Skip to main content

minor chords attract teenagers - what else ?

Some great topics happening here.

I've been told that teenagers seem to like songs with minor chords. When I think back, I think I was like that too. Maybe these are the years we start thinking about life more. Minor chords have a mystery to them... yes?

Are there other interesting sounds or progressions that are either age or gender related ?

Comments

JoeH Sat, 02/17/2007 - 21:34
JoeJoeMan, I think the point has been proven that it can work either way, but it's never a bad thing to have as much training (or simply knowledge) as you can get your hands on. There's no glory in being needlessly stupid or misinformed.

As for Louis Armstrong, it's rather pointless to question the credentials of someone who virtually helped INVENT a genre. What's the point here?

As for your spelling, I can't quite tell if you're simply trying to be funny, or are just an *sshole with your continued, deliberate misspelling of Jeremy's last name. (It's a fairly easily spelled Italian name. Is there some kind of problem here that the moderators should be looking into???)

Most of us enjoy the intelligent, back and forth sharing of ideas and information, in funny and creative ways. Those who don't grasp this concept don't seem to last too long, if you catch my drift.

Not sayin'....just sayin'......

pr0gr4m Tue, 02/06/2007 - 15:13
Not that I disagree with anything here...but who/what are the artists/songs with the major chords that the youth don't listen to?

Is it the minor chords that attract the youth or the song material? Without making a wide sweeping generalization, song with minor chords, tend to be about things young people are experiencing.

****
Here's one I heard/read about that is neither age nor gender related but has to do with where you are from/live...

Europeans taste in dance (techno, trance, etc)music seems to not involve a snare drum while Americans yearn for the snare. From my experience and tastes, this is true. I've heard lots of European dance that doesn't have a snare or where the snare isn't really prevalent and I'm left wanting more. Then I hear some American dance and when the snare comes in on the 2 and 4 it's like a musical payoff. Without it, it just sounds like it's unfinished to me. Weird.

Pro Audio Guest Sat, 02/24/2007 - 20:13
DaveDog wrote:
If we are to consider the affect of the modality of the music in an emotional sense, then its purely up to the individual experienceing the music to what effect it may or may not have on them personally.

You can write that down, but at some point you have to go past the written word to express the true emotional content of that self.

If I'm interpretting you correctly, the listener may experience one emotion while the composer intented another.....if this is true music makes for a poor conduit for emotional expression, as my mother, as probably your's, was much better at expressing her emotion, as I always knew exactly what and when.......she was happy, sad, excited, or downright pissed and I was rip for a whooping, there was no guessing we both knew what emotion/feeling we were dealing with.
More to the point, I think the 'feeling' in music is not to be confused with an emotional 'feeling' like happiness, sadness, surprise, feelings and emotions that are provokated everyday by such simple things as the smell of fresh cut grass, or the smile of a friend, such common everyday events express much more vividly the exact intended emotion. Whereas music is much more vague in that reguards. Also, as such it would be impossible for music not to express some emotion content, seeing how almost everything in life does in one way or another everyday. So I find the ability for music to express such emotions as inconsequencial, just a given so to say.
No, I think what elevates music above feelings of everday emotions, (love, lose, hope, happiness,etc) is a separate emotion or feeling, feelings not so easily express in everyday life by everyday people. Take for example the feeling of rhythm, a phenomena or feeling that music can express much better than everyday life. Not there isn't rhythm to be found in life outside of music. Music also express a sense of pleasure disrelated from the type found in normal everyday pleasures. Of course this could all just be inside me head.
But I would think that the importance of an artist is that they have the ability to go beyond the everyday emotions that anyone can express. Arttist give us a chance to experience feelings and sounds that we don't get to experience in normal life.

JoeH Sat, 02/24/2007 - 20:55
well, maybe we've come full circle on this.....minor chords, teenagers, etc. etc. (Did anyone yet mention "Emo" music yet?)

I remember some of my more intense memories and moments where while growing up; some of it major key, some of it minor key. I had no clue early on what keys any of the classical music my parents were listening to was, but of course, the early Beatles stuff on Ed Sullivan was all major-key. Then I heard the blues and rock, and a ton of great, moody stuff all through the 70s. (Love Reign o'r Me by the Who was pretty heavy at the time, and that was pretty much all minor key throughout, just to name one of thousands.)

