Repetition
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
What is /mu/'s opinion on repetition in music? Is it a necessity, or not? How much is too much, how little is too little?
Is it okay to, for example, have the same bass line and/or drum beat repeat unchanging throughout an entire song? Why/why not?
Pic unrelated.
What kind of repetition are we talking about here? Early Swans or Metallica?
I think some form of repetition is needed, unless it's some sort of sound collage. You shouldn't be jumping from one idea to the next without pressing the idea into the listener. If it's just a barrage of "whacks" nothing will be memorable.
Drone should have some calculated, subtle tweaks throughout that make it creative and interesting, otherwise it has little merit
pic related, my favourite drone album
>>65327149
It really is subjective. In the right context it could incredible e.g. Dilla Donuts. But often, hacks will abuse it for lack of talent/integrity.
>>65327188
Anything and everything, I'm talking about whether there are limits, whether something can have "too much" repetition or even (say with free jazz or noise music) have "too little" repetition.
>>65327250
Also yeah I'm sorta more interested in too much repetition than too little.
Seems like a lot of popular music these days has a lot of repetition in it. Yet it's popular. So I'm just trying to wrap my head around it for my own creations of how much repetition is "allowed" vs. how far away from repetition I can get, which one is better (and for what reasons it would be better in a given musical context), etc.
I mean look at billy idol's rebel yell for example. Dude repeats the same fucking line "with a rebel yell she cried more more more, in the midnight hour she cried more more more" etc, and it was an extremely popular song. Both lyrically and musically it was very repetitive though.
I mean on the one hand you could say "herp derp justin bieber is popular miley cyrus is popular, popularity doesn't matter" but on the other hand I'd still like to make music that a lot of people enjoy listening to, so it's hard to straddle that line between popularity and creating something truly great and unique. Ultimately, the question of how much repetition plays a big role in this, which is why I ask.
>>65327660
I think you should go with your musical instinct and what YOU think is sufficient repetition. Of course your target audience has an influence, and maybe somedays you feel less repetitive than other. I wouldn't want to pander to retards with no attention span, but i wouldn't want to make music for autists either, like this songs with over the top progression. As with many things, it's all about balance. btw repetition can be done without being too repetitive, if that makes sense. like small nuances etc.
>>65327845
So you think ultimately it doesn't really matter, then? I'm just trying to figure out if there are any sorts of rules are not, some type of golden balance, but subjectivity is mind boggling sometimes.
>>65327149
Repetition, just like in writing, is a device to build and relieve tension. Good repetition has direction and can go on as long as it wants as long as it's trying to convey something
Bad repetition is simply through a lack of ideas and doesn't convey anything
As always, it just lies in concept and execution, and when those are present repetition is fine no matter how long it goes.
Examples:
>bad repetition
Most top 40 pop songs
Whip/Nae Nae
etc.
>good repetition
Eccojams, intro of The Moon by The Microphones, etc.
It's an interesting question. I feel to me repetitious lines of music is fine, if there are just small changes throughout, but it has to be audible, and the loop needs to be really satisfying for me to be able to go through it. One of my favourite albums of all time is Diskont 94 by Oval and "Do While" is fantastic in it's glorious repetitious 24 minutes, but here the other day I listened to Baskinski's Disintregration Loops, and I was bored to tears. I may be valuing repetition less than most though.
i'd like to throw out there that you should consider the context of the music as well. for example, stuff like trance and house music are very repetitive and often has four-on-the-floor beats (kick on every quarter note) and are just inherently repetitive in general, but you have to consider that they're specifically made to be danced to. so instead they usually mess with filters or add/remove instruments and make subtle changes throughout the repetitiveness.
you've also got something like say hip hop for example. often, each song has usually around a 4 measure beat to it that is looped over and over again through the whole song, but this is mostly there as a "foundation" for the vocals, the rapping, which is usually considered the focal point of the song. so they instead focus on finding that perfect sounding loop that you'd actually want to hear over and over for 3 minutes because it sounds so good, so they can rap over that (so while the beat may be repetitive, the vocals can do all sorts of non-repetitive things on top of it).
but yeah definitely an interesting question to consider like >>65329060 said, wish this board discussed more philosophical topics of music more often.
repetition is a tool, like anything else. it can be used tastefully or detrimentally.
The Caretaker, William Basinksi, Swans and Earth are some god-tier musicians that use it perfectly
>>65327149
repetition makes or breaks music, one of my fav bands really uses lots of repetition (can). It can set up an atmosphere or a mood. Little repetition makes your music sound frantic and wild. All music has repetition though (unless its harsh noise). Repetition is very pleasing to the ear and it is no surprise top 40 songs all sound the same and are very non progressive. The mind likes familiarity and shuns new things (evolutionary a good trait for survival). Even very progressive music uses it, so yes it is good
>>65329328
The question is: what determines whether repetition is "tasteful" or "detrimental"?
It always feels like it's difficult to get any sort of real, concrete answer on these sorts of things, due to the subjectivity of it all. How do you figure out whether the repetition you're creating is tasteful or not?
>>65329451
Well I would say that the artists I mentioned rely on it 100%, or have at certain points in their career for certain projects.
I think music tends to make people want to stay in one spot predictably looping from time to time, or to drift from one movement to another. Ambient music has that "drift," pop has that predictability.
If you look at the ocean, you can stare at it for hours and not get bored of the waves, the skyline, the shoreline. It's repetitive, but it draws you in due to its vastness.
