Right. Many first learn about sus2 and sus4 chords when they learn the “bridge” in Stairway to Heaven — D2 D D4 (pause) D2 D D4 (pause) …
Police: Every Little Thing She Does is Magic: What Makes This Song Great? Ep. 2 THE POLICE - YouTube
Man, **pulykamell, ** you weren’t kidding. What an episode. It’s like the Toto episode on steroids, a master class in unpacking a top-shelf song.
-
Sting’s technical writing skills - I bust his chops on this board for his Sting-ness, but man, I love the Police and respect Sting at his best and this is some of it. Groovin’ in Lydian, who knew?
-
This is the most technical episode. I let most of it wash over me and I filter out the words I understand ;). I know what modes are, but how Sting builds those pre- and post-chorus transitions might as well be in Sanskrit. I get the gist - Sting navigates tricky transitions while keeping his finger on a groove we can follow him through, and that is impressive - but all the chords names sound like Charlie Brown’s teacher.
-
I had not fully appreciated how the chorus rhythm bed sounded like it belonged in the Little Mermaid soundtrack.
-
Beato’s comments on the improvised fade out and how that provides “fresh sonic information” that led to radio dj’s not talking over it was so geek-aliciously satisfying that I nearly applauded my iPad.
If Beato could include 5 minutes of context/Dissect-type info - e.g., the fact that Sting showed up to the studio with his songs stating “this is the finished album” and how that led to the versions we are hearing. Putting this album in context as “the Police’s studio album” when their sound started to include synths and obvious studio embellishments vs their sinewy-trio-of-geniuses sound from before - if he could include stuff like that, his popolarity would go much bigger.
Rick Beato’s got more theory knowledge in his little finger than I have in my body, but I think he’s simplifying a bit there or something (and other commentators on that video think so, too). To me, it sounds more like a walk up from the V chord up to the one that just keeps “faking” back to V. So, if you play your D major scale, those notes would be G, A, B, C#, before it finally resolves on the D on “from the START.” Those do happen to also be the notes of G lydian, but rather than think of it as G lydian going into D major, I think of it all as D major, just with the verse starting on the V. Or who knows, maybe there is some technical reason for calling it G lydian that I’m missing (I mean, without the context of the chorus, I guess it would be, if everything just resolves to the G in the end.)
Anyhow, I watched the Metallica video today. He was a bit phoning it in on that one, I thought, though I share his love of the snare + crash on two!
My cat’s breath smells like cat food! 
Yeah - agreed, but also a commentary on what he thought he could unpack about Hammett’s playing
Okay, I am supposed to be working on a document, but screw it - I listened to the Steely Dan, Kid Charlemagne
Link here: What Makes This Song Great? Ep. 3 Steely Dan - YouTube
Okay, this is getting a bit more hilarious. This is another great episode unpacking a top-shelf production, but Beato spends fully half - at least - of the 18-minute episode picking apart Larry Carlton’s masterful, technical, glorious solo. Now, remember: he literally spent NO time on Hammett in Enter Sandman, one of the most well-known solos in metal. I am just dyin’ here.
Back to Steely Dan, not a lot to say other than it is great. Love the respect that Bernard Purdie gets in this episode, both at the beginning and when Beato contrasts Bruno Mars’ programmed groove to Purdie’s playing. Ahhhhhh - that’s a nice addition and a really nice insight to share. When you come back to the SD song, you can hear how it breathes with Purdie’s playing in a way that a programmed-drum foundation just can’t.
Okay - now, really, to work
I’m just saying it’s not necessary to view the song in two keys/modes, when just one key does gone.
I understand the gist of that, yes.
If you read down in the comments for the Enter Sandman video, you’ll see someone says something along the lines of “what, no discussion of the Kirk Hammett solo hahaha” to which Rick Beato replies with just a smile. So it’s pretty clear that, like you surmise, the omission was purposeful. That said, I actually don’t mind the solo, but it might just be because it’s been beaten into my brain from all the radio play.
Oh, I know you know more theory than you let on or care to admit. 
a-HA!!! I knew it! That is damn hilarious. Lordy I hate that solo, especially that climactic wah bit, where it sounds like he is wringing a duck’s neck. Go Beato!!!
Again, I can follow it - like growing up in a house with relatives who speak a language you can understand, but not actively speak yourself. But I just have hand-wavy nicknames for stuff as I pick apart a song - “okay, here’s the climby bit, then that weird partial chord bit in the pre-chorus, then go big with the chimey chords that hold the top notes constant!!!”