Greg Lake once said in an interview that he never had any idea at all what specific emotions or feelings his songs would invoke with the listener. He went as far as to say it was completely out of his control, and pretty much none of his business WHAT people felt, as long as they felt SoMETHING.

I think that's the beauty of all music, no matter what genre; it inspires something different in everyone who hears it. Maybe the sad stuff/minor chords just resonates more with the teen crowd during that "precious" time of their lives. Or not.

hueseph Sat, 02/24/2007 - 21:07
Well, definitely, kids are looking for a way to express themselves better than they are able to in words. That's why often the writers of these songs are much older than their listeners. Experience just has a way of making sense whereas inexperience often leaves you at a loss for words.

Emo I think is targeted at teen boys who don't want to be thought of as sissies but who have a hard time expressing their emotions. I personally hate the genre. It's no different than the power ballads of the eighties.

dementedchord Sun, 02/18/2007 - 11:17
i've always found it ridiculous that people take a few greats out of context in order to justify not doing their homework.... the question is NOT whether SRV or (insert here) made it without... the question is whether they or more importantly YOU would have benefitted from study... and the answer is unequivicably yes....

Cucco Sun, 02/18/2007 - 11:40
JoeH wrote:
Many classical musicians (not all of course!) sight-read only, and cannot - even with a gun to their heads - play off-the-cuff or improvise by ear. (Tell them they've got the solo in the middle section of a twelve bar blues in E, and they're liable to sh*t a brick, asking you: well, where's the score?!?!?!)

Ha...you aren't kidding! One of the better conductors I've worked with would RAG on our strings all the time. He would ask them..."so, when did you guys stop knowing how to improvise? Shortly after Vivaldi died?"

Just for kicks when I was in college (majoring in horn performance), I took 2 semesters of Jazz Improv and a semester of Jazz theory. You should have seen the looks on the trumpets and saxophone players' faces when a horn player showed up axe-in-hand for jazz class. What was even funnier - my bassoon playing friend did the same. That was an interesting couple of semesters! It sure was fun though. Talk about putting Bach to practical use!

Every once in a while, I'll do some improv work just to keep it interesting and keep my jazz chops up, but not so much any more. I also had the chance to study a few times with Thomas Bacon at various master classes and symposiums...what a wealth of jazz-horn knowledge! (And a damn fine player too!)

Anyway...just thought I'd share. It's always funny to talk about classical musicians and improv.

ouzo77 Sun, 02/18/2007 - 13:03
i've been reading this topic for awhile now, and just want to add my thoughts about it.
i'm drumming in a top40 cover band. unlike our guitarist and keyboard player i never had any musical training, only as a normal subject in school. i always hated music theory (like any theory) and never had good marks in tests (though i always had an A in my school reports cause i played in the band)

in our band practices the guitarist and keyboard player often throw strange words at each other, like "e7diminished" or "gsus9withanaovere" or whatever (i doubt these examples exist, so nevermind). mysteriously they do understand each other and everything sounds good. i do know basic notation and know where my keys are on the guitar or keyboard. i can also tell the difference between major and minor, but that's about it. it would take me hours to play something from a sheet.

BUT although i don't really have a clou about music theory i do understand music. i'm not only a drummer, i also play keyboards and guitar, and i sing. i'm writing songs, although i couldn't tell you the names of the chords i'm playing. by not being able to read scores i have very well trained ears, and that's much more important than knowing the names of chords or play a piece of music just by reading some dots and lines.
it can be helpful though.

it's certainly good to know theory and to be able to read sheets, especially for session musicians, but the ability to do that doesn't make you a good musician. it's the ears that make a good one. and the feeling that makes a great one.
i'm sure many or most classical musicians could play a piece of music they've never heard before off a sheet without mistakes, but would it be a great performance? i don't think so.
without scores you have to know the piece by heart, and we all know that's crucial for a great performance with a lot of feeling.
btw, in my band we never use scores at gigs at all. it would be a boring, lame ass show with everybody standing behind music stands staring at some paper. we do 4 to 7 hour shows by heart and that's why we get booked. not because we read well...

as with everything else, it's always good to know the backgrounds, but it's not really necessary. but like i said before, it can be helpful.
i am happy that i'm "only" the drummer of the band and don't have to deal with these things. i am one of the lazy kinda guys that never saw the point to it. but i do often arrange background vocals in my band cause i have a good understanding of harmonics and find the right notes faster than our guitarist, who has a degree in music.
i can write music without knowing what chords i play. i don't give a ***. if i like it, it's fine. i don't like it, i try something else.

oh, ... i did find another musician who was very influential in modern music and had a lotta hits in the last 30 years. phil collins. and he still can't read sheets.
now tell me he doesn't know what he's doing!

