Bridges

[ZoeB]

Hiya! Does anyone here have any advice on making bridges (or the B part in an AABA arrangement, etc)? It seems like quite a hard line to balance between being too similar to the verse (or A part), therefore making it too boring, or being too different, making it too much like suddenly switching to a completely different song that just happens to be the same tempo. The best I've worked out so far is to keep the instrumentation the same while changing the key, or only change some of the instrumentation at most while keeping the key, or change the chords themselves and the broken chords' pattern of ascent and descent while keeping the rhythm, things like that... Does anyone here have any other suggestions? I tend to too often just cut out a few instruments for the bridge and introduce a new one, which then stays for the climax (a kind of A, A, B, A + B, where A and B are instruments playing compatible melodies and rhythms, not types of melodies and rhythms played by all the instruments), but although this sounds great, I only want to use it appropriately. I don't want to start relying on it as a trope. The same goes for eschewing a bridge or breakdown entirely in favour of just building a song slowly up and up, which works very well for ambient music but even then isn't something I'd want to exclusively rely on. So yeah, any ideas to help me break out of my comfort zone in this regard?

[chim]

You're probably making it too complicated for yourself. Some of the best songs have weirdass bridges. Think contrast rather than AABA patterns. Bring in some entirely new elements, fuck around with things abit. As long as there's some form of buildup it usually makes sense. altering the chords while leaving the pattern intact might bring in some tension for the final part, think fifth substitutes or sus chords. You usually stumble upon a good thing if you really give it abit of time to play around and make mistakes.

 

Whenever someone mentions bridges I always think of the one in this song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqcgnR9HvmM

[perunamuusi]

the bridge is over the bridge is over

[Guest A/D]

I think CSM's advice is good. I've only written two bridges I'm really proud of. One is an "extension" of the song's chorus, lingering on chords longer. The other is a bunch of new sounds, new chords, new melodies, a big build back to the original chorus.

[Guest Wall Bird]

A few possible techniques

 

Melodic variation/augmentation/diminution

Maintain the same rhythm but change the melodic content or vice versa; same melodic content with a different rhythm

Reharmonization

Dynamics, people!

Modulation to new keys. Modulation is totally overlooked by a lot of contemporary musicians.

Change the instrumentation

Tempo change (half time, double time, quad time(?), gradually speed up/slow down.

 

Zoe, listening to a few of your songs, I hear lots of instances of two-bar and four bar musical phrases. One of the reasons that your transitions sound unnatural is because of the way you repeat short phrases over and over. The longer you repeat something the more jarring it will seem when you finally do make a change. Such simple divisions repeated can make your music predictable, or boring at worst. Challenge yourself to write melodies and rhythms that don't fall into even numbered divisions. Go back to songs you have written and remove a bar from a four bar phrase and analyze how this changes the flow of the song. Does it suggest new places to go? Try to write longer melodies and chord changes that extend beyond four bar phrases as well.

 

Becoming more comfortable with this kind of structural variation will allow you to create music that is exciting and develops in a more natural way. Right now, your compositions are very even. Consciously put a little bit of asymmetry into your compositions to create tension and contrast. Of course, taken to it's extreme, this advice can also be create awful disorienting music. In some styles (club music, for example) it would generally be inappropriate to deviate from 4/4 meters and four bar divisions. To do so would disorient the people dancing and they would feel weird because that huge downbeat didn't come in when they expected, making them pause while they reorient themselves.

[ZoeB]

Thank you very much everyone, especially Wall Bird. That was great and much needed advice! I need to get less geometric and simple, and more musical and varied...

[Hautlle]

Really love dropping things to half-time myself, even doing half a track at one speed, then dropping the beat to half time for a portion http://soundcloud.com/hautlle/travels_with_torp

 

for bridges it seems I'll most often drop most things out and focus on an element that wil be carried into the next section or that finishes up the previous section.

[Cryptowen]

A thing I used to do a lot was to drop the tempo to like 1/2, 1/4, 1/3 etc. for the last part of the last measure before a big changeup, but then I decided that it was an easy way out & more often than not just sounded kinda awkward. Now I try to do something different each time.