Related: as I was watching him pick apart the rhythm guitar for Kid C - all of those three-note “triad” chords up the neck, moving from majors and minors to flatted 9ths and 13ths - I couldn’t help but think “man, I have no interest in playing that stuff. I like hearing it, but not for me.”
I guess I want to play stuff I can describe with hand-wavy nicknames
Yeah, it does venture into parody there, along with the “falling down the stairs” ending of the solo. Maybe it’s a bit of musical Stockholm syndrome as to why it doesn’t annoy me as much as it annoys guitar players.
“That weird jazzy chord part”! Or possibly “those Jimi Hendrix chords!” if it’s a seventh chord with a sharp nine (the “Purple Haze” chord.) You may already be using some of these chords if you play along to your guitar heroes.
I’ve probably brought this up before, so forgive me if I’m repeating myself, but speaking of Steely Dan, I always enjoyed this video of Donald Fagan talking about “Peg” in terms of breaking down an artist’s creative process. Now, I respect Steely Dan, but I’m not a huge listener of their music, but I love “Peg” particularly for Rick Marotta’s drums. That is just such a killer laid-back groove. Oozes cool. Oh, and that wacked-out guitar solo, too. So I stumbled upon this video while initially looking for some Marotta clips.
Anyhow, what is interesting about that song that I have never noticed before is that the verse is entirely based on a 12-bar blues progression, reinterpreted and reimagined through Fagan’s warped jazzy musical brain. I had never noticed that before but, sure enough, it’s 12 bars and follows the standard blues formula (though jazzed-up.) Both musical and clever.
I will go listen to that Fagan commentary. Hearing what those guys anchor their pieces on is always interesting.
To be clear: I do hear all that, and yes, those are the nicknames I would use for them ;). My point is that I love simpler ratios. I want to hear Keith Richards add that one note that forces Start me Up to have to resolve the way it does. I love the Blink 182, Tom Petty and the Nirvana episodes so far for what they capture about that simplistic essence. If AC/DC can take the major-est of chords but add that one thing that keeps the groove essential and moving - damn, what is that one thing? How can I get more of that?! How can my playing be only about that?
ETA: Damn, where’s Super Kapowzler when you need him? We’re getting all deep and shit.
I don’t think it’s “one thing,” but if I had to simplify, it’s rock steady rhythm section and lots of syncopation.
Hmm. I’ve never listened to MBDTF. I’m a big fan of Kanye’s earlier work, but I didn’t like 808s and Heartbreak when it came out. So I never made it beyond that. I’m familiar with POWER because it was everywhere, but I don’t recognize any of the other songs on the album by title.
I’ll try to give the album a listen this afternoon and then maybe follow up on this podcast.
Similarly, often the analyst must choose between considering some passage as having distinct chords, vs. basically variations on a single chord. Here’s Allan Pollack on the Beatles’ “Something” (the verses):
“I prefer to not place Roman numerals under the middle chords of that phrase because, even though you may accurately describe them as Ab-Augmented and C-Major 6/4, their reason for being in this context is as a side effect of harmonizing the descent of the bassline. The bassline motion implies an arrival on F# in the final measure of the phrase even though the bass elects to jump down to the root note of D at that point.”
That *was *great.
Okay, I’d better get back to work myself…
Yeah, things can become a bit weird/awkward sometimes when trying to analyze pop music through the lens of classical music theory.
And I just realized I’m an idiot who can’t count. I meant the IV chord. G is the fourth note of the D major scale, so the walk up, as I hear it, is the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh degrees. Your mind wants to hear that final D, the “one,” but it just keeps dropping back to the four before finally resolving on that D. It’s like musical “edging,” if you know what I mean. (But only really feels like “edging” if you know the D chord is the climax.)
By the way, for anyone following the Rick Beato series, there were two episodes of “What Makes This Song Great” that were blocked on Youtube due to a request from the copyright holders. You can find them here:
It’s for “You Can Go Your Own Way” by Fleetwood Mac and “No One Knows” by Queens of the Stone Age.
Wow, I think I’m gong to binge these. Beato really has a clear logical presentation style that makes this analysis a lot of fun to listen to.
I just listened to the Fleetwood Mac one. It was really a “wow, I get it!” revelation with his description of the alternating sus notes and deliberate dissonances (ack, I just threw up music theory in my mouth a little ;)). Really insightful in answering where that mysterious energy comes from.
My only quibble with his take is that, though I love Buckingham’s melody and rhythm playing, I’ve never liked his soloing style. I find his incessant single-note lines in this and other Mac songs to be more dead-horse kicking rather than interesting.