Red Mosquito

I guess with these two examples I've realized that I am more impressed when songs are able to pull off unconventional time signatures in a standard pop template than when artists make a concerted effort to trip up the listener

"Blue Rondo a la Turk" and "Take Five" by Dave Brubeck are good examples of that, I think -- mathematically complex, but still some of the easiest-going, smoothest-swinging jazz around.

Calling the Erasure chorus 17/4 makes it sound more complicated than it is. It's a normal 4/4 beat with an additional beat at the very end.

Mike wrote:Calling the Erasure chorus 17/4 makes it sound more complicated than it is. It's a normal 4/4 beat with an additional beat at the very end.

Yeah that's what I was hearing as well, but I dont feel confident enough in my musical knowledge to go to debate with someone as unforgiving as theplatypus.

I mean, it is exactly 17/4. That is an accurate way to describe it. Just like the Bacharach song or something like "Solsbury Hill", it is a small tweaking of regular time which sounds effortless and natural instead of jerky and cumbersome, and that is largely on the strength of the songwriting. So many songs in awkward time signatures are exactly "a normal 4/4 with an extra beat" or "4/4 but it slips into 7/4 for a few bars". Doesn't make it any less unnatural-sounding, or less impressive when it comes at no expense to the song's catchiness

Yeah I love it when complex songs are catxhy

Yeah, technically you can call it 17/4. I just think it's a little far fetched to count the whole chorus (not counting the repititions) to get the time. In "Solsbury Hill" I would put the whole musical phrase in one bar with seven beats. It's just a small musical phrase that's repeated. "Always" is more like three bars of 4/4 and one bar of 5/4. I think it's confusing and unnatural to call it 17/4.

I was trying to correct it and the mobile site kept logging me out!

I'm sorry I said anything.

Kaius wrote:I'm sorry I said anything.

Were you afraid you might catxh hell?

Mike wrote:Yeah, technically you can call it 17/4. I just think it's a little far fetched to count the whole chorus (not counting the repititions) to get the time. In "Solsbury Hill" I would put the whole musical phrase in one bar with seven beats. It's just a small musical phrase that's repeated. "Always" is more like three bars of 4/4 and one bar of 5/4. I think it's confusing and unnatural to call it 17/4.

I take your point. I carry it in my heart.

Coincidentally, Erasure had my least-favorite time-signature "transposition" of all time... in their cover of "Solsbury Hill"

I think you guys are right

I agree with Mike and Trag. I have no idea what they're saying but I trust that they do and that they're right.

I agree with Mike and Trag. I have no idea what they're saying but I trust that they do and that they're right.

It'd be sort of like saying the chorus to Pearl Jam's "Get Right" is 20/4 because it's two bars of 6/4 and two of 4/4 (from memory, I think that's right). You could count it that way but it's not the clearest in terms of direction.

theplatypus wrote:It'd be sort of like saying the chorus to Pearl Jam's "Get Right" is 20/4 because it's two bars of 6/4 and two of 4/4 (from memory, I think that's right). You could count it that way but it's not the clearest in terms of direction.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. 17/4 would sound like this to me:

How do some of you guys not know this stuff?

I'd love to be good with this stuff but I'm not, I have no idea at all.