Bulstrode here.

I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of

    verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise

it's now

    verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.

Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??


P.S. any UK songwriter wannabes should make an effort to listen to
BBC-R2. Last night, for instance, there was an excellent programme
on the BUSINESS of the music biz - and where all the money goes in
record deals.

As ever , it's the songwriter gets any cream.

bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Bulstrode here.
> 
> I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
> 
>     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
> 
> it's now
> 
>     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
> 
> Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
> 
> 
> P.S. any UK songwriter wannabes should make an effort to listen to
> BBC-R2. Last night, for instance, there was an excellent programme
> on the BUSINESS of the music biz - and where all the money goes in
> record deals.
> 
> As ever , it's the songwriter gets any cream.
> 

Chorus or bridge. You could get around the decision making by calling it 
the B part. Is the form of your instrumental break the same as the 
verses? What's the reprise? A repeat of the verse form?

-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

On 24 May, 08:50, Sean  wrote:

> Chorus or bridge. You could get around the decision making by calling it
> the B part. Is the form of your instrumental break the same as the
> verses? What's the reprise? A repeat of the verse form?
>
> --http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Bulstrode here.

What I've done is to re-jig it so that there's no
"chorus" as such but use a four-bar hook (the "reprise",
and variations of it) which I tack onto the end of
variations/developments of a theme.

bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> Bulstrode here.

> I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of

>     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise

> it's now
 >     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.

Strictly then, you haven't cut out a chorus.

In popular music terminology, a chorus is the word which describes one 
complete iteration of the melody - all sections of the melody.

In a 32-bar standard song, the structure of a chorus is AABA.

For instance, "The Lady Is A Tramp" structure (a classic AABA song), 
is that the chorus runs:

[A Section:]
She gets too hungry for dinner at eight
She loves the theatre and never comes late
She never bothers with people she hates
That's why the lady is a tramp

[A Section:]
Doesn't like crap games with barons and earls
Wont go to Harlem in ermine and pearls
Won't dish the dirt with the rest of the girls
That's why the lady is a tramp

[B Section ("middle eight"; "bridge")]
She loves the free, fresh, wind in her hair
Life without care
She's broke, but it's ok
She hates California - its cold and its damp
Thats why the lady is a tramp

[A Section:]
Doesnt like dice games, with sharpies and frauds
Wont go to harlem, in lincolns or fords
Wont dish the dirt, with the rest of those broads
Thats why the lady is a tramp

[NB: that last A section's lyrics don't look right to me]

> Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??

I hope the above helps.

In article <qtb5i.46368$g63.34441@edtnps82>, sean@fake.con says...
> bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > Bulstrode here.
> > 
> > I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
> > 
> >     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
> > 
> > it's now
> > 
> >     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
> > 
> > Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??

It won't change what the song is, so I say call it Bob.

-- 
Michael J. Anthony
Duckmares are coming
www.michaeljanthony.com

Michael J. Anthony wrote:
> In article <qtb5i.46368$g63.34441@edtnps82>, sean@fake.con says...
>> bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> Bulstrode here.
>>>
>>> I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>>>
>>>     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>>>
>>> it's now
>>>
>>>     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>>>
>>> Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
> 
> It won't change what the song is, so I say call it Bob.
> 

That could be confusing, because Bob is already the name of D7/F#.

-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

On 25 May, 20:43, Michael J. Anthony
 wrote:
> In article <qtb5i.46368$g63.34441@edtnps82>, s...@fake.con says...
>
> > bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > > Bulstrode here.
>
> > > I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>
> > >     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>
> > > it's now
>
> > >     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>
> > > Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
>
> It won't change what the song is, so I say call it Bob.
>
> --
> Michael J. Anthony
> Duckmares are comingwww.michaeljanthony.com

Bulstrode here.

Trouble is, I 've got to put something onto the lead sheet. Le mot
juste in just the right place can clinch anything.

On 25 May, 20:42, JNugent 
wrote:
> bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > Bulstrode here.
> > I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
> >     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
> > it's now
>
>  >     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>
> Strictly then, you haven't cut out a chorus.
>
> In popular music terminology, a chorus is the word which describes one
> complete iteration of the melody - all sections of the melody.
>
> In a 32-bar standard song, the structure of a chorus is AABA.
>
> For instance, "The Lady Is A Tramp" structure (a classic AABA song),
> is that the chorus runs:
>
> [A Section:]
> She gets too hungry for dinner at eight
> She loves the theatre and never comes late
> She never bothers with people she hates
> That's why the lady is a tramp
>
> [A Section:]
> Doesn't like crap games with barons and earls
> Wont go to Harlem in ermine and pearls
> Won't dish the dirt with the rest of the girls
> That's why the lady is a tramp
>
> [B Section ("middle eight"; "bridge")]
> She loves the free, fresh, wind in her hair
> Life without care
> She's broke, but it's ok
> She hates California - its cold and its damp
> Thats why the lady is a tramp
>
> [A Section:]
> Doesnt like dice games, with sharpies and frauds
> Wont go to harlem, in lincolns or fords
> Wont dish the dirt, with the rest of those broads
> Thats why the lady is a tramp
>
> [NB: that last A section's lyrics don't look right to me]
>
> > Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
>
> I hope the above helps.

