The Songwriting Secrets of The Beatles

[Movies]

Hello!

I just thought I'd let y'all know about a book I recently purchased called, "The Songwriting Secrets of the Beatles." It's by a British rock-guitarist named Dominic Pedler who writes for Total Guitar -- the English equivalent of, like, Guitar World or Guitar Magazine in the USA.

I first heard of Mr. Pedler via a photocopied article he wrote for Total Guitar with the same title as the book. In it, he outlined eight or ten techniques that The Beatles exploited and he gave examples of each in the form of a partial harmonic analysis of the songs in which they can be found. There were a bunch of basic concepts like borrowed chords and the neapolitan chord, but it also skimmed the surface of [what I would call] their radical pan-diatonicism.

So, long story short, the article was spun into a three hundred page book which not only goes fairly deep into their music, but also ties their harmonic and melodic decisions down to semantic ideas involving the way their lyrics and songs work together.

I think, at the very least, a basic understanding of the fundamentals of music theory (major minor scales and chord qualities) are required for getting through this dealie and a more complex understanding of basic concepts (chord function, non-harmonic tones, borrowed chords) would help the reader to get a lot more out of it.

This book, together with The Beatles Complete Scores, is, like, unstoppable!

[bdr]

Thanks for the info, I always seem to come back to the Beatles, I know it gets debated a lot but George Martin must have stuck his head in the door a few times and said,'that's nice, why don't you try this chord instead.'

[Movies]

Yeah, he was definitely in there helping out -- especially with orchestration ideas.

Still, the way those guys just, like, intuited harmony is completely next level!

[Frodo]

There appears to be quite a generous preview of this book on books.google.com, if anyone's interested. I haven't looked through the whole thing, but it looks fascinating.

http://books.google.com/books?id=fts1uK ... &q&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[zed]

I just thought I'd let y'all know about a book I recently purchased called, "The Songwriting Secrets of the Beatles."

Thanks for bringing this to our attention Movies! I did not know of the existence of this book, but I most definitely want it and will be ordering shortly. I like secrets.

There appears to be quite a generous preview of this book on books.google.com, if anyone's interested. I haven't looked through the whole thing, but it looks fascinating.

http://books.google.com/books?id=fts1uK ... &q&f=false" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fascinating indeed. I'm quite pleased with the number of pages they have included in the preview. It really gives you a good idea of how information is presented, and gives you a tonne of stuff to start exploring while you're waiting for the hard copy to be delivered.

So, long story short, the article was spun into a three hundred page book...

Damn. The book preview above ends with the note "Pages 277 to 795 are not shown in this preview." I was hoping that this was actually an 800 page book, but I suppose that is a typo and they meant to say 295.

[zed]

Just placed my order.

Oh... and I just paid more attention to the Table of Contents, and it does indeed appear to be an 800 page book.

[Movies]

So it is! The index ends on page 791.

I don't know what kind of magical mystery tour I was on when I wrote my original post!

[James Steele]

It's really very simple: Find to guys like Lennon & McCartney and then have them write great songs!

I don't meant to overly romanticize the Beatles, but songwriting teams like those guys are rare things. They are a statistical improbability.

[Frodo]

It's really very simple: Find to guys like Lennon & McCartney and then have them write great songs!

I don't meant to overly romanticize the Beatles, but songwriting teams like those guys are rare things. They are a statistical improbability.

Dude-- you smacked it right into verbal accuracy. We'll likely never hear about a book analyzing the songwriting techniques of The Dave Clark 5 if I had money to put on it.

[zed]

I don't meant to overly romanticize the Beatles, but songwriting teams like those guys are rare things. They are a statistical improbability.

I don't think that romanticization of the Beatles can ever be overdone!

Songwriting teams like this are indeed rare, but there is certainly a lot to be learned from studying their music and better understanding what it is that makes those songs work so well. I've picked up a lot of stuff intuitively throughout the years, but I'm eager to study examples of great songs and whatever "tricks", "moves" and progressions are used to make them stand out. The more familiar one becomes with these things, the greater the chances at being able to construct better and more interesting songs themselves.

Unfortunately, even after you've learned all the compositional tricks and secrets, your voice will probably never sound like Lennon's or McCartney's.

[Movies]

I love wading through the harmonic analyses of their music, for sure, however where this stuff gets super interesting to me -- and what sets them apart from virtually any songwriting team before or after them, in my and many peoples' opinion[s] -- is the way their music moves semantically/corresponds with their lyrics.

There's a ton of stuff on this subject for defs, but a great starter-resource is this page:

http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOL ... ords.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[bayswater]

I don't meant to overly romanticize the Beatles, but songwriting teams like those guys are rare things. They are a statistical improbability.

I don't think that romanticization of the Beatles can ever be overdone!

Unfortunately, even after you've learned all the compositional tricks and secrets, your voice will probably never sound like Lennon's or McCartney's.

Agree, but I think there's more to it than the voices. Even learning all the tricks will probably just make you sound like the Rutles.

[Frodo]

I've tried to show restraint with this thread, but I can't help myself. I plea for pardon in advance.

There is so much about The Beatles' songwriting styles that amaze me-- and I say "styles" (plural) because when you look independently at the styles of Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison one could write volumes about each. In combo, it's overwhelming. Also consider that their styles changed so dramatically from their first album to their last and it's almost too much to digest-- at least for me. I remain a hopeless fan to a fault.