[MAXIMUS MISCHIEF]

a sample of someone shouting 'YEAAAAH!'

[YEK]

a sample of someone shouting 'YEAAAAH!'

[Hautlle]

A thing I used to do a lot was to drop the tempo to like 1/2, 1/4, 1/3 etc. for the last part of the last measure before a big changeup, but then I decided that it was an easy way out & more often than not just sounded kinda awkward. Now I try to do something different each time.

 

like make the last notes drag out?

[Guest Hermann]

I find it difficult to follow up such good and extensive advice, but I´ll give it a go.

 

I agree with csm in some aspects. I think if you´re worried about it sounding to out of place then maybe you can build it up (a bit like csm said) and bring in some little things a bit before the bridge, which would carry on in the bridge. Or not necessarily obvious things, maybe just musical patterns and techniques that you could carry on in the bridge, or maybe even bring in a little bit before and then carry it on in the bridge.

But of course I think it´s not a big deal and I agree you´re making things complicated :) because it can sound HOWEVER you want it to, and I kind of have faith in your ability to do something nice whatever it may be, since i´ve listened a bit to your things and I´m an observer of people´s behaviour (including in language) and I can analyze from things that you say to give me insights into how you make things creatively :) and therefore derive information from that........ anyway....

 

Hope this helps at all :s ignore it if it´s too much including all the other advice, i know how it feels to get overloaded with information..

 

I´ll try adding here a song I made (actually a remix of something, but still completely a new piece I´ve written etc etc) I don´t know if it will work, it seems like the internet doesn´t want it on it, I´ve tried soundcloud but no..

Anyway, if it works, my purpose of posting it is because a sort of a bridge thingy I made (very short, but I regard it as something that stands out a little bit from the rest of it) at about 3:10.

I´m not sure "how" it would help to listen to it, but I think it can always help to listen to something else to get some sort of perspective. Whether it´s good or not. In my opinion it´s weird and sticks out, but maybe it will help somehow.

 

Oh actually it´s too big a file I just tried :(

So there was no need to write all that... Or was there? Hmmm, maybe there was ;)

Well if there´s another way to send you it; otherwise it´s fine.

 

Anyway I´ll stop blabbering now.

Hermann

[ZoeB]

Heh, thanks Hermann! I'm going to try out everyone's advice, it'll just take me a while... I still think Wall Bird's worked out the main thing I need to work on first though, being less repetitive, and making melodies that actually go somewhere, and chord progressions that aren't just blocks of four bars that endlessly repeat. It'll take me a few weeks at least to properly get into the habit of going on diversions and spicing things up a bit... as well as a few other things I need to get into the habit of, like changing key in the middle of a track more often, or trying out different kinds of chords (suspended, augmented, diminished, sixth, seventh, etc). The latter being something I was reminded of by collaborating with a director who has quite a different composing style to me; I forgot how useful collaborations were for picking up new habits! Then I'll work on improving my arrangements too... There's always so much to learn! :D

 

And don't worry about rambling, the web has infinite space for all practical purposes, and it's often useful to articulate things that you normally wouldn't. Thanks again, everyone! ^.^

[Guest Hermann]

Yeah, it´s true, the internet is a perfect place for rambling and its much easier to articulate yourself.

 

I also think Wall Bird´s advice was really good, I´m going to use it as well for myself ;)

 

Well I´ve managed to post the remix song I made on YLC if you want to check it out. Youtube had to do..

[ZoeB]

Sure, thanks! What's the link?

[Guest Hermann]

Oh it´s here

 

[zazen]

Good thread.

 

"How to have two different bits that are different but still related" really goes to the heart of songwriting and composing.

 

In general: Music is all about patterns, and when people listen they are taking in those patterns to some extent (whether a melody pattern, percussion pattern or something larger scale like the pattern of sections within a track). The trick is to have enough repetition so that the patterns are recognisable (as the opposite of this, imagine a track of random notes proceeding with no repetition of any kind) but also have enough change happening to keep things interesting. The sort of changes that have a lot of impact are typically ones that people could almost have predicted - Like when you're listening to music and a key change happens and it just makes sense.