Bulstrode here.

Certainly something I'd never thought of before.

Cheers.

On 23 May 2007 12:14:23 -0700, bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>Bulstrode here.
>
>I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>
>    verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>
>it's now
>
>    verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>
>Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
>
>
>P.S. any UK songwriter wannabes should make an effort to listen to
>BBC-R2. Last night, for instance, there was an excellent programme
>on the BUSINESS of the music biz - and where all the money goes in
>record deals.
>
>As ever , it's the songwriter gets any cream.

I'd be inclined to call it a bridge.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On Fri, 25 May 2007 20:42:19 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>> Bulstrode here.
>
>> I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>
>>     verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>
>> it's now
> >     verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>
>Strictly then, you haven't cut out a chorus.
>
>In popular music terminology, a chorus is the word which describes one 
>complete iteration of the melody - all sections of the melody.
>
>In a 32-bar standard song, the structure of a chorus is AABA.

This is incorrect, at least in terms of current usage.   In today's
usage, a chorus, which not all songs have, is a section, usually
containing the song title. that is repeated at regular intervals
throughout the song.   

And example of a chorus would be the part of the song that goes:

She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

from the Beatles' "She Loves You".

>For instance, "The Lady Is A Tramp" structure (a classic AABA song), 
>is that the chorus runs:
>
>[A Section:]
>She gets too hungry for dinner at eight
>She loves the theatre and never comes late
>She never bothers with people she hates
>That's why the lady is a tramp
>
>[A Section:]
>Doesn't like crap games with barons and earls
>Wont go to Harlem in ermine and pearls
>Won't dish the dirt with the rest of the girls
>That's why the lady is a tramp
>
>[B Section ("middle eight"; "bridge")]
>She loves the free, fresh, wind in her hair
>Life without care
>She's broke, but it's ok
>She hates California - its cold and its damp
>Thats why the lady is a tramp
>
>[A Section:]
>Doesnt like dice games, with sharpies and frauds
>Wont go to harlem, in lincolns or fords
>Wont dish the dirt, with the rest of those broads
>Thats why the lady is a tramp
>
>[NB: that last A section's lyrics don't look right to me]
>
>> Thing is, what to call the single "chorus". Bridge 1,? pre-bridge??
>
>I hope the above helps.

-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

Pepe Papon wrote:

> JNugent  wrote:
>>bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>Bulstrode here.

>>>I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>>>    verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>>>it's now
>>>    verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.

>>Strictly then, you haven't cut out a chorus.
>>In popular music terminology, a chorus is the word which describes one 
>>complete iteration of the melody - all sections of the melody.
>>In a 32-bar standard song, the structure of a chorus is AABA.

> This is incorrect, at least in terms of current usage.

If by "current usage" you mean usage by people who are not musicians, 
arrangers or composers, I have no comment to make on that beyond 
saying that I was talking about the terms that *knowledgeable* people 
use. Being one of those knowledgeable people, you know that what I 
wrote is correct. It doesn't matter what other people think a chorus is.

> In today's usage,

[by non-musicians, and so irrelevant to the issue]

> a chorus, which not all songs have, is a section, usually
> containing the song title. that is repeated at regular intervals
> throughout the song.

Irrelevant, I'm afraid.

> And example of a chorus would be the part of the song that goes:

> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
> 
> from the Beatles' "She Loves You".

Where is the "chorus within a chorus" in "Please Please Me"? Or "From 
Me To You"? Or "Twist And Shout"?

Pepe Papon wrote:

[ ... ]

> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...

What?

The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
called a "chorus".

Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.

On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:09:03 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Pepe Papon wrote:
>
>> JNugent  wrote:
>>>bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>Bulstrode here.
>
>>>>I just doctored a song by cutting out a chorus so that instead of
>>>>    verse/chorus (x2), bridge, instrumental break, reprise
>>>>it's now
>>>>    verse 1, verse 2, "chorus", instrumental break, reprise.
>
>>>Strictly then, you haven't cut out a chorus.
>>>In popular music terminology, a chorus is the word which describes one 
>>>complete iteration of the melody - all sections of the melody.
>>>In a 32-bar standard song, the structure of a chorus is AABA.
>
>> This is incorrect, at least in terms of current usage.
>
>If by "current usage" you mean usage by people who are not musicians, 
>arrangers or composers, I have no comment to make on that beyond 
>saying that I was talking about the terms that *knowledgeable* people 
>use. Being one of those knowledgeable people, you know that what I 
>wrote is correct. It doesn't matter what other people think a chorus is.

