C&L's Late Nite Music Club with Janet Jackson
By MaxMarginal Friday Apr 24, 2009 7:00pmI once heard someone say that Janet Jackson was a guilty pleasure. If I ever have to feel guilty about liking this song, someone smack me in the face and tell me to get it together, because this song slays.
Rhythm Nation 1814 was a hugely successful album about social injustice that A&M Records didn't want Janet Jackson to make. She and her production/writing team of Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis knew better -- the album has sold over 12 million copies and consistently makes lists of the Top 100 albums of all time. The title track is without a doubt the heaviest hit of 1989, and it never once got a spin on Headbangers Ball.
Particularly unique about this song is the fact that it's just one chord (E). There's not a single chord change in this song, which makes its wealth of emotion and energy particularly stunning. The only other one-chorders I can think of are Eddy Grant's "Electric Avenue," Placebo's "Pure Morning," Beck's "Loser," and "Love You To" by the Beatles. Speak up, musos! What am I missing?
Login or Register to post comments.
I was hoping for a wardrobe malfunction!
I like your choice o'tunes, Max!
The dancing was what always made this one so great.
In fact that's why I love all of J squared's videos.
Girlfriend could MOVE. oKAY ?
She's amazing.
Since switching to their own player none of the embedded vids stream properly for me. They stream for 15 secs, then stop for 5, then stream, then stop. It's really annoying. I don't have this issue at any other site. If I click thru (i.e. to youtube) they stream perfectly. Anyone else have this problem here??
for which I am thankful.
If the video allows you to download, then that's the only way I can stream them uninterrupted from this site.
As to the JJ video, that's one of the breast...er, I mean BEST vids I've seen of hers.
I had the same problem, but only with IE
I experience the exact same thing. Now I don't even bother with the posted vid; I just click straight through to U-Toob.
Think I would have been a little shocked to see this play after Slayer or Sepultura on Headbanger's Ball.
Living LaVida Loca
(and listen to) Ricky Martin any day!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HnwX3xMfEs&fe...
the other night... it was something...
it has that whole "she'll make you take your clothes off" pre-chorus.
ZZ Top - La Grange
My favorite one-chorder is my favorite simply because of its ironic title: "Them Changes," which consisted entirely of one chord and one unchorded unison riff.
Quickly followed by "Spanish Moon" by Little Feat and a couple of Bob Marley tunes. La Grange definitely has a chord change.
Chain, chain, chain
and who remembered the exquisite dancing. and watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEoIC_hRfUM
Now that was sweet.
She looks more like Michael than Michael.
You never see Michael Jackson and Latoya Jackson