I think repetition can swallow a person and make the music a visual and auditory part of their senses. But it depends what you're repeating. If you play Sesame Street on replay, it's a mode of torture. If you play Earth at full blast laying alone in a dark room, it's meditative. So I believe it depends on perception of time and place.
>>65329434
It's a question of amount, though. Like, what do you think of free jazz? What do you think of hip hop beats that often repeat some 2-4 bar musical phrase over and over? Or Goa Trance? Or Musique Concrete?
How much is too much, how little is too little? What is "tasteful" repetition and what is "detrimental" repetition?
Black people actually can't be racist
>>65329584
That's not true, but that aside wtf does that have to do with this thread?
>>65329561
>If you look at the ocean, you can stare at it for hours and not get bored of the waves, the skyline, the shoreline. It's repetitive, but it draws you in due to its vastness.
i love this metaphor
>>65329576
I dont like hip hop because the repetition goes so far that rap songs amongst different artists still sound the same. If you have a unique style or sound and repeat that its fine. Can uses repetition but each song sounds different and they as a band have a unique sound. While hip hop is in its premise already flawed. In order to allow the delivery of the actual rapping the beat can not progress. Repetition does not mean that your songs cant be masterfully crafted and creative. Take slint for example. They use repetition but also insanely seemless changes in time signatures. Hip hop not only uses repetition but it also does not progress at all. The genre stayed more or less the same since its inception. It inhibts creativity in and of itself. It is probably the most uninteresting genre (in my opinion). Its flaw is not repetition but rather an abundance of progress (exceptions being groups like DG)
>>65329857
I disagree with that and suggest you should actually dig deeper into the genre besides just looking at the surface of what's popular. Hip Hop can certainly be creative and masterfully crafted, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVVuW8701yQ&feature=player_detailpage&t=221
A rhyming story told over roughly 11 minutes with multiple different beats each having a unique emotional landscape, each of which fits the different parts of a story that remains cohesive and connected over it's entirety.
It can be good.
I think the biggest sin most people make os unnecessary third chorus' after a soft final bridge.
At a point, you have to realize you produced the best part of the song, and just increasing the length with an extra chorus or coda isnt going to make it better.
>>65329857
I think hiphops big problem is most songs are in maybe 3 different times. Couple with the recent minimalist trends and you get sparse beats all at the same speed with no chorus differential across multiple artists.
You really have to look on the fringe to find the innovators.
>>65327660
To be fair, Rebel Yell has much more note diversity than a typical beiber song, and has a speedier time signature. More punch.
If anyone has the link to the article about music getting simpler, it would be much appreciated.
>>65331584
You could make the same generalization about a lot of genres, especially popular ones, though. It's always been this way, you always have to dig to find the good stuff, the people who are innovating, past the generic.
I think repetition is fine
>>65331645
Mainstream rap beats were definitively denser only 5 years ago. There is a definite softening and homogenizing of music, rap in particular. Less note variation, similar times, less breaks, etc.
I love repetition. Can't get enough of it.
>>65331637
That kinda misses the point though, doesn't it? It's still repetitive as fuck, yet also widely known and was very popular in it's time (hell, even today a lot of people know about it/have heard it, it gets played on the radio, etc).
You're just saying "it may be repetitive as hell, but hey at least it's fast!" It's still repetitive as fuck though. Still very popular despite it's heavy use of repetition, though.
>>65331706
I'll check it out, thanks for the suggestion.
>>65331770
That's just the music industry, though.
Maybe that's really where the question of repetition winds up, though. We all (musicians) want to make money (at least enough to pay the bills) from our passion. Yet it's pretty obvious that the music "industry" has taken advantage of psychology to figure out how to churn out sounds and images that will keep the money flowing in, with little regard for actual artistic merit or innovation.
>>65331469
well thats cool and all but I dont listen to music for its stories. I do like good lyricism but musically it does not captivate me which is too much of a flaw in my book. 4/4 and 2/4 beats get old fast and because of the rapping on top of the beat it does not allow for a lot of distortions or noise or experimentation in general
>>65331946
Well like I've said, it's a difficult problem because of the subjectivity of art in general.
Because I'd strongly disagree with you but neither of us is wrong, we just have different tastes and preferences when it comes to music. Hard to draw any objective "lines in the sand" for what is correct and incorrect.
>>65332028
you are right it is very subjective and I dont hate on people who dislike the music I like or who like music I dislike (well I do on /mu/ because its fun but I dont actually mean it)
>>65331811
Its waay less repetitive than beibers latest. Which is my point, popular music gets more streamlined as time goes on. Listen to bieber chorus and rebel yell and tell me ry doesnt have more note or cadence diversity.
>>65332352
They're both super repetitive though, it's like comparing two shits and asking which smells worse. They both stink.
I mean I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just saying rebel yell being a bit less repetitive doesn't mean they're not both super repetitive songs.
That said, they're also both widely popular songs/musicians (at least for their time), so really the question is: what does that say about humanity and about music as an artform in general? Especially from the creator's point of view?
I mean what do you say if you make something you really like and show it to a friend and the friend is like "eh I don't like that it's really repetitive and boring" and you either feel like "no it's not you're missing all of the subtle changes here and there and there" or "well yeah but that's the point because..." and they just don't give a shit. It's really frustrating when trying to consider when your piece is "done" or not.