Again, I'm afraid this is incorrect.  I'm talking about the term as it
is used by songwriters, musicians, music publishers, producers, A&R
people, singers, and sheet music publishers.   I'm not sure which
"knowledgeable people" are excluded.

>> In today's usage,
>
>[by non-musicians, and so irrelevant to the issue]

Naturally, I'm talking about use by songwriters and musicians.
Otherwise, I wouldn't have bothered to post this here. 

>> a chorus, which not all songs have, is a section, usually
>> containing the song title. that is repeated at regular intervals
>> throughout the song.
>
>Irrelevant, I'm afraid.

On the contrary, it's the entire point.

>> And example of a chorus would be the part of the song that goes:
>
>> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
>> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah
>> She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
>> 
>> from the Beatles' "She Loves You".
>
>Where is the "chorus within a chorus" in "Please Please Me"? Or "From 
>Me To You"? Or "Twist And Shout"?

Those are examples of songs that do not have choruses.  As I said, not
all songs have them.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Pepe Papon wrote:
>
>[ ... ]
>
>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>
>What?
>
>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>called a "chorus".
>
>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.

What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
the word is used as I described in my previous post. 
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

Bulstrode here.

Got it: "post-chorus".

I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
the original
chorus and I already have a bridge.

Pepe Papon wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>
>>[ ... ]
>>
>>
>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>
>>What?
>>
>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>called a "chorus".
>>
>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
> 
> 
> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
> of the word "chorus".

I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).

In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.

> Perhaps the word is used differently in
> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
> the word is used as I described in my previous post.

In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
suggest.

Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".

Honest.

JNugent wrote:
> Pepe Papon wrote:

>> a chorus, which not all songs have, is a section, usually
>> containing the song title. that is repeated at regular intervals
>> throughout the song.
> 
> Irrelevant, I'm afraid.

I went to a seminar held by Jim Vallance. You may know of some of the 
songs he wrote or co-wrote. For example:

With Brian Adams: Cuts Like a Knife, Hearts on Fire, Heat of The Night, 
Heaven, Run to You, Somebody, and This Time: virtually all of Adams's hits.
Also: Aerosmith's Ragdoll and The Other Side.
Etc. etc.
I guess he knows how to write a pop song.

At the seminar, he said explicitly that the chorus should contain the 
title of the song. This isn't a definition of chorus, but just the 
thought of one of the most successful pop writers in history.

One of his rules of thumb was that someone should be able to hear the 
song once and know what the title of the song is. This usually happens 
when the title is in the chorus and the chorus has the 
melodic/harmonic/anthemic hook that stays in the listener's mind.

-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

JNugent wrote:
> Pepe Papon wrote:
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
> 
> What?
> 
> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is called 
> a "chorus".

Jazz players use it that way, as does Band in a Box. In pop songs it has 
another meaning.


> 
> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
> saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
> than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.

Not if you are using the word "chorus" to mean what pop, rock and 
country composers mean by it.


-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

Pepe Papon wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>  wrote:
> 
>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>> What?
>>
>> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>> called a "chorus".
>>
>> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>> saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>> than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
> 
> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
> of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
> the word is used as I described in my previous post. 

He's using it the way jazz players use it. In jazz, a "chorus" is once 
through the form of the tune. So a jazz player might say to one of the 
other players, "Solo for two choruses."
He's wrong, though, when he implies that pop writers use it that way. 
They don't. I'll bet money that Paul McCartney uses "chorus" to mean a 
part of the song that often involves other singers joining in with the 
main singer (hence "chorus"); it's a part of the song that is repeated 
at various times in the course of the song, often underlines the theme 
of the song, often contains the title, and often contains the main hook 
of the song.
I doubt that many of the people who post in this ng are jazz composers; 
they probably use "chorus" in the non-jazz sense. And they are quite 
right to do so.


-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

Sean wrote:
> Pepe Papon wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>
>>> What?
>>>
>>> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>> called a "chorus".
>>>
>>> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>> saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>> than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>
>>
>> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>> of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
>> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>> the word is used as I described in my previous post. 
> 
> 
> He's using it the way jazz players use it. In jazz, a "chorus" is once 
> through the form of the tune. So a jazz player might say to one of the 
> other players, "Solo for two choruses."
> He's wrong, though, when he implies that pop writers use it that way. 
> They don't. I'll bet money that Paul McCartney uses "chorus" to mean a 
> part of the song that often involves other singers joining in with the 
> main singer (hence "chorus"); it's a part of the song that is repeated 
> at various times in the course of the song, often underlines the theme 
> of the song, often contains the title, and often contains the main hook 
> of the song.
> I doubt that many of the people who post in this ng are jazz composers; 
> they probably use "chorus" in the non-jazz sense. And they are quite 
> right to do so.