On the one hand, it's a little too easy to say that McCartney was the melodic balladeer and Lennon was the rocker. Both were scary in both respects-- I mean-- "Helter Skelter" could be considered the forerunner of metal in a lot of ways. That was McCartney. How Lennonesque of McCartney to have written that tune.

Take a song like "And I Love Her". It's a simple tune in many ways, but McCartney does some very innovative harmonic manipulation with it that makes it timeless. First off, it's starts in the key of E, but it avoids E as much as possible. It starts out going between F#m and C#m and only resolves to E at the end of the phrase. Even there, the melody doesn't go to E. It goes to C# and G#-- again avoiding the obvious. Beautiful!!

So, then it gets to that E6 chord ("... and I love her..."), but when the guitar solo starts it doesn't go to the expected F#m. It goes to Gm--- BAM!! Right out of the blue-- no warning. We've laughed at half-step modulations over the years, but --dunno-- this one still works for me.

As an answer to this tune, Lennon comes up with "If I Fell". Now, McCartney confesses to the influence of tin pan alley, broadway, vaudeville, etc., because his father was into that sort of thing. But here's Lennon, "the rocker". Right? "If I Fell" starts out in a way that was rare for even The Beatles, let alone Lennon. That "intro" for a start is right out of tin pan alley, broadway, and vaudeville. If you listen to old standards of George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Harold Arlen, Rogers & Hart, Rogers & Hammerstein, etc., etc., many of their songs start out with what was called a "verse". Such a verse had almost nothing to do with the tune at all, and over the years many of these verses were not performed. In recent years they've been brought back and considered rediscovered treasures.

Anyway, "If I Fell" does exactly the same thing--- and it does some previously unheard of harmonic trickery. It starts on E-flat minor, although the tonal center is D-flat. But then it gets to "... and I found that love was more than JUST....". What? Em7? That serves as the pivot chord and the whole thing goes to D major after that.

That part of the song is only heard once-- right out of vaudeville. How McCartney of Lennon to do that!

So, here's the common thread-- "And I Love Her" is in E, but the first chord is F#m--- up a whole step.

"If I Fell" (the verse, anyway) is in D-flat, but the first chord is E-flat minor--- up a whole step.

Well, I was listening to "Sgt. Pepper", a tune that couldn't be more different than the other two mentioned above. It's in the key of G. Guess what? The first chord is A7--- UP A WHOLE STEP.

There are many other examples of this and it's no accident. It really was a major part of their writing style throughout their career. It wasn't always up a whole step, but it quite often avoided the key center as the first chord.

I really think this contributes in part to why The Beatles' still sound fresh all these years later.

Okay, I'm done. Thanks for "listening".

[bayswater]

Agree 100% on If I Fell. That song astounded me when I first heard it, and it still does. I had heated arguments at the time with those who argued that neither Lennon or McCartney could have written it, and that Lennon's music had no soul.

?????? No soul? Of all things--- if anyone had anything close to "soul" in that band it was Lennon!! Crimminey, Hector!!! Good-night, Irene!!

How could they even say that with a clear conscience? Maybe "soul" is the wrong word for it. What I get from them is sincerity. They broke the rules because they didn't know what the rules were--- or that there were any rules. How did the tunes on "With The Beatles" turn into "Rubber Soul" and then into "Sgt. Pepper" and "Abbey Road" or the "White Album"? Rules? I think not in favor of the lack of them. We the people are still benefitting from it, imho.

So many would discredit L & M out of disbelief. But they did what they did-- and they did it again and again. The most important thing is that they really DID it, and they made no hesitation to credit their influences.

Here we are all these years later still talking about this and not Herman's Hermits.

Sorry--- my abstemiousness has failed me once again. I'll shut up now.

[zed]

Agree, but I think there's more to it than the voices. Even learning all the tricks will probably just make you sound like the Rutles.

Well I agree that there is more to it, but you can get in the ballpark if you pay attention. The Rutles sound great, but their songs are parodies and therefore lack the more serious tone. It is joking and silly humour versus a sophisticated sense of humour and more inventive and meaningful/timeless lyric writing. And of course there are other differences too.

I love wading through the harmonic analyses of their music, for sure, however where this stuff gets super interesting to me -- and what sets them apart from virtually any songwriting team before or after them, in my and many peoples' opinion[s] -- is the way their music moves semantically/corresponds with their lyrics.

There's a ton of stuff on this subject for defs, but a great starter-resource is this page:

http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOL ... ords.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some great articles on that site. Thanks Movies! I immediately did a "Save as PDF" on this article that you referenced.

Aren't we lucky to live in an age where it is so easy to access and store information? Being able to create and keep a reference PDF copy of anything you find on the web is truly a wonderful thing.

I've tried to show restraint with this thread, but I can't help myself. I plea for pardon in advance.

Oh no... here he goes again...
Wait a minute. I like the Frodo perspective.

So, here's the common thread-- "And I Love Her" is in E, but the first chord is F#m--- up a whole step.

"If I Fell" (the verse, anyway) is in D-flat, but the first chord is E-flat minor--- up a whole step.

Well, I was listening to "Sgt. Pepper", a tune that couldn't be more different than the other two mentioned above. It's in the key of G. Guess what? The first chord is A7--- UP A WHOLE STEP.

There are many other examples of this and it's no accident. It really was a major part of their writing style throughout their career. It wasn't always up a whole step, but it quite often avoided the key center as the first chord.

That's an interesting observation. I am going to take a serious look at each of those examples to make better sense of what is happening in those songs. Thanks for pointing that out.