Music question

[icepixie]

Music theorists, I have a question for you. I recently heard Dar Williams's "And a God Descended" for the first time, and I found that there was something really, really musically satisfying about the first line of the chorus, or rather the first two lines, since the melody and arrangement repeats itself. (Here's a clip of the relevant part, with a bit of the preceding verse for context.) It's not necessarily that I think it's pretty, though I do, but rather that it feels very, very right that these notes/chords follow each other in this order. Is there some objective reason why I find it so satisfying, such a particularly strong resolution of the chords involved, or something like that? Or is it pure idiosyncrasy?

Also, in case anyone missed it, the Small Fandoms/Rarepairs/Rarely-written Characters Promote-a-Thon and Request Line is still going on! Come share your rare fanworks and see if other people have written things you never knew you needed!

Comments

[icepixie]

Ah, so it's a combination of factors, many of them having to do with what it comes after. Thank you! I thought it might be that it was echoing something familiar (I'm listening to Pachelbel's Canon now, and am sort of gobsmacked at the fact that the sequence is exactly the same; I totally hear it now, but would never have guessed until you told me) and also being in something traditionally bright and cheery and, I guess, natural(?) like C major. (...I just made a pun there, didn't I?)

although it's... not serving the same purpose as the do we expected, but that's a conversation for another time

...? Would I understand if you explained?

[alto2.livejournal.com]

I'm listening to Pachelbel's Canon now, and am sort of gobsmacked at the fact that the sequence is exactly the same;

I'm not only because I've seen this WAY too many times (I'm sure you have, too?).

[icepixie]

Oh, that thingy! Yes, I have seen it, but the only thing I remember about it was the part where he rants about the eight notes in the cello part...

[sleepingcbw.livejournal.com]

Heh. Yeah, that's because you actually worked on your comps. Those of us who were less diligent can recite it from memory.

[icepixie]

Heh. Good theory, except for the part where it falls apart when I remind you that you were doing three sets, and if I remember correctly still managed to pull a distinction on the English comps. ;)

[alto2.livejournal.com]

I didn't watch it again because, you know, bedtime and didn't really want that floating through my head when I wanted to be sleeping--but he does talk about how the damn thing is everywhere, right?

(I remember my mother telling me one time that if Pachelbel had known the Canon would be the only piece he was remembered for, he probably wouldn't have written it...)

[icepixie]

He does talk about it; I just didn't remember it.

[alto2.livejournal.com]

Ah good. I'm not crazy after all. ;)

[sleepingcbw.livejournal.com]

I'm listening to Pachelbel's Canon now, and am sort of gobsmacked at the fact that the sequence is exactly the same; I totally hear it now, but would never have guessed until you told me

-insert Pachelbel's Rant joke here-

Actually, I find it more annoying when it happens in reverse -- when I'll be playing someone that has a Pachelbel progression in it, and suddenly my brain starts singing R. Kelly's "World's Greatest" along with it. Fortunately I don't have occasion to play that progression very often. :)


...? Would I understand if you explained?

Sure. It's not really complicated; it just has nothing to do with the question above. :)

Basically there are three functions of chords: tonic (I, iii), subdominant (IV, vi, ii), and dominant (V, vii). A whole crapload of music goes

tonic -> subdominant -> dominant -> tonic

except sometimes there'll be extra chords in there, like a I hanging out with the subdominants where it doesn't belong, or a V near the beginning that isn't really doing V-ish things. These are called extensions (tonic extensions, dominant extensions, subdominant extensions).

The Pachelbel canon breaks down like this:

C: tonic
G-a-e: either subdominant, or sequential material that doesn't count, depending on who your theory professor is
F-C-F: subdominant (the C is a subdominant extension)
G: dominant

If this song followed the pattern exactly, the chorus would begin on a subdominant extension C. Instead, it begins on a tonic C. (Williams can do that, because F-C is a legitimate ending cadence in pop music -- but for Pachelbel the final cadence has to be G-C, so he can't just stop there.)


Hey, thanks for helping me pretend I don't teach high school for a little while! :)

[sleepingcbw.livejournal.com]

(Wait, oops! Expansions, not extensions. Extensions are something different. :D )

[icepixie]

Fortunately I don't have occasion to play that progression very often.

You and your Webern. :)

Interesting explanation. I feel like one of these days I should check a music theory textbook out of the library or something (and hope that it comes with an accompanying CD, 'cause I never know the songs they use for reference), because I sort of vaguely know the terms and ideas behind them, and basically have just enough knowledge to be dangerous but not enough to really do anything with. It's an annoying limbo.

Hey, thanks for helping me pretend I don't teach high school for a little while! :)

Glad to be of service! :)