IME, the bit you are referring to is called "the hook".

JNugent wrote:
> Sean wrote:
>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [ ... ]
>>>>
>>>>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>
>>>> What?
>>>>
>>>> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>> called a "chorus".
>>>>
>>>> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>> saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>> than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>
>>>
>>> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>> of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>> the word is used as I described in my previous post. 
>>
>>
>> He's using it the way jazz players use it. In jazz, a "chorus" is once 
>> through the form of the tune. So a jazz player might say to one of the 
>> other players, "Solo for two choruses."
>> He's wrong, though, when he implies that pop writers use it that way. 
>> They don't. I'll bet money that Paul McCartney uses "chorus" to mean a 
>> part of the song that often involves other singers joining in with the 
>> main singer (hence "chorus"); it's a part of the song that is repeated 
>> at various times in the course of the song, often underlines the theme 
>> of the song, often contains the title, and often contains the main 
>> hook of the song.
>> I doubt that many of the people who post in this ng are jazz 
>> composers; they probably use "chorus" in the non-jazz sense. And they 
>> are quite right to do so.
> 
> IME, the bit you are referring to is called "the hook".

Well, it's clear that you aren't the expert you think you are. The other 
possibility is that all the great pop, rock, and country songwriters are 
wrong and you are right.
The thing is, you are wrong, you know. You could persist in your 
ignorance out of pride, but what would be the benefit of that?

-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

Sean wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
> 
>> Sean wrote:
>>
>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ... ]
>>>>>
>>>>>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What?
>>>>>
>>>>> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>> called a "chorus".
>>>>>
>>>>> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. 
>>>>> But saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no 
>>>>> more than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>> of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>> the word is used as I described in my previous post. 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> He's using it the way jazz players use it. In jazz, a "chorus" is 
>>> once through the form of the tune. So a jazz player might say to one 
>>> of the other players, "Solo for two choruses."
>>> He's wrong, though, when he implies that pop writers use it that way. 
>>> They don't. I'll bet money that Paul McCartney uses "chorus" to mean 
>>> a part of the song that often involves other singers joining in with 
>>> the main singer (hence "chorus"); it's a part of the song that is 
>>> repeated at various times in the course of the song, often underlines 
>>> the theme of the song, often contains the title, and often contains 
>>> the main hook of the song.
>>> I doubt that many of the people who post in this ng are jazz 
>>> composers; they probably use "chorus" in the non-jazz sense. And they 
>>> are quite right to do so.
>>
>>
>> IME, the bit you are referring to is called "the hook".
> 
> 
> Well, it's clear that you aren't the expert you think you are. The other 
> possibility is that all the great pop, rock, and country songwriters are 
> wrong and you are right.
> The thing is, you are wrong, you know. You could persist in your 
> ignorance out of pride, but what would be the benefit of that?

When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used) 
by generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers, 
promoters and meeja people.

But thanks for your concern.

On 28 May, 13:42, JNugent 
wrote:

> When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used)
> by generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers,
> promoters and meeja people.
>
> But thanks for your concern.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Bulstrode here.

Two wrongs may not a make a right but enough will.

Like 'logging onto' websites. Techies will tell you this is 'wrong'
but that battle's long lost.

P.S. Subject of tonight's R2 prog The Record Producers is Clive
Langler
and Alan Winstanley. No, I haven't heard of them either but I will
have by the end of it. Others include Arif Martin,. Nile Rogers, Tiony
Visconti and Trevor Horn.

JNugent wrote:

> When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used) by 
> generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers, 
> promoters and meeja people.

Excellent. Then you'll be changing your opinion on this.

> 
> But thanks for your concern.

What is the "but" for?


-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

Sean wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
> 
>> When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used) 
>> by generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers, 
>> promoters and meeja people.
> 
> Excellent. Then you'll be changing your opinion on this.
> 
>>
>> But thanks for your concern.
> 
> What is the "but" for?
> 
> 


-- 
http://www.soundclick.com/seanholland

Sean wrote:

> JNugent wrote:

>> When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used) 
>> by generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers, 
>> promoters and meeja people.

> Excellent. Then you'll be changing your opinion on this.

I don't think so.

>> But thanks for your concern.

> What is the "but" for?

Eh?

On Sun, 27 May 2007 11:39:24 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Pepe Papon wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>
>>>[ ... ]
>>>
>>>
>>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>
>>>What?
>>>
>>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>called a "chorus".
>>>
>>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>> 
>> 
>> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>> of the word "chorus".
>
>I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
>sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
>("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).
>
>In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
>the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
>to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
>joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.
>
>> Perhaps the word is used differently in
>> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>> the word is used as I described in my previous post.
>
>In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
>suggest.
>
>Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
>the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
>joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".
>
>Honest.

Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter.  You seem to be talking
about something that's unique to the world of jazz.   The problem is,
you're stating your definition of "chorus" as if it applies to all
forms of music.  It doesn't.

I have been professionally involved in the music industry as a
songwriter for over 15 years, and I have never once heard the word
"chorus" used in any way other than the way I have described it in
this thread.    I'd say that, for the purposes of a newsgroup called
rec.music.makers.songwriting, this would be as close to a standard
definition as there can possibly be.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On Mon, 28 May 2007 13:42:06 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Sean wrote:
>> JNugent wrote:
>> 
>>> Sean wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ... ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>>> called a "chorus".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. 
>>>>>> But saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no 
>>>>>> more than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>>> of the word "chorus".   Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>>> different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>>> from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>>> the word is used as I described in my previous post. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He's using it the way jazz players use it. In jazz, a "chorus" is 
>>>> once through the form of the tune. So a jazz player might say to one 
>>>> of the other players, "Solo for two choruses."
>>>> He's wrong, though, when he implies that pop writers use it that way. 
>>>> They don't. I'll bet money that Paul McCartney uses "chorus" to mean 
>>>> a part of the song that often involves other singers joining in with 
>>>> the main singer (hence "chorus"); it's a part of the song that is 
>>>> repeated at various times in the course of the song, often underlines 
>>>> the theme of the song, often contains the title, and often contains 
>>>> the main hook of the song.
>>>> I doubt that many of the people who post in this ng are jazz 
>>>> composers; they probably use "chorus" in the non-jazz sense. And they 
>>>> are quite right to do so.
>>>
>>>
>>> IME, the bit you are referring to is called "the hook".
>> 
>> 
>> Well, it's clear that you aren't the expert you think you are. The other 
>> possibility is that all the great pop, rock, and country songwriters are 
>> wrong and you are right.
>> The thing is, you are wrong, you know. You could persist in your 
>> ignorance out of pride, but what would be the benefit of that?
>
>When discussing music, I prefer the terminology used (and still used) 
>by generation of musicians rather than that used by record producers, 
>promoters and meeja people.

I would think that songwriters would be the ultimate experts on song
structure.   In the world of songwriting, you are incorrect.

And for the record, all the musicians I know and every studio musician
I've ever hired use the word "chorus" the same way I do.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On 27 May 2007 00:59:19 -0700, bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>Bulstrode here.
>
>Got it: "post-chorus".
>
>I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
>the original
>chorus and I already have a bridge.

If you use the term, "post-chorus", nobody in the world of songwriting
of the music industry will know what you're trying to say.    If it's
a section that is placed at the very end of a song, the standard term
for it is a "tag".
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

Pepe Papon wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 11:39:24 +0100, JNugent
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>[ ... ]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>
>>>>What?
>>>>
>>>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>called a "chorus".
>>>>
>>>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>
>>>
>>>What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>of the word "chorus".
>>
>>I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
>>sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
>>("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).
>>
>>In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
>>the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
>>to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
>>joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.
>>
>>
>>>Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>the word is used as I described in my previous post.
>>
>>In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
>>suggest.
>>
>>Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
>>the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
>>joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".
>>
>>Honest.

> Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter.  You seem to be talking
> about something that's unique to the world of jazz.   The problem is,
> you're stating your definition of "chorus" as if it applies to all
> forms of music.  It doesn't.

> I have been professionally involved in the music industry as a
> songwriter for over 15 years, and I have never once heard the word
> "chorus" used in any way other than the way I have described it in
> this thread.    I'd say that, for the purposes of a newsgroup called
> rec.music.makers.songwriting, this would be as close to a standard
> definition as there can possibly be.

I'm sorry, but we're going to gave to differ on this.

The terms "verse" and "chorus" - as used in jazz - come directly from 
the Tin Pan Alley world of the Broadway show-tune and are NOT unique 
to jazz.

The musical comedy (and operetta) convention is that an introduction 
to a show song (almost always a completely different melody, often in 
a different key and with a different tempo and different general 
emotional setting) is called the "verse" and the main song (AABA) is 
called the "chorus".

Of course, as we all know, when the songs are removed from their 
original context (eg, for a cabaret or concert performance, or for a 
separate recording), the verse is often omitted - so much so that many 
people who are quite au fait with a range of standard show-songs often 
don't recognise the composition just from hearing the verse and only 
recognise it at the start of the first chorus.

Check out original scores for almost anything by Rodgers and Hart, or 
Jerome Kern, Cole Porter, the Gershwins, etc. It's all there on the 
sheet music.

The example I gave earlier was Rodgers and Hart's "The Lady Is A 
Tramp". I gave the lyrics for a complete chorus. The lyrics for the 
verse of that song (as I expect you know) begin:

"I've wined and dined on Mulligan Stew and never wished for turkey...".

