Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

cantgetmuchhigher.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 160 posts

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#51

Post by mastazi »

I'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 seem right.

Maybe the discrepancy is because modern jazz fusion tunes are under represented in the Real Book and those are usually more guitar-oriented, so perhaps more likely that the musician would pick a sharp key like D or A. As opposed to straight-ahead jazz were people try to accommodate for sax/trumpet/trombone etc.

Or maybe it's because chords like D or A can be dominants in minor keys that are flat keys, e.g. D in the key of Gmin or A in the key of Dmin. - EDIT I just realised that dominants are listed separately so this is not the case.

One more thing: according to the article, major triads make up more than 50% of chords in jazz... what? That's certainly wrong, most major chords in jazz are usually maj7th or 6th even when they don't have upper extensions. I think that what they actually meant is "major chords that are not dominants". But they used the label "major triad" instead.

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#52

Post by volemo »

memset wrote: post #36

The way this analysis, and the original dataset were created, makes no sense. This is, in part, not the author's fault, since the original data [1, 2] is flawed. First, the original data was constructed like this: "...The next step was to format the raw HTML files into the full chord progression of each song, collapsing repeating identical chords into a single chord (’A G G A’ became ’A G A’)..." Already this makes n…

Could you explain the Roman numerals part?

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#53

Post by zenogantner »

volemo wrote: post #52
memset wrote: post #36

The way this analysis, and the original dataset were created, makes no sense. This is, in part, not the author's fault, since the original data [1, 2] is flawed. First, the original data was constructed like this: "...The next step was to format the raw HTML files into the full chord progression of each song, collapsing repeating identical chords into a single chord (’A G G A’ became ’A G A’)..." Already this makes n…

Could you explain the Roman numerals part?

Typically, chord progressions are described independently of the key they are in.

For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%2750s_progression

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#54

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

hirvi74 wrote: post #4

I find the analysis interesting in terms of a hobby project, but I'd be careful extrapolating too much out of this. 680k is quite the sample size, but my issue lies within the myopic selection of one instrument and the issues that arise from the platform of Ultimate Guitar. 1. I am curious, how many of the 680k songs are unique? It is rather uncommon for massively successful songs to only have one version of tabs out…

> Music has also become more accessible as time progressed.

Hell no. Before recorded music literally everyone was a musician in one way or another. Music was an activity you did while bored. (Today music is not an activity, it's a product to consume.)

They had simple woodwinds and percussive instruments. People weren't playing the church organ while waiting for the cows to come home.

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#55

Post by johnfn »

domenici2000 wrote: post #34
cjohnson318 wrote: post #25

Listing the "most frequent chord" is a weird analysis, I'm more interested in the "most frequent key", or a transition matrix from one key to another, e.g., if I'm in F, what's the chance I go a fifth up to C, or a fourth down to Bb. Just telling me G is a popular chord doesn't do much.

Exactly, this is useless. It's like saying the letter E is the most used letter in the world and Wheel of Fortune is your dataset.

It's significantly worse than that. It's like saying the letter E is the most common letter in a corpus of text where most of the text has been ceasar-shifted.

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#56

Post by zenogantner »

memset wrote: post #36

The way this analysis, and the original dataset were created, makes no sense. This is, in part, not the author's fault, since the original data [1, 2] is flawed. First, the original data was constructed like this: "...The next step was to format the raw HTML files into the full chord progression of each song, collapsing repeating identical chords into a single chord (’A G G A’ became ’A G A’)..." Already this makes n…

The problem with collapsed repeated chords comes not only from the data processing -- most Ultimate Guitar songs are written down entirely ignoring how often a chord is repeated -- the classic "lyrics plus chords" format is incomplete and requires the player to somewhat know the structure of the song anyway. The write-up usually just gives hints where, relative to the lyrics, the chord changes.

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#57

Post by Twirrim »

volemo wrote: post #52
memset wrote: post #36

The way this analysis, and the original dataset were created, makes no sense. This is, in part, not the author's fault, since the original data [1, 2] is flawed. First, the original data was constructed like this: "...The next step was to format the raw HTML files into the full chord progression of each song, collapsing repeating identical chords into a single chord (’A G G A’ became ’A G A’)..." Already this makes n…

Could you explain the Roman numerals part?

By convention in music, we use Roman numerals to signify what chord we should play relative to the root (key). "I" refers to the root/tonic/key and we count up from there. [1]

So, for example, a common three chord progression in a major scale would be I – IV – V. If we take the key of C, those would be C, F, G, as F and G are the fourth and fifth chords respectively.

In the key of G, it'd be G, C and D. In that key, a good example song is "Sweet Home Alabama", where almost the entire song is just V - IV - I over and over again.

One of the most popular chord progressions, used in an astounding number of pop songs is known as the "Four Chord Trick", I – V – VI – IV, famously demonstrated by the Aussie comedy band Axis of Awesome[2]

I think I'd agree with the person you're replying to, both in that the original source is flawed due to not including the "dupes", despite them being important, and also because key is largely irrelevant, chord progression is much more important.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numeral_analysis [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOlDewpCfZQ.

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#58

Post by zzo38computer »

volemo wrote: post #52
memset wrote: post #36

The way this analysis, and the original dataset were created, makes no sense. This is, in part, not the author's fault, since the original data [1, 2] is flawed. First, the original data was constructed like this: "...The next step was to format the raw HTML files into the full chord progression of each song, collapsing repeating identical chords into a single chord (’A G G A’ became ’A G A’)..." Already this makes n…

Could you explain the Roman numerals part?

The number "I" means the chord from the first note of the scale (e.g. C E G in C major, or F A C in F major), and uppercase means major and lowercase means minor. Other numbers will then be e.g. "V" will be G B D in C major. You may then add digits as well in which case they indicate intervals above the bass, e.g. "V6" is a first inversion chord (e.g. B D G in C major) and "V7" adds the seventh (e.g. G B D F in C major).

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#59

Post by zzo38computer »

I do not see the mention of what chord progressions are used. They did mention what chords (according to only the notes, not according to the key) are common, though.

I would expect that a full analysis should write the roman numbers (so you will have to know what key it is as well), and might also consider such things as non-chord tones, modulation to other keys, etc. (However, this is not as simple as just putting them into the computer and writing a SQL query or whatever.)

What I had seen on television and what I had read, is that I-V-vi-IV chord progression is common in modern music. (There is also i-VI-III-VII, which is the relative minor key than I-V-vi-IV, which is obvious once you realize it.)

Re: I analyzed chord progressions in 680k songs

#60

Post by cpelletier »

Twirrim wrote: post #57
volemo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain the Roman numerals part?

By convention in music, we use Roman numerals to signify what chord we should play relative to the root (key). "I" refers to the root/tonic/key and we count up from there. [1] So, for example, a common three chord progression in a major scale would be I – IV – V. If we take the key of C, those would be C, F, G, as F and G are the fourth and fifth chords respectively. In the key of G, it'd be G, C and D. In that key,…

Minor chords are written in lowercase so the Axis of Awesome progression should be I-V-vi-IV
Post reply on HN