I’m listening to “Bette Davis Eyes” by Kim Carnes now and I’ve always loved the harmony more than anything else about this song. Love how each phrase of the harmony ends “unresolved” except at a couple of points in the song where it unexpectedly resolves into a comfortable F major chord - gets me every time.
In which songs, for you, does the harmony make the song?
Thank you.
Not wild about the Poco song “Angel”…except for one word.
A breathy “aaaangelll…” sung behind the bridge at 3:07.
The trick is being backed by two of the smoothest voices in country rock: Rusty Young and Timothy B Schmit (same voice as the Eagles’ “I Can’t Tell You Why”)
Same guys doing background Nah-nahs at the four minute mark.
eta: I found a live version, to make the point that so many songs with smooth backup singing don’t come close live… but this one did! I cued it up before Rusty Young’s blistering slide guitar solo. The “aaaangelll…” is right after that.
Journey’s “Lovin’, Touchin’, Squeezin’”, obviously. Not that it’s not a decent song but the harmony on the na na naa’s is what makes it.
I would say most songs. Lyrics are usually the worst part of any song once you read them. The voice can be a good instrument of course, but the words are usually fucking stupid. There are exceptions, tho.
I must be misunderstanding what you mean by “harmony”. I normally think of a harmony as being other voices singing a complementary tune to the melody. Do you just mean the music?
Personally I tend to think of a song as a whole so there may be parts I particularly like but often I like those parts because of the contrast with the parts I supposedly don’t like as much. Example, Comfortably Numb by Pink Floyd. I really like the chorus sections but what makes them particularly enjoyable for me is the way they stand out from the verses. If it was just the chorus over and over I wouldn’t like it so much.
By “harmony,” I think the OP is specifically referring to background vocals parts sung in harmony** (i.e., more than one voice sung together). This can be done in various ways: nonsense syllables (e.g., the Beatles’ “Michelle”), or actual words — and the words might echo the main melody lyric (e.g., the Beatles’ “Help”), or be a different lyric altogether* (R.E.M.’s “Fall on Me,” which has two superimposed backing vocal parts).
My answer might be the Beach Boys’ “God Only Knows,” both the nonsense-words break (bridge), and the three-part polyphonic coda whose words echo parts of the main melody lyric. Both these sections are stunningly beautiful. (I know, it’s been said a million times already).
(*The “Frere Jacques” fragment that John and George sneak into “Paperback Writer” is a goofy little special case!).
**Or not. As has been pointed out, this seems absent from “Betty Davis Eyes.”
I take it back. The OP is about harmony in the larger sense — basically, the sequence of chords (and possibly key changes).
I don’t think there necessarily has to be an actual countermelody to create “harmony”. This video covers common techniques:
Even a key change or chord change can be dramatic, but I am blanking out when it comes to choosing the best example (I think of something but then I either actually like the vocal lines, or there aren’t any lyrics at all…)
Except for the fact that the na na naas never end.
And I like the song too.
Yes. This.
Thanks!
I’d put California Dreamin’ by the Mamas and the Papas on this list. Cass Elliot’s and Michelle Phillips‘ voices make for some uplifting harmony.
Does this song fit the OP’s intent of harmony in the larger sense?
“California Dreamin’” is a great choice.
The Beach Boys would be an obvious choice. “Wouldn’t It Be Nice,” “California Girls,” “Good Vibrations,” or
Cool, Cool Water
And many, many more.
Steve Allen used to have a schtick where he’d read the lyrics to songs of the day as if they were poetry. One time he did Lieber & Stoller’s “Drip Drop”
The roof is leaking and
The rain’s falling in my head
Drip, drip
Drippity drop
Well, the roof is leaking and
The rain’s falling on my head
Drip, drip
Drippity drop
I cried so hard
Teardrops soiled my face
Drip, drip
Drippity drop
Mom laughed and said, “See how stupid songs are today?” I just looked her in the eye and in my best William Shatner imitation said,
Mairzy doats… and doz…
y doats and liddle lamz… y divey
That’s when she hit me.
Yeah that’s what I was thinking. I listened to the OP’s example and it doesn’t have a vocal harmony so I was unsure what I was listening for.
Yeah I didn’t mean “countermelody”, I was trying to describe a vocal harmony as opposed to the harmony of the music. All cleared up now.
California Dreaming is a great example: I like the repeated riff and have no clue what the lyrics are about. Also “Nightswimming” and “Find the River” by REM, I think the harmony is more interesting than the melody in both. I never should have looked up the lyrics to the latter; it damaged my enjoyment of the piece and I was content when I couldn’t decipher it and the voice sounded like another instrument.
Very astute. I was going to post an interview with Michael Stipe where he said he doesn’t care about lyrics, and often sings different ones at each live concert. His rationale is that he considers his voice just one more instrument.
One more Beatles comment (sorry!): While both John and Paul were of course masters at both melody and harmony, generally Paul’s specialty was great melody, while John’s was great harmony. John’s melody lines tended to be within a restricted range, while his chord sequences were usually inventive and memorable. “Strawberry Fields Forever” is a good example.
(Though one of John’s most celebrated compositions, “Tomorrow Never Knows,” is pretty much the opposite: an interesting, bugle-call melody, and groundbreaking sonic textures, but almost no harmonic movement, deliberately.)
To me, an interesting thing about this thread is how the OP more or less equated “harmony” (sequence of chords, etc.) with “background.” This is neither “right” nor “wrong;” rather, it reveals how some people perceive the melody of a song as primary, with other components secondary. Personally, I don’t perceive it that way — a pop song that uses the same chord sequence as Pachelbel’s canon will sound boring to me, even if the (sung) melody is different (though I suppose a REALLY interesting melody might shine through as special even for me).
(The standard blues chord sequence — “harmony” — varies little, but like many do, I give it a pass, for various reasons. Maybe that’s the subject for a different thread).
I came in here to post that one. Before I learned the words in the melody, the harmony in the chorus just grabbed me and I was humming along with that for weeks whenever it was on the radio.