Despite anything found to the contrary in the Cecil Sharpe 
collections, I am happy to note and observe the conventions of the 
Gershwins, Rodgers, Harts, Kern and Porters of this world (and their 
publishers, transcribers and arrangers), as well as to note how that 
was adopted as standard practice in the jazz world (though it did not 
start there by any means).

On 29 May, 02:03, Pepe Papon <a...@mindspring.invalid> wrote:

> On 27 May 2007 00:59:19 -0700, bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> >Bulstrode here.
>
> >Got it: "post-chorus".
>
> >I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
> >the original
> >chorus and I already have a bridge.
>
> If you use the term, "post-chorus", nobody in the world of songwriting
> of the music industry will know what you're trying to say.    If it's
> a section that is placed at the very end of a song, the standard term
> for it is a "tag".
> --
>
>        ~ Seth Jackson
>
> MySpace URL -http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
> Songwriting and Music Business Info:http://www.sethjackson.net

Bulstrode  here.

The song structure is now

verse 1, chorus 1, verse 2, chorus 2, post-chorus, bridge,
instrumental,
reprise.

The "tag" is at the end of each chorus, which gets developed at the
end of
chorus 2 into the "post-chorus".

Remember, the world had to be dragged kicking and scheming into its
first "pre-chorus", whatever that is!

On Tue, 29 May 2007 12:31:45 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Pepe Papon wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 11:39:24 +0100, JNugent
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>[ ... ]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>>
>>>>>What?
>>>>>
>>>>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>>called a "chorus".
>>>>>
>>>>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>>of the word "chorus".
>>>
>>>I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
>>>sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
>>>("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).
>>>
>>>In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
>>>the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
>>>to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
>>>joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>>different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>>from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>>the word is used as I described in my previous post.
>>>
>>>In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
>>>suggest.
>>>
>>>Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
>>>the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
>>>joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".
>>>
>>>Honest.
>
>> Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter.  You seem to be talking
>> about something that's unique to the world of jazz.   The problem is,
>> you're stating your definition of "chorus" as if it applies to all
>> forms of music.  It doesn't.
>
>> I have been professionally involved in the music industry as a
>> songwriter for over 15 years, and I have never once heard the word
>> "chorus" used in any way other than the way I have described it in
>> this thread.    I'd say that, for the purposes of a newsgroup called
>> rec.music.makers.songwriting, this would be as close to a standard
>> definition as there can possibly be.
>
>I'm sorry, but we're going to gave to differ on this.
>
>The terms "verse" and "chorus" - as used in jazz - come directly from 
>the Tin Pan Alley world of the Broadway show-tune and are NOT unique 
>to jazz.
>
>The musical comedy (and operetta) convention is that an introduction 
>to a show song (almost always a completely different melody, often in 
>a different key and with a different tempo and different general 
>emotional setting) is called the "verse" and the main song (AABA) is 
>called the "chorus".
>
>Of course, as we all know, when the songs are removed from their 
>original context (eg, for a cabaret or concert performance, or for a 
>separate recording), the verse is often omitted - so much so that many 
>people who are quite au fait with a range of standard show-songs often 
>don't recognise the composition just from hearing the verse and only 
>recognise it at the start of the first chorus.
>
>Check out original scores for almost anything by Rodgers and Hart, or 
>Jerome Kern, Cole Porter, the Gershwins, etc. It's all there on the 
>sheet music.
>
>The example I gave earlier was Rodgers and Hart's "The Lady Is A 
>Tramp". I gave the lyrics for a complete chorus. The lyrics for the 
>verse of that song (as I expect you know) begin:
>
>"I've wined and dined on Mulligan Stew and never wished for turkey...".
>
>Despite anything found to the contrary in the Cecil Sharpe 
>collections, I am happy to note and observe the conventions of the 
>Gershwins, Rodgers, Harts, Kern and Porters of this world (and their 
>publishers, transcribers and arrangers), as well as to note how that 
>was adopted as standard practice in the jazz world (though it did not 
>start there by any means).

In my other posts, I specifically pointed out that I'm referring to
contemporary usage of the word "chorus".   Tin Pan Alley writers used
the word as you describe, but they hardly qualify as contemporary.
In today's songwriting lingo, the word "chorus" is universally
understood to mean a section of a song that appears at regular
intervals throughout the song and contains the "hook", which is
usually the title of the song.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On 29 May 2007 12:02:05 -0700, bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>On 29 May, 02:03, Pepe Papon <a...@mindspring.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 27 May 2007 00:59:19 -0700, bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>
>> >Bulstrode here.
>>
>> >Got it: "post-chorus".
>>
>> >I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
>> >the original
>> >chorus and I already have a bridge.
>>
>> If you use the term, "post-chorus", nobody in the world of songwriting
>> of the music industry will know what you're trying to say.    If it's
>> a section that is placed at the very end of a song, the standard term
>> for it is a "tag".
>> --
>>
>>        ~ Seth Jackson
>>
>> MySpace URL -http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
>> Songwriting and Music Business Info:http://www.sethjackson.net
>
>Bulstrode  here.
>
>The song structure is now
>
>verse 1, chorus 1, verse 2, chorus 2, post-chorus, bridge,
>instrumental,
>reprise.
>
>The "tag" is at the end of each chorus, which gets developed at the
>end of
>chorus 2 into the "post-chorus".
>
>Remember, the world had to be dragged kicking and scheming into its
>first "pre-chorus", whatever that is!