Pro Audio Guest Sun, 02/18/2007 - 16:18
JoeH wrote:
JoeJoeMan, I think the point has been proven that it can work either way, but it's never a bad thing to have as much training (or simply knowledge) as you can get your hands on. There's no glory in being needlessly stupid or misinformed.

As for Louis Armstrong, it's rather pointless to question the credentials of someone who virtually helped INVENT a genre. What's the point here?

As for your spelling, I can't quite tell if you're simply trying to be funny, or are just an *sshole with your continued, deliberate misspelling of Jeremy's last name. (It's a fairly easily spelled Italian name. Is there some kind of problem here that the moderators should be looking into???)

Most of us enjoy the intelligent, back and forth sharing of ideas and information, in funny and creative ways. Those who don't grasp this concept don't seem to last too long, if you catch my drift.

I really don't care if you someone has musical training or not, great if they do, great if they don't. If they can play - wonderful. I wasn't taking sides one way or the other. Just making a counter point to Jeremy's orginal point, with reference to training or Bach, whatever that orginal point was. Perhaps you are upset that I trumped his orginal point.
Whether I can spell or not, or if am just having fun is no excuse on your part to be calling someone an *sshole, So I won't even stoop to an exchange on that, only to say that perhaps your point is correct and the moderator should be looking into something (ie. your reprehensible behavior).

amishsixstringer Tue, 02/06/2007 - 22:10
Yooo...i was a teenager a couple years ago, and this is something I've been thinking about a lot lately as my own band is getting ready to step into a studio soon (not my own of course). I have found that minor keys seem to be more versitile in composition and yield more consonance. Inverted chords and 3rd in the bass sound better than in major keys. I do however love A major in a crazy way. I do agree though. I'm still pretty much a teenager, and I find that minor keys usually sound more appealing to me.


Neil

Pro Audio Guest Tue, 02/06/2007 - 22:27
when you refer to european dance you mean synthetic snare right, same as in rap; sampled snare?

beethoven did use minor tonalities. bach didn't.

i would never say the minor progressions are more versatile than major progressions. that's a horrible thing to say. and often times i credit (for the most part) anyone who uses certain tones exclusively with having some sense of a narrow mind, and not well rounded enough to create interesting and diverse forms of musical expression. although there are certain cases like with nirvana or black sabbath where they still find ways to make the minor intervals interesting song after song. although one might not consider those particular bands to be all that versatile either.

Davedog Sun, 02/18/2007 - 19:02
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>MODERATOR

" Reprehensible behavior will only be tolerated if it is in response to posts by JP,aquasquid, likwidstoody-os, or some other jackass. Any other outbreaks will be squelched at the source."

Cucco is spelled like this C U C C O .. Learn it. use it. And stop being reprehensible.


I HAVE SPOKEN. Back to the argument.....er....discussion.

MadMax Sun, 02/18/2007 - 19:24
Moving back two squares...

audiokid wrote: Are there other interesting sounds or progressions that are either age or gender related ?

I don't shiv a get whether you girls wanna' keep debating bach's virginity... go fer it.

The odd thing is that no matter the era, despite the angst, modernization of culture, or whatever... the thing that seems to consistantly attract teenies is the vocal melody. Whether us old farts like the melody, whether it meets conventional music theory, etc.

What makes a song popular with teenagers is the ability to be sung by the majority of the people. The simpler the melody the better. If it's a minor chord structure... the better. With my kids generation and the newest batch of teenies... it's a back to basics 4/4. With an emphasis on harmonies and a big LF component.

Pro Audio Guest Tue, 02/06/2007 - 23:51
moonbaby wrote: Mr. Page played pedal steel on that tune, not slide guitar. A whole different ball of wax. And anyone who can sit down with an instrument and make it look or sound easy is pretty good in my book.

Do I have to dig out my copy of Houses of the Holy? I don't recall any pedal steel on "Over the Hills and Far Away." A lap steel of some variety maybe...

I'd have to listen to it again, but my memory's not placing any pedal steel.

Tags

x