 

In 'simple' electronic music, the early dance stuff in the 80s and 90s, people typically just have layers of repeating loops and mute things in and out to provide variation. (cut the chords, 16 bars later add some more drums, 16 bars later cut eveything except drums and bassline, 16 bars later bring the chords back, you know the sort of thing). If you listen to the early output of Aphex and most of the other 'featured artists' here, thats what they were doing.

 

IMHO it starts becoming proper, viable music when changing melodic patterns come in. Aphex has done this in more and more sophisticated ways as his career has progressed - thats the main difference between say Analord and Caustic Window. Also, listen to early Black Dog vs recent Plaid to see a similar advance.

 

I think there is some relationship here with music that is thought of as 'immediately accessible' and stuff that you have to listen to lots of time before it really 'clicks' - I think that comes down to how obvious the patterns are and how quickly your brain can grok them. Pop music tends to have either simple patterns, or else potentially complicated patterns that are easily predictable because of conventions (such as certain sorts of key progressions).

 

I've found that its easy to come up with 16 bars of stuff that sounds good on repeat - almost anything sounds 'right' if you repeat it for long enough - but the real art of music is to come up with many different chunks/sections/phrases that fit together.

 

Tricks I've used (often two or three of these at the same time can work):

• key changes (look up the circle of 5ths and how to move around it with key changes and then (often) end back on the key you started from)
  
• swap melodies between instruments
  
• take a few notes of the previous section, mutate somewhat and then expand
  
• change FX
  
• use established 'cadence' - basically, these are like musical puntuation that signal to the listener either "that was a full stop, next bit will be different" or "that was a comma, next bit will be similar". Its just a convention, but one that most (western) listeners will instinctively get.
  

The point wall bird makes above is also important - in a track where there hasn't been much change, introducting a big change is difficult. In a track where the musical patterns are shifting the whole time, introducing changes is easier and you can get away with quite large differences.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm by no means an expert on this.

Here's some 'progressions' that I'm quite pleased with; instrumentation doesn't really change in this track but there are melodic shifts and key changes (first one hits about 1:40)

 

http://soundcloud.com/koanotic/go-placidly

 

edit: fixing soundcloud embedding

[ZoeB]

More excellent advice, thank you Zazen! :D

 

"How to have two different bits that are different but still related" really goes to the heart of songwriting and composing.

 

In general: Music is all about patterns, and when people listen they are taking in those patterns to some extent (whether a melody pattern, percussion pattern or something larger scale like the pattern of sections within a track). The trick is to have enough repetition so that the patterns are recognisable (as the opposite of this, imagine a track of random notes proceeding with no repetition of any kind) but also have enough change happening to keep things interesting. The sort of changes that have a lot of impact are typically ones that people could almost have predicted - Like when you're listening to music and a key change happens and it just makes sense.

 

Well articulated. Music is basically all about balance, such as between the extremes of being too repetitive and predictable, and too random and unpredictable. The human brain is primarily a pattern recognition machine, so being able to predict what's about to happen, and sometimes being proven wrong in a way that was sufficiently hinted at to not be considered cheating, is at the heart of jokes, plot twists, and probably a lot more of culture besides.

 

In 'simple' electronic music, the early dance stuff in the 80s and 90s, people typically just have layers of repeating loops and mute things in and out to provide variation. (cut the chords, 16 bars later add some more drums, 16 bars later cut eveything except drums and bassline, 16 bars later bring the chords back, you know the sort of thing). If you listen to the early output of Aphex and most of the other 'featured artists' here, thats what they were doing.

 

Yes, this is exactly what I'm still doing far too often. Either making a verse / A section and a bridge / B section and essentially doing AABA or AAB A+B, with the addition and removal of instruments as you go along, or -- even more simple -- just a single part and lots of addition and removal of instruments. Which, yes, is too close to the "predictable" side of the axis.

 

Partly this was a conscious effort on my part, after getting into ambient and ambient techno, a lot of which consists of slowly, subtly fading in and out compatible riffs that get along together until eventually all the original ones have been entirely replaced, and evolving the timbres as you're going, but as nice as that is for some music, I can't use it all the time. It's time to try out some other things more! :D

 

IMHO it starts becoming proper, viable music when changing melodic patterns come in. Aphex has done this in more and more sophisticated ways as his career has progressed - thats the main difference between say Analord and Caustic Window. Also, listen to early Black Dog vs recent Plaid to see a similar advance.

