 84 Table 43 - Light My Fire (1967) - The Doors Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 38 42 90 255 425 % 8.9% 9.9% 21.2% 60.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:10 00:25 00:38 00:54 01:07 03:07 03:19 05:34 05:43 05:59 06:12 06:28 06:52 07:05 Seconds 0 10 25 38 54 67 187 199 334 343 359 372 388 412 425 Section Intro Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Organ Solo Trans. Guitar Solo Reintro Verse 3 Chorus Verse 4 Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 10 15 13 16 13 120 12 135 9 16 13 16 24 13 Category N N N MR LR Var MR Var MR LR LR MR MR MR Notes Improvisation based on verse material More like a buffer using verse material Improvisation based on verse material 85 Table 44 - Like a Rolling Stone (1965) - Bob Dylan Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 83 73 199 10 365 % 22.7% 20.0% 54.5% 2.7% MM:SS 00:00 00:11 00:21 00:31 00:41 00:51 01:01 01:33 01:44 01:54 02:04 02:14 02:24 03:01 03:12 03:22 03:32 03:42 03:52 04:30 04:40 04:50 05:00 05:10 05:20 05:55 06:05 Seconds 0 11 21 31 41 51 61 93 104 114 124 134 144 181 192 202 212 222 232 270 280 290 300 310 320 355 365 Section Intro V1 P1a V1 P1b V1 P2 V1 P3 Prechorus Chorus V2 P1a V2 P1b V2 P2 V2 P3 Prechorus Chorus V3 P1a V3 P1b V3 P2 V3 P3 Prechorus Chorus V4 P1a V4 P1b V4 P2 V4 P3 Prechorus Chorus Fade out End V = Verse P = Phrase Duration (s) 11 10 10 10 10 10 32 11 10 10 10 10 37 11 10 10 10 10 38 10 10 10 10 10 35 10 Category N N MR N N N N MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR MR LR MR MR MR MR MR LR Var Notes Varied lyrics Harmonica improvisation 86 Table 45 - London Calling (1979) - The Clash Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 46 48 70 34 198 % 23.2% 24.2% 35.4% 17.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:22 00:29 00:36 00:43 00:50 01:07 01:14 01:21 01:28 01:35 01:52 01:59 02:06 02:20 02:36 02:51 02:58 03:05 03:18 Seconds 0 22 29 36 43 50 67 74 81 88 95 112 119 126 140 156 171 178 185 198 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Verse 1C Verse 1D Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Verse 2C Verse 2D Chorus Break A Break B Solo Chorus Retrans Verse 3A Verse 3B Coda End Duration (s) 22 7 7 7 7 17 7 7 7 7 17 7 7 14 16 15 7 7 13 Category N N MR MR MR N MR MR MR MR LR Var MR Var LR LR MR MR Var Notes Var of verse material MR of Break A Based on verse material Var of verse material 87 Table 46 - Loser (1993) - Beck Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 67 68 57 41 233 % 28.8% 29.2% 24.5% 17.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:23 00:34 00:45 00:57 01:08 01:30 01:42 01:53 02:04 02:27 03:00 03:23 03:45 03:53 Seconds 0 23 34 45 57 68 90 102 113 124 147 180 203 225 233 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Verse 1C Verse 1D Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Verse 2C Chorus Break Chorus Chorus Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 23 11 11 12 11 22 12 11 11 23 33 23 22 8 Category N N MR MR N N MR MR MR LR Var LR LR Var Notes Sitar added Acts as a prechorus, but still is part of the verse Distorted guitar enters as song fades out Table 47 - Losing My Religion (1991) - R.E.M. Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 77 62 107 19 265 % 29.1% 23.4% 40.4% 7.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:17 00:47 01:18 01:33 02:04 02:34 02:50 03:05 03:36 03:51 04:06 04:25 Seconds 0 17 47 78 93 124 154 170 185 216 231 246 265 Section Intro Verse 1 Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Verse 4 Chorus Interlude Verse 5 Chorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 17 30 31 15 31 30 16 15 31 15 15 19 Category N N MR N MR MR LR N LR LR MR Var Notes LR could be plausible here Var of material from interlude 88 Table 48 - Love Will Tear Us Apart (1980) - Joy Division Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 59 64 45 34 202 % 29.2% 31.7% 22.3% 16.8% MM:SS 00:00 00:14 00:27 00:46 00:59 01:06 01:25 01:38 01:52 02:05 02:24 02:37 02:50 