Chords To 1300 Songs Analyzed Statistically For Patterns

First time accepted submitter hooktheory writes "We looked at the statistics gathered from 1300 choruses, verses, etc. of popular songs to discover the answer to a few basic questions about pop music. First we look at the relative popularity of different chords based on the frequency that they appear in the chord progressions of popular music. Then we begin to look at the relationship that different chords have with one another. To make quantitative statements about music you need to have data; lots of it. Guitar tab websites have tons of information about the chord progressions that songs use, but the quality is not very high. Just as important, the information is not in a format suitable for gathering statistics. So, over the past 2 years we've been slowly and painstakingly building up a database of songs taken mainly from the billboard 100 and analyzing them 1 at a time. At the moment the database of songs has over 1300 entries indexed. Knowing these patterns can give one a deeper more fundamental sense for how music works" This reminds me of the work done by two Rutgers grad students last year trying to find a formula for a hit song.

Comments

Sorry, I have to:

[Zapotek]

Pachelbel Rant

Interesting...

[jamstar7]

Just what we need, a database for the RIAA to use to play Whack-A-Mole on upcoming songwriters for 'copyright infringement'. There are only so many chord progressions possible. This will allow the holders of the eternal copyright to sue somebody because the chord progression they wrote mirrors a song their grandparents heard in the womb and thus infringes.

Yet another argument for 7 year copyrights. Too bad we can't convince our Congresscritters of this...

Re:Interesting...

[jamstar7]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1397511/

According to this documentary, mashups are not legal per US copyrights.

Re:Interesting...

[Forever Wondering]

Just what we need, a database for the RIAA to use to play Whack-A-Mole on upcoming songwriters for 'copyright infringement'.

This type of analysis has been going on for decades. I remember meeting a guy [circa 1992] who had a consulting business based on doing just that. He would put a [suspect] music CD into his CDROM drive and [with custom software he wrote] have it analyze the note sequences looking for fragments that matched fragments of his clients' songs/catalog. IIRC, the criterion was either 11 notes or 11 bars [I can't remember which] of music.

There are only so many chord progressions possible.

Per copyright law, things that have "only one way to do them" can't be copyrighted. Also, the work must be of sufficient length (e.g. a 3 chord sequence could not be copyrighted but a 50 chord sequence could). Although circuit courts have varied on this, in general, the courts have held that to grant a copyright on a short [enough] sequence is tantamount to trying use a copyright to get patent-like protection. For the most part, this gets rejected.

For specific examples of this, read Alsup's decision in the recent Oracle/Google dispute (including the citations to precedents). Or the second Westlaw mashup (again with citations).

This will allow the holders of the eternal copyright to sue somebody because the chord progression they wrote mirrors a song their grandparents heard in the womb and thus infringes.

IIRC, just having a long chord sequence that matches isn't always grounds for claiming infringment. In particular, if the defendant can show that they got there through non-infringing means (e.g. they kept all their composition sheets and could prove that they created the work from scratch, it's not infringing even if a portion happens to match). Unfortunately, I can't recall the case law to cite for this [just an article I read way back when].

Yet another argument for 7 year copyrights. Too bad we can't convince our Congresscritters of this...

Yes, the current length is insane [and unconstitutional IMHO] ...

Re:Interesting...

[SlippyToad]

I don't think that chord progressions are subject to copyright

Considering how theory and harmony work, chord progressions are utterly non-copyrightable. I believe the majority of pop songs use the chords I, IV, V, I, in that order, at 120 bpm.

The chords for "Twist and Shout," "La Bamba," and a dozen other little pop dance songs are flat-out identical. There are ONLY seven choices if you stick to simple triads in key. If you aren't playing simple triads in key, you're wandering towards jazz.

Melody and lyric are what make a song individual. Chord progressions are like building blocks. It would be akin to patenting the fucking brick.

And they found that...

[dgatwood]

...they were all either:

• I, IV, VI, V
• I, IV, II, V
• I, VI, IV, V or
• I, V/7, VI, I/5, IV, I/3, II7, V

Right? Or maybe that's just pop songs from the past twenty years....

Re:And they found that...

[dgatwood]

BTW, the reason for the popularity of many chords (or lack thereof) is likely because so much pop music is guitar-centric. An A major chord would only be common if you're playing in D major, E major, A major, or sometimes in D minor (with a raised 7th).

• Playing in D major isn't great for solo guitar work because with standard tuning, you've lost the fundamental. Now if your guitarist is willing to keep an axe in drop-D, sure, but....
• Playing in E major results in having to play a B major chord as your V, which is kind of a clumsy chord to play (compared with many other non-complex chords, anyway).
• The key of A major is awkward for tenors. Although the middle A is comfortable, the high A is powerfully high, and the low A is below the bottom of their usable range, so you can't safely write music that spans an octave from tonic to tonic. And even for guys with lower voices, the low A just sounds too boomy.

You'll notice that D, major, A major, and E major are the 5th, 6th, and 7th most popular keys. And although D minor is the 4th most popular key, not all A chords in D minor are going to be major chords.

I would also expect the probability of moving from any given chord to another would be strongly correlated with the standard chord leading rules, assuming you analyze them with numbered chord notation rather than by the actual note names. Certain chords naturally follow other chords, and although you don't have to always use such pairs in that order, good composers will tend to do so the majority of the time.

Axis of Awsome already figured out the formula.

[theNetImp]

Don't need no computer analysis for that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I

Re:Axis of Awsome already figured out the formula.

[jasno]

Yeah, this whole thing sounds like something a computer programmer came up with after learning 2 hours of music theory. If he would have spent a few more hours on music theory he would have realized how obvious his conclusions were.

I'd be more interested in hearing why those chord changes are popular - i.e. an explanation of their psychological effect.

Also, The Piano Guys' remix.

[antdude]

Watch it on YouTube.

Re:Also, The Piano Guys' remix.

[wonkey_monkey]

I've always preferred Four Chord Song