I don't recall any kicking and screaming about pre-choruses, although
I do know that there are many different names commonly used to
describe that particular section of a song.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

Pepe Papon wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 11:39:24 +0100, JNugent
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>[ ... ]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>
>>>>What?
>>>>
>>>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>called a "chorus".
>>>>
>>>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>
>>>
>>>What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>of the word "chorus".
>>
>>I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
>>sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
>>("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).
>>
>>In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
>>the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
>>to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
>>joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.
>>
>>
>>>Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>the word is used as I described in my previous post.
>>
>>In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
>>suggest.
>>
>>Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
>>the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
>>joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".
>>
>>Honest.

> Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter.  You seem to be talking
> about something that's unique to the world of jazz.   The problem is,
> you're stating your definition of "chorus" as if it applies to all
> forms of music.  It doesn't.

> I have been professionally involved in the music industry as a
> songwriter for over 15 years, and I have never once heard the word
> "chorus" used in any way other than the way I have described it in
> this thread.    I'd say that, for the purposes of a newsgroup called
> rec.music.makers.songwriting, this would be as close to a standard
> definition as there can possibly be.

I'm sorry, but we're going to gave to differ on this.

The terms "verse" and "chorus" - as used in jazz - come directly from 
the Tin Pan Alley world of the Broadway show-tune and are NOT unique 
to jazz.

The musical comedy (and operetta) convention is that an introduction 
to a show song (almost always a completely different melody, often in 
a different key and with a different tempo and different general 
emotional setting) is called the "verse" and the main song (AABA) is 
called the "chorus".

Of course, as we all know, when the songs are removed from their 
original context (eg, for a cabaret or concert performance, or for a 
separate recording), the verse is often omitted - so much so that many 
people who are quite au fait with a range of standard show-songs often 
don't recognise the composition just from hearing the verse and only 
recognise it at the start of the first chorus.

Check out original scores for almost anything by Rodgers and Hart, or 
Jerome Kern, Cole Porter, the Gershwins, etc. It's all there on the 
sheet music.

The example I gave earlier was Rodgers and Hart's "The Lady Is A 
Tramp". I gave the lyrics for a complete chorus. The lyrics for the 
verse of that song (as I expect you know) begin:

"I've wined and dined on Mulligan Stew and never wished for turkey...".

Despite anything found to the contrary in the Cecil Sharpe 
collections, I am happy to note and observe the conventions of the 
Gershwins, Rodgers, Harts, Kern and Porters of this world (and their 
publishers, transcribers and arrangers), as well as to note how that 
was adopted as standard practice in the jazz world (though it did not 
start there by any means).

On 29 May, 02:03, Pepe Papon <a...@mindspring.invalid> wrote:

> On 27 May 2007 00:59:19 -0700, bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> >Bulstrode here.
>
> >Got it: "post-chorus".
>
> >I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
> >the original
> >chorus and I already have a bridge.
>
> If you use the term, "post-chorus", nobody in the world of songwriting
> of the music industry will know what you're trying to say.    If it's
> a section that is placed at the very end of a song, the standard term
> for it is a "tag".
> --
>
>        ~ Seth Jackson
>
> MySpace URL -http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
> Songwriting and Music Business Info:http://www.sethjackson.net

Bulstrode  here.

The song structure is now

verse 1, chorus 1, verse 2, chorus 2, post-chorus, bridge,
instrumental,
reprise.

The "tag" is at the end of each chorus, which gets developed at the
end of
chorus 2 into the "post-chorus".

Remember, the world had to be dragged kicking and scheming into its
first "pre-chorus", whatever that is!

On Tue, 29 May 2007 12:31:45 +0100, JNugent
 wrote:

