Also the whole idea of doing the analysis based on absolute rather than relative notes makes little sense to me as a musician, though perhaps that's because I didn't start with guitar or a tuned instrument like a trumpet.
I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
141–150 of 160 posts
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no recorded or productionized music back then. And yet people liked music as much as we do now. So the only way to enjoy music was to do it yourself. Singing and playing an instrument was just a basic life skill that everyone had back then. (Say, like driving a car or using a computer is today. Not everyone is a professional driver or computer programmer, but not being able to use a computer at all today wo…
> before recorded music literally everyone was a musician in one way or another ... playing an instrument was just a basic life skill that everyone had back then You're just making this up. Playing an instrument is a complex skill that requires a lot of work and an expensive piece of equipment. Music has been a profession since at least Mesopotamian times
Or it's something you just, you know, do? I listen to and play a lot of tunes from the Appalachians and you really do get the sense that just about everyone played something back in the day. They developed complex and extremely localized traditions that did not require formal music education to pass down. Some of them were musical geniuses, many were middling, just like with most things people do.
Even poor families would often have an heirloom fiddle around to learn to play on (sometimes even brought with them from Europe), and ownership of family possessions was much more communal. Many parlors or bars would have a banjo or parlor guitar around for whoever wanted to make some music while hanging around. Those without access or with limited woodworking skill also often made their own fretless banjos (which look different from what you might normally recognize as a banjo) out of wood and hide, or other simpler instruments like dulcimers. Not that there weren't also semi-skilled luthiers making non-concert-grade fiddles at more affordable prices. All this culture is well documented in the Foxfire manuals on Appalachian folk traditions, complete with schematics on how to make those things from different regions. Pretty far from 'made up'. Hell, a lot of American music traces its roots back to music made by actual slaves. It's hard to think of a group of people with less means and access to the things you've mentioned, and yet, music.
Music theory may have a nearly limitless ceiling for both complexity of understanding and expense of instruments, but your statement here completely ignores the entirety of global folk tradition. And it does seem like an accurate observation to me that participation in casual musicianship in everyday contexts has declined significantly in correlation with a lot of the trends in modern living.
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except music theory has a math component to it so it's arguably somewhat quantifiable and falsifiable in a way that linguistics never will be.
[flagged]
I encourage you to read this site's guidelines and strive to do better moving forward, as your comment kinda seems to break 5-6 rules all at once.
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#144Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This is an incredibly ignorant reply, even for someone who has so obviously studied neither debate nor logical reasoning. I encourage you to read this site's guidelines and strive to do better moving forward, as your comment kinda seems to break 5-6 rules all at once. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
We could list the logical fallacies you're displaying in the spirit of "debate and reasoning" but I have no faith this would go anywhere productive.
Report me instead of complaining about guidelines if retaliation for being exposed for your ignorance is so important to you.
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an incredibly ignorant reply, even for someone who has so obviously studied neither debate nor logical reasoning. I encourage you to read this site's guidelines and strive to do better moving forward, as your comment kinda seems to break 5-6 rules all at once. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
If you had more to say on the topic at hand, you would have said it by now. I'm not interested in trying to educate someone so comfortable in promulgating assertions informed by nothing but amateur-level vibes. We could list the logical fallacies you're displaying in the spirit of "debate and reasoning" but I have no faith this would go anywhere productive. Report me instead of complaining about guidelines if retalia…
You assume my choice to not continue the conversation is because I have nothing to say, when in fact I do so because I have nothing to say to you specifically.
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#147I'm surprised that according to the article, in jazz, some chords like D and A, which are mostly found in sharp keys, are more common than chords like Bb and Eb, which are usually found in flat keys. I remember once creating a dataset based on 50 random tunes from the Real Book and sharp keys were less than 20% of the total (based on the key signature at the start of the score) so that graph in the article doesn't se…
The dataset is not “jazz,” it’s Ultimate Guitar’s tablature of jazz songs, so the data is very low quality.
To be fair there are also high quality charts on UG, but they generally require a paid subscription (I think they are called "pro" charts). Maybe the dataset should have been limited to those but I'm not sure about the legal implications given that they are a paid product.
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#148"Chord progressions also often move between chords whose roots are related by perfect fifth, making the circle of fifths useful in illustrating the "harmonic distance" between chords."
It'll be very interesting to analyse the available songs data to find chords that follow circle of fifths.
By cross-reference patterns with the circle of fifths, we might just end up with the LLM equivalent of data-driven musical composer that's capable of generating harmonically pleasing, genre-aware, even hit songs chord progressions.
[1] Circle of fifths:
Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs
#149Using absolute chord analysis instead of relative chords (i.e. roman numeral analysis) doesn't make sense. As others have noted, the original dataset is flawed because the structure of a song is critical, you cannot omit repeating chords. Programmers/analysts should take more care to understand music theory or the underlying field at hand, before compiling datasets or doing analysis. "Most common chord" is mildly int…
Agreed on chord numbers and progression being the analysis that should have been done. For example, blues is mostly defined by a 1-4-5 progression and the ol 2-5-1 is pretty ubiquitous across time and genre. Also, I think disappearance of 7th chords - major, minor, or dominant - is vastly overstated. Keep in mind that these are from guitar tabs so likely ignoring chord inversion / voicing / substitution taking placw…
I IV V, and ii V I, to be clear.