02:57 03:10 03:22 Seconds 0 14 27 46 59 66 85 98 112 125 144 157 170 177 190 202 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1 Chorus Reintro Verse 2 Chorus Bridge Reintro Verse 3 Chorus Chorus Reintro Coda Fade End Duration (s) 14 13 19 13 7 19 13 14 13 19 13 13 7 13 12 Category N N N N Var MR LR Var LR MR LR LR MR Var LR Notes Var of intro B Var of intro material MR of bridge material Var of intro B 89 Table 49 - No Woman No Cry (1975) - Bob Marley Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 50 51 98 19 218 % 22.9% 23.4% 45.0% 8.7% MM:SS 00:00 00:11 00:21 00:31 00:50 01:10 01:20 01:29 01:49 02:08 02:18 02:28 02:37 02:47 02:57 03:07 03:26 03:38 Seconds 0 11 21 31 50 70 80 89 109 128 138 148 157 167 177 187 206 218 Section Intro Chorus A Chorus B Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus A Chorus B Verse 2A Verse 2B Bridge A Bridge B Chorus A Chorus B Chorus A Chorus B Solo/Coda Fade out End Duration (s) 11 10 10 19 20 10 9 20 19 10 10 9 10 10 10 19 12 Category N N MR N MR LR MR MR MR N MR LR LR MR LR Var LR Notes Addition of 2nd organ in texture Same as Bridge A but thickening texture 90 Table 50 - Nothing Compares 2 U (1990) - Sinead O'Connor Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 56 64 140 44 304 % 18.4% 21.1% 46.1% 14.5% MM:SS 00:00 00:09 00:40 01:12 01:28 02:00 02:32 02:48 03:20 03:52 04:04 04:16 04:28 04:40 05:04 Seconds 0 9 40 72 88 120 152 168 200 232 244 256 268 280 304 Section Intro Verse 1A Verse 1B Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus String solo Verse 3B Chorus Chorus Chorus Coda Fade End Duration (s) 9 31 32 16 32 32 16 32 32 12 12 12 12 24 Category N N MR N MR MR LR Var MR LR LR MR Var LR Notes Var of verse material, is "Verse 3A" Truncated chorus 91 Table 51 - One (1992) - U2 Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 56 30 131 56 273 % 20.5% 11.0% 48.0% 20.5% MM:SS 00:00 00:02 00:13 00:34 00:45 00:55 01:06 01:27 01:38 01:48 01:59 02:20 02:31 02:41 03:05 03:16 03:26 03:37 03:47 03:58 04:09 04:19 04:27 04:33 Seconds 0 2 13 34 45 55 66 87 98 108 119 140 151 161 185 196 206 217 227 238 249 259 267 273 Section Sticks Intro Verse 1 Chorus A Chorus B Reintro Verse 2 Chorus A Chorus B Reintro Verse 3 Chorus A Chorus B Bridge Chorus A Chorus B Chorus C Coda Coda Coda Coda Coda Outro End Duration (s) 2 11 21 11 10 11 21 11 10 11 21 11 10 24 11 10 11 10 11 11 10 8 6 Category N N N N MR N MR MR MR Var MR MR MR Var MR MR LR MR LR Var Var LR MR Notes Adds new melodic material Var of previous Reintro material varied melodic material LR of Chorus B at 98s MR of previous chorus material LR of coda at at 217s Vocal improvisation 92 Table 52 - Paranoid Android (1997) - Radiohead Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 152 31 142 56 381 % 39.9% 8.1% 37.3% 14.7% MM:SS 00:00 00:19 00:36 00:48 01:08 01:26 01:38 01:58 02:10 02:21 02:27 02:32 02:43 02:55 03:05 03:28 03:34 04:05 04:35 05:06 05:37 05:48 05:59 06:11 06:21 Seconds 0 19 36 48 68 86 98 118 130 141 147 152 163 175 185 208 214 245 275 306 337 348 359 371 381 Section X Intro X Verse 1A X Verse 1B X Chorus X Verse 2A X Verse 2B X Chorus Y Intro Y Interlude Y Verse 1A Y Verse 1B Y Interlude Y Verse 2 Y interlude Y solo Transition Z Intro Z Verse 1 Z Verse 2 Z Verse 3 Y Reintro Y Interlude Solo Y Verse Solo Y Interlude Solo End X, Y, and Z represent three major sections Duration (s) 19 17 12 20 18 12 20 12 11 6 5 11 12 10 23 6 31 30 31 31 11 11 12 10 Category N N MR N MR MR LR N N N MR LR MR MR Var N N N MR MR MR Var Var Var Notes 7/8 pattern Instrumental 7/8 Interlude material with distortion 93 Table 53 - Rehab (2006) - Amy Winehouse Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 67 39 106 0 212 % 31.6% 18.4% 50.0% 0.