>Pepe Papon wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 11:39:24 +0100, JNugent
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 27 May 2007 02:12:57 +0100, JNugent
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Pepe Papon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>[ ... ]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In today's usage, a chorus, which not all songs have...
>>>>>
>>>>>What?
>>>>>
>>>>>The once-through structure of a song (or even an instrumental) is 
>>>>>called a "chorus".
>>>>>
>>>>>Classical music and (maybe) freeform jazz would be an exception. But 
>>>>>saying that some songs don't have a chorus (when a chorus is no more 
>>>>>than the entire melodic theme statement) is puzzling.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What's puzzling to me is why you're not familiar with the standard use
>>>>of the word "chorus".
>>>
>>>I am familiar with it in the context of the sort of songs we used to 
>>>sing at school, where the terms "verse" and "chorus" were used 
>>>("chorus" being the bit where everyone joined in - logically).
>>>
>>>In the world of professional music-making, it's different. A chorus is 
>>>the complete iteration of the entire melodic theme of a song. Nothing 
>>>to do with singing the words used in the title or with everyone 
>>>joining in. It even applies to instrumentals.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Perhaps the word is used differently in
>>>>different parts of the world.   I don't know where you're posting
>>>>from, but here in the US and also in Canada, the UK, and Australia,
>>>>the word is used as I described in my previous post.
>>>
>>>In the USA, as in those other places, the term "chorus" is used as I 
>>>suggest.
>>>
>>>Talk to a few American jazz musicians as to what they understand by 
>>>the term "chorus". They won't tell you it's the bit where everyone 
>>>joins in for a bit of "green Grow The Rushes-O".
>>>
>>>Honest.
>
>> Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter.  You seem to be talking
>> about something that's unique to the world of jazz.   The problem is,
>> you're stating your definition of "chorus" as if it applies to all
>> forms of music.  It doesn't.
>
>> I have been professionally involved in the music industry as a
>> songwriter for over 15 years, and I have never once heard the word
>> "chorus" used in any way other than the way I have described it in
>> this thread.    I'd say that, for the purposes of a newsgroup called
>> rec.music.makers.songwriting, this would be as close to a standard
>> definition as there can possibly be.
>
>I'm sorry, but we're going to gave to differ on this.
>
>The terms "verse" and "chorus" - as used in jazz - come directly from 
>the Tin Pan Alley world of the Broadway show-tune and are NOT unique 
>to jazz.
>
>The musical comedy (and operetta) convention is that an introduction 
>to a show song (almost always a completely different melody, often in 
>a different key and with a different tempo and different general 
>emotional setting) is called the "verse" and the main song (AABA) is 
>called the "chorus".
>
>Of course, as we all know, when the songs are removed from their 
>original context (eg, for a cabaret or concert performance, or for a 
>separate recording), the verse is often omitted - so much so that many 
>people who are quite au fait with a range of standard show-songs often 
>don't recognise the composition just from hearing the verse and only 
>recognise it at the start of the first chorus.
>
>Check out original scores for almost anything by Rodgers and Hart, or 
>Jerome Kern, Cole Porter, the Gershwins, etc. It's all there on the 
>sheet music.
>
>The example I gave earlier was Rodgers and Hart's "The Lady Is A 
>Tramp". I gave the lyrics for a complete chorus. The lyrics for the 
>verse of that song (as I expect you know) begin:
>
>"I've wined and dined on Mulligan Stew and never wished for turkey...".
>
>Despite anything found to the contrary in the Cecil Sharpe 
>collections, I am happy to note and observe the conventions of the 
>Gershwins, Rodgers, Harts, Kern and Porters of this world (and their 
>publishers, transcribers and arrangers), as well as to note how that 
>was adopted as standard practice in the jazz world (though it did not 
>start there by any means).

In my other posts, I specifically pointed out that I'm referring to
contemporary usage of the word "chorus".   Tin Pan Alley writers used
the word as you describe, but they hardly qualify as contemporary.
In today's songwriting lingo, the word "chorus" is universally
understood to mean a section of a song that appears at regular
intervals throughout the song and contains the "hook", which is
usually the title of the song.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net

On 29 May 2007 12:02:05 -0700, bulstrode_arblaster@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

>On 29 May, 02:03, Pepe Papon <a...@mindspring.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 27 May 2007 00:59:19 -0700, bulstrode_arblas...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>
>> >Bulstrode here.
>>
>> >Got it: "post-chorus".
>>
>> >I'd forgotten that the latter 8 bars of the two "verses" are actually
>> >the original
>> >chorus and I already have a bridge.
>>
>> If you use the term, "post-chorus", nobody in the world of songwriting
>> of the music industry will know what you're trying to say.    If it's
>> a section that is placed at the very end of a song, the standard term
>> for it is a "tag".
>> --
>>
>>        ~ Seth Jackson
>>
>> MySpace URL -http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
>> Songwriting and Music Business Info:http://www.sethjackson.net
>
>Bulstrode  here.
>
>The song structure is now
>
>verse 1, chorus 1, verse 2, chorus 2, post-chorus, bridge,
>instrumental,
>reprise.
>
>The "tag" is at the end of each chorus, which gets developed at the
>end of
>chorus 2 into the "post-chorus".
>
>Remember, the world had to be dragged kicking and scheming into its
>first "pre-chorus", whatever that is!

I don't recall any kicking and screaming about pre-choruses, although
I do know that there are many different names commonly used to
describe that particular section of a song.
-- 

       ~ Seth Jackson

MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong 
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net