 

I'm not sure Analord's always that interesting in terms of structure. Quite often it's about building up layers, and switching between two different sections, at least with the catchy tracks such as I'm Self Employed and PWSteal.Ldpinch.D. Now, if you're talking about, say, Fenix Funk 5, then yeah, that's much more interesting structurally, like the upbeat Drukqs tracks, and almost like classical music. This is the kind of music I can really learn good habits from, with all of its interesting twists and turns. (Or, for that matter, how some bits repeat every four bars, some every five, and towards the end new instruments tend to get introduced on the second bar, not the first as you might expect, and a tonne of other things.)

 

I think there is some relationship here with music that is thought of as 'immediately accessible' and stuff that you have to listen to lots of time before it really 'clicks' - I think that comes down to how obvious the patterns are and how quickly your brain can grok them. Pop music tends to have either simple patterns, or else potentially complicated patterns that are easily predictable because of conventions (such as certain sorts of key progressions).

 

I've found that its easy to come up with 16 bars of stuff that sounds good on repeat - almost anything sounds 'right' if you repeat it for long enough - but the real art of music is to come up with many different chunks/sections/phrases that fit together.

 

This sounds generally true, yes, although there is some pop music whose creators throw in surprisingly good ideas. For instance, Girls Aloud's Biology goes from either 6/8 or 4/4 with a shuffle or swing (for the verses) to regular 4/4 (for the pre-chorus and chorus), and the effect's similar to Pink Floyd's Money, where they do sort of the opposite, going from 7/4 to 6/8 or swing or shuffle or whatever you want to call it, and in both cases it provides a pleasing "ratching it up a notch" feeling while avoiding the clichéd truck driver's gear shift. As far as I can tell, both are essentially saying for the chorus "it's OK, you can dance now."

 

Tricks I've used (often two or three of these at the same time can work):

• key changes (look up the circle of 5ths and how to move around it with key changes and then (often) end back on the key you started from)
  
• swap melodies between instruments
  
• take a few notes of the previous section, mutate somewhat and then expand
  
• change FX
  
• use established 'cadence' - basically, these are like musical puntuation that signal to the listener either "that was a full stop, next bit will be different" or "that was a comma, next bit will be similar". Its just a convention, but one that most (western) listeners will instinctively get.
  

 

Thank you, these are good ideas for me to try out! Another one I've got to get into the habit of more is having some instruments that only exist in certain sections, eg the pre-chorus and chorus but not the verse. Oh, another cool trick I tried a while back which may be a bit cliched but works very well is to introduce a reasonably subtle second layer of percussion for the second verse that's not in the first, to show that even though you're almost back where you started, you're taking it up a notch.

 

I guess a lot of this is about working your way up to a climax.

 

That's a nice metaphor about punctuation. It only recently dawned on me listening to Fatboy Slim's zestful use of crash and splash cymbals (or at least samples of them) that they're essentially exclamation marks, and big beat is basically shouting really enthusiastically.

 

The point wall bird makes above is also important - in a track where there hasn't been much change, introducting a big change is difficult. In a track where the musical patterns are shifting the whole time, introducing changes is easier and you can get away with quite large differences.

 

Yeah, that's a good idea. I should probably try, for instance, changing some instrumentation for the pre-chorus, then simplifying the beat down to a house/disco four-to-the-floor for the chorus, stuff like that, even for simple pop. So you're changing a lot over the course of the song, but from one part to the next, only about two of those things.

 

This is actually pretty similar to something it took me ashamedly long to work out: each part shouldn't be complex, it should be simple, but you should have just too many to concentrate on them all at once.

 

I'm by no means an expert on this.

 

Here's some 'progressions' that I'm quite pleased with; instrumentation doesn't really change in this track but there are melodic shifts and key changes (first one hits about 1:40)

 

http://soundcloud.com/koanotic/go-placidly

 

edit: fixing soundcloud embedding

 

 

I wouldn't worry about branding people experts or not. You've been very helpful to me, and I'm grateful, thank you!