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:27 00:53 01:07 01:33 01:59 02:12 02:26 02:52 03:05 03:30 03:32 Seconds 0 27 53 67 93 119 132 146 172 185 210 212 Section Chorus Verse 1 Prechorus Chorus Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Verse 3 Prechorus Chorus Outro End Duration (s) 27 26 14 26 26 13 14 26 13 25 2 Category N N N MR MR MR LR MR MR LR MR Notes Brass added Truncated chorus Table 54 - Respect (1967) - Aretha Franklin Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 42 36 56 8 142 % 29.6% 25.4% 39.4% 5.6% MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:09 00:22 00:30 00:43 00:51 01:04 01:12 01:20 01:29 01:41 01:49 01:57 02:06 02:22 Seconds 0 5 9 22 30 43 51 64 72 80 89 101 109 117 126 142 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Chorus Break A Break B Verse 4 Chorus Break Chorus Chorus/Fade End Duration (s) 5 4 13 8 13 8 13 8 8 9 12 8 8 9 16 Category N LR N N MR LR MR Var N MR MR LR N MR LR Notes Var of chorus material 94 Table 55 - River Deep, Mountain High (1966) - Ike & Tina Turner Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 88 54 58 17 217 % 40.6% 24.9% 26.7% 7.8% MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:28 00:46 01:10 01:14 01:38 01:55 02:20 02:26 02:38 02:50 03:07 03:32 03:37 Seconds 0 5 28 46 70 74 98 115 140 146 158 170 187 212 217 Section Intro Verse 1 Prechorus Chorus Reintro Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Break Intro Break A Break B Break C Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 5 23 18 24 4 24 17 25 6 12 12 17 25 5 Category N N N N LR MR MR LR N N MR Var LR MR Notes Varied harmony, lyrics Var of break material Table 56 - (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction (1965) - The Rolling Stones Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 74 84 64 0 222 % 33.3% 37.8% 28.8% 0.0% MM:SS 00:00 00:15 00:43 01:14 01:42 02:14 02:42 03:14 03:34 03:42 Seconds 0 15 43 74 102 134 162 194 214 222 Section Intro Chorus Verse 1 Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Verse 3 Coda Fade End Duration (s) 15 28 31 28 32 28 32 20 8 Category N N N LR MR LR MR LR LR Notes LR of chorus material 95 Table 57 - Seven Nation Army (2003) - The White Stripes Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 43 40 100 47 230 % 18.7% 17.4% 43.5% 20.4% MM:SS 00:00 00:08 00:16 00:47 00:51 01:07 01:11 01:19 01:27 01:58 02:02 02:33 02:37 02:45 02:53 03:24 03:28 03:44 03:50 Seconds 0 8 16 47 51 67 71 79 87 118 122 153 157 165 173 204 208 224 230 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1 Prechorus Chorus Retrans Reintro A Reintro B Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Retrans Reintro A Reintro B Verse 3 Prechorus Chorus Coda End Duration (s) 8 8 31 4 16 4 8 8 31 4 31 4 8 8 31 4 16 6 Category N MR N N Var MR LR LR MR MR Var MR MR LR MR MR LR MR Notes Drums enter Also functions as a retransition Var of Intro A material Prechorus material leads back to verse Same as intro More melodic material Has lead guitar above Feedback from guitar over bass Same as first chorus Table 58 - She Loves You (1964) - The Beatles Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 38 37 39 24 138 % 27.5% 26.8% 28.3% 17.4% MM:SS 00:00 00:13 00:25 00:38 00:51 01:04 01:16 01:29 01:42 01:54 02:18 Seconds 0 13 25 38 51 64 76 89 102 114 138 Section Chorus Verse 1 Prechorus Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Verse 3 Prechorus Chorus Coda End Time (s) 13 12 13 13 13 12 13 13 12 24 Category N N N MR MR LR MR LR LR Var Notes Chorus aversion Modifed to lead to chorus Var of chorus 96 Table 59 - Smells Like Teen Spirit (1991) - Nirvana Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 91 97 63 25 276 % 33.0% 35.1% 22.8% 9.1% MM:SS 00:00 00:17 00:25 00:42 00:58 01:23 01:31 01:39 01:56 02:12 02:37 02:45 03:01 03:10 03:26 03:42 04:06 04:36 Seconds 0 17 25 42 58 83 91 99 116 132 157 165 181 190 206 222 246 276 Section Intro V Intro Verse 1 Prechorus Chorus Retrans. V Intro Verse 2 Prechorus Chorus Retrans. Gtr. Solo V Intro Verse 3 Prechorus Chorus Coda End Time (s) 17 8 17 16 25 8 8 17 16 25 8 16 9 16 16 24 30 Category N N N N N N LR MR LR LR LR Var Var MR LR LR MR Notes Based on verse melody 97 Table 60 - Summer Babe (1992) - Pavement Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 50 30 44 69 193 % 25.9% 15.5% 22.8% 35.8% MM:SS 00:00 00:20 00:40 01:00 01:20 01:40 02:00 02:19 02:29 02:39 02:48 02:58 03:08 03:13 Seconds 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 139 149 159 168 178 188 193 Section Intro Verse 1 Reintro Verse 2 Solo A Solo B Break Postbreak Coda A Coda B Coda C Coda D Coda End Duration (s) 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 10 10 9 10 10 5 Category N N LR MR Var Var Var MR N MR Var LR MR Notes LR of intro Generously labeled Var instead of LR Var of verse material New vocal material 98 Table 61 - Sweet Child O' Mine (1987) - Guns N' Roses Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 109 63 105 76 353 % 30.9% 17.8% 29.7% 21.5% MM:SS 00:00 00:15 00:31 00:46 01:16 01:32 01:47 02:03 02:18 02:33 02:49 03:04 03:20 03:35 03:52 04:08 04:23 04:39 04:46 04:54 05:01 05:09 05:16 05:24 05:31 05:53 Seconds 0 15 31 46 76 92 107 123 138 153 169 184 200 215 232 248 263 279 286 294 301 309 316 324 331 353 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Verse 1 Chorus Reintro Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Reintro Solo 1 Chorus Chorus Solo 2A Solo 2B Solo 2C Solo 2D Break A Break B Break C Break D Coda A Coda B Coda C End/Fade End Duration (s) 15 16 15 30 16 15 16 15 15 16 15 16 15 17 16 15 16 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 22 Category N N MR N N Var MR MR LR LR Var LR MR N Var N Var MR LR MR MR Var LR Var MR Notes New melodic material Single verse because of rhyme pattern Not a single verse Cresc. to next section New progression, melodic material New progression, melodic material Based on Solo 2C material Build up to Coda Var of break material MR of break material modified for closure 99 Table 62 - Take Me Out (2004) - Franz Ferdinand Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 75 101 40 20 236 % 31.8% 42.8% 16.9% 8.5% MM:SS 00:00 00:07 00:21 00:34 00:41 00:48 00:55 01:00 01:04 01:14 01:23 01:32 01:41 01:50 01:59 02:08 02:13 02:22 02:31 02:40 02:49 02:58 03:08 03:17 03:22 03:31 03:39 03:46 03:56 Seconds 0 7 21 34 41 48 55 60 64 74 83 92 101 110 119 128 133 142 151 160 169 178 188 197 202 211 219 226 236 Section Intro 1 Verse 1A Verse 1B "Buffer" Trans Decelerando Intro 2A Intro 2B Chorus Chorus Verse 2A Verse 2B Chorus Verse 3A Verse 3B "Buffer" Bridge A Bridge B Chorus Verse 4A Verse 4B Verse 4C Chorus "Buffer" Bridge A Bridge B Buffer Coda End Duration (s) 7 14 13 7 7 7 5 4 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 9 9 9 9 10 9 5 9 8 7 10 Category N N MR N N N N LR N LR N MR LR LR MR LR N LR LR LR MR Var LR LR LR LR LR Var Notes Grouped two lines because of rhyme Space between verse lyrics and trans lyrics Tempo modification is very noticeable. Intro to the rest of the song Instrumental chorus Material from Intro 2 Grouped in two because of melodic contour LR of Verse 2A Var of verse material Material from Intro 2 Material from Intro 2 Var of Intro 2 100 Table 63 - That'll Be the Day (1957) - Buddy Holly Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 34 46 31 23 134 % 25.4% 34.3% 23.1% 17.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:04 00:19 00:34 00:49 01:12 01:27 01:42 01:58 02:14 Seconds 0 4 19 34 49 72 87 102 118 134 Section Intro Chorus Verse 1 Chorus Solo Chorus Verse 2 Chorus Chorus End Duration (s) 4 15 15 15 23 15 15 16 16 Category N N N LR Var LR MR LR MR Notes Var of chorus material MR for closure 101 Table 64 - The Message (1982) - Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 51 141 172 47 411 % 12.4% 34.3% 41.8% 11.4% MM:SS 00:00 00:05 00:14 00:24 00:33 00:43 00:52 01:02 01:21 01:30 01:35 01:59 02:08 02:17 02:46 02:55 03:05 03:14 03:24 03:33 03:43 04:21 04:30 04:40 04:49 05:55 06:05 06:15 06:24 06:33 06:43 06:51 Seconds 0 5 14 24 33 43 52 62 81 90 95 119 128 137 166 175 185 194 204 213 223 261 270 280 289 355 365 375 384 393 403 411 Section Intro A Intro B Intro C Intro D Intro E Hook B "Buffer" Verse 1 Hook A Hook B Verse 2 Hook A Hook B Verse 3 Hook A Hook B Break A Break B Break C Break D Verse 4 Hook A Hook B Hook B Verse 5 Hook A Hook B Break A Break B Break C Fade End Duration (s) 5 9 10 9 10 9 10 19 9 5 24 9 9 29 9 10 9 10 9 10 38 9 10 9 66 10 10 9 9 10 8 Category N N Var Var LR N Var N N MR MR LR LR MR LR LR Var LR Var LR MR LR LR LR MR LR MR LR LR LR LR Notes Var of Intro B Var of Intro B Hook B of a typical A&B pattern MR of Hook B at 43s Var of Intro B 102 Table 65 - Tutti Frutti (1955) - Little Richard Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 34 63 31 15 143 % 23.8% 44.1% 21.7% 10.5% MM:SS 00:00 00:03 00:19 00:34 00:50 01:05 01:21 01:36 01:52 02:07 02:23 Seconds 0 3 19 34 50 65 81 96 112 127 143 Section Intro Refrain Verse 1 Refrain Verse 2 Refrain Solo Refrain Verse 3 Refrain End Duration (s) 3 16 15 16 15 16 15 16 15 16 Category N N N LR MR LR Var MR LR LR Notes Melodic material slightly changed Table 66 - What's Going On (1971) - Marvin Gaye Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 59 48 68 56 231 % 25.5% 20.8% 29.4% 24.2% MM:SS 00:00 00:08 00:17 00:27 00:37 00:46 00:56 01:05 01:15 01:29 01:38 02:06 02:16 02:25 02:35 02:49 02:58 03:26 03:51 Seconds 0 8 17 27 37 46 56 65 75 89 98 126 136 145 155 169 178 206 231 Section Intro A Intro B Verse 1A Verse 1B Verse 1C Verse 2A Verse 2B Verse 2C Prechorus Chorus Break Verse 3A Verse 3B Verse 3C Prechorus Chorus Break Coda/Fade End Duration (s) 8 9 10 10 9 10 9 10 14 9 28 10 9 10 14 9 28 25 Category N N N MR N MR MR MR N N Var MR MR MR LR LR Var LR Notes "Party" sounds return in the texture Var of verse material Generously labeled Var instead of LR LR of previous break 103 Table 67 - When Doves Cry (1984) - Prince Category N LR MR Var Time (s) 64 56 76 31 227 % 28.2% 24.7% 33.5% 13.7% MM:SS 00:00 00:34 00:49 01:04 01:19 01:34 01:50 02:05 02:35 02:50 03:21 03:36 03:47 Seconds 0 34 49 64 79 94 110 125 155 170 201 216 227 Section Intro Verse 1 Verse 2 Chorus A Chorus B Reintro Verse 3 Chorus A&B Reintro Chorus A&B Coda Fade out End Duration (s) 34 15 15 15 15 16 15 30 15 31 15 11 Category N N MR N MR Var MR LR LR MR Var LR Notes MR because of lyrics Vocal improv LR of chorus group Altered melodic material Var of chorus material SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Adorno, T. W. (1941). On popular music. Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, 9, 17-48. Appen, R., & Frei-Hauenschild, M. (2015). AABA, refrain, chorus, bridge, prechorus - Song forms and their historical development. In R. Appen, A. Doehring, & T. Phelps, (Eds.) Samples: Online-Publikationen der Gesellschaft für Popularmusikforschung / German Society for Popular Music Studies e. V. 13. Aucouturier, J., Pachet, F., & Sandler, M. (2005). "The way it sounds:" Timbre models for analysis and retrieval of music signals. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 7(6), 10281035. Beatles, McCartney, P., Lennon, J., Harrison, G., Starr, R., Fujita, T., Hagino, Y., … Sato, G. (1993). The Beatles: Complete Scores. London, U.K.: Wise Publications. Besson, M., Faïta, F., Peretz, I., Bonnel, A. M., & Requin, J. (1998). Singing in the brain: Independence of lyrics and tunes. Psychological Science 9(6), 494-498. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York, NY. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Biasutti, M. (2012). Group music composing strategies: A case study within a rock band. British Journal of Music Education, 29(3), 343-357. Bornstein, R. F. (1992). Inhibitory effects of awareness on affective responding. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Emotion: Review of personality and social psychology (No. 13, 235-255). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1994). The Attribution and discounting of perceptual fluency: Preliminary tests of a perceptual fluency/attributional model of the mere exposure effect. Social Cognition, 12, 103-128. Burns, L. (2000). Analytic methodologies for rock music: Harmonic and voice-leading strategies in Tori Amos's ‘Crucify'. In W. Everett (Ed.) (2008) Expression in pop-rock music: A collection of critical and analytical essays. New York, NY: Routledge. Clapton. E. (2007). Clapton: The Autobiography. New York, NY: Broadway Books. Covach, J. (2005). Form in rock music: A primer. In D. Stein (Ed.) Engaging Music: Essays in Music Analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 105 Deliège, I. (2007). Similarity relations in listening to music: How do they come into play? Musicae Scientiae, 11(1 suppl), 9-37. Deutsch, D., Henthorn, T., & Lapidis, R. (2011). Illusory transformation from speech to song. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 129(4), 2245-2252. Dowling, W. J., Tillman, B., & Ayers, D. F. (2001). Memory and the experience of hearing music. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19(2), 249-276. Dunbar-Hall, P. (1991). Semiotics as a method for the study of popular music. International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music, 22(2), 127-132. Everett, W. (1992). Voice leading and harmony as expressive devices in the early music of the Beatles: ‘She Loves You'. College Music Symposium, 32, 19-37. Frith, S. (1988). Music for pleasure: Essays in the sociology of pop. New York, NY: Routledge. Gilliland, A. R., & Moore, H. T. (1924). The immediate and long-time effects of classical and popular phonograph selections. Journal of Applied Psychology, 8(3), 309-323. Hanninen, D. A. (2003). A theory of recontextualization in music: Analyzing phenomenal transformations of repetition. Music Theory Spectrum, 25(1), 59-97. Hargreaves, D. J. (1984). The effects of repetition on liking for music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 32(1), 35-47. Huron, D. (2006). Sweet anticipation: Music and the psychology of expectation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hutchins, S., & Palmer, C. (2008). Repetition priming in music. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(3), 693-707. Jakobovits, L. A. (1966). Studies of fads: I. The "Hit Parade." Psychological Reports, 18, 443450. Jacoby, L. L. (1983). Perceptual enhancement: Persistent effects of an experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 21-38. Jacoby, L. L., & Kelly, C. M. (1987). Unconscious influences of memory for a prior event. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 314-336. Jacoby, L. L., & Whitehouse, K. (1989). An illusion of memory: False recognition influenced by unconscious perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 126-135. Juslin, P. N., & Västfjäll, D. (2008). Emotional responses to music: The need to consider underlying mechanisms. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 559-621. 106 Klapuri, A., & Davy, M. (Eds.) (2006). Signal processing methods for music transcription. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media LLC. Krugman, H. E. (1943). Affective response to music as a function of familiarity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38(3), 388-392. Lerdahl, F., & Jackendoff, R. (1983). A generative theory of tonal music. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lidov, D. (2004). Is language a music? Writing on musical form and signification. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Livingstone, S. R., Palmer, C., & Schubert, E. (2012). Emotional response to musical repetition. Emotion, 12(3), 552-567. Margulis, E. H. (2014). On repeat: How music plays the mind. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Mauch, M., MacCallum, R. M., Levy, M., & Leroi, A. M. (2015). The evolution of popular music: USA 1960-2010. Royal Society Open Science, (2)5, 150081. McAdams, S. (1989). Psychological constraints on form-bearing dimensions in music. Contemporary Music Review, 4, 181-198. Meyer, L. B. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Meyer, M. (1903). Experimental studies in the psychology of music. The American Journal of Psychology, 14(3/4), 192-214. Middleton, R. (1983). ‘Play it again Sam': Some notes on the productivity of repetition in popular music. Popular Music, 3, 235-270. Middleton, R. (1990). Studying popular music. Milton Keynes, U.K.: Open University Press. Middleton, R. (Ed.). (2000). Reading pop: Approaches to textual analysis in popular music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Monson, I. (1999). Riffs, repetition, and theories of globalization. Ethnomusicology, 43(1), 3165. Moore, A. F. (2012). Song means: Analysing and interpreting recorded popular song. Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Murphy, S. T., Monahan, J. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1995). Additivity of nonconscious affect: Combined effects of priming and exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 589-602. 107 Nan, Y., Knösche, T. R., & Friederici, A. D. (2009). Non-musicians' perception of phrase boundaries in music: A cross-cultural ERP study. Biological Psychology, 82, 70-81. Neuhaus, C., Knösche, T. R., & Friederici, A. D. (2009). Similarity and repetition: An ERP study on musical form perception. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1169(1), 485-489. Ockleford, A. (2005). Repetition in music: Theoretical and metatheoretical perspectives. London, U.K.: Ashgate. Ollen, J., & Huron, D. (2003). Musical form and habituation theory. [Presentation] Poster presented at the Society for Music Perception and Cognition Conference 2003, Las Vegas, Nevada. Osborn, B. (2011). Understanding through-composition in post-rock, math-metal, and other post-millennial rock genres. Music Theory Online 17(3). Osborn, B. (2013). Subverting the verse-chorus paradigm: Terminally climactic forms in recent rock music. Music Theory Spectrum, 35(1), 23-47. Rohrmeier, M., & Cross, I. (2008). Statistical properties of tonal harmony in Bach's chorales, in Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition. Sapporo: Hokkaido University. Rolling Stone (2004, December). The 500 Greatest Songs of all time. Rolling Stone, 963, 65-165. Rolling Stone (2010, May). The 500 greatest songs of all time. Rolling Stone. Retrieved from http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/the-500-greatest-songs-of-all-time20110407. Ruwet, N. (1987). Methods of analysis in musicology (M. Everist, Trans.). Music Analysis, 6(1/2), 3-36. Salaam, M. (1995). The aesthetics of rap. African American Review, 29(2), 303-315. Schellenberg, E. G. (2008). The role of exposure in emotional responses to music. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(5), 594-595. Shusterman, R. (1991). The fine art of rap. New Literary History, 22(3), 613-632. Sloboda, J. A. (1985). The musical mind: The cognitive psychology of music. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press. Starr, L., & Waterman, C. (2010). American popular music: From minstrelsy to MP3. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 108 Szpunar, K. K., Schellenberg, E. G., & Pliner, P. (2004). Liking and memory for musical stimuli as a function of exposure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(2), 370-381. Tagg, P. (1982). Analysing popular music: Theory, method and practice. Popular Music, 2, 3767. Taruskin, R. (2010). Music in the Late Twentieth Century. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Temperley, D., & de Clercq, T. (2011). A corpus analysis of rock harmony. Popular Music, 30(1), 47-70. Temperley, D. & de Clercq, T. (2013). Statistical analysis of harmony and melody in rock music. Journal of New Music Research, 42(3), 187-204. Verveer, E. M., Barry, H., & Bousfield, W. A. (1933). Change in affectivity with repetition. The American Journal of Psychology, 45(1), 130-134. Williamson, N. (2006, October). The making of… Derek and the Dominos' Layla. Uncut Magazine, #113. Retrieved from http://www.uncut.co.uk/features/the-making-ofderek-and-the-dominos-layla-24633. Wundt, W. (1902) Principles of physiological psychology (E. B. Titchener, Trans.). London, U.K.: Swan Sonnenschein & Co. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, pt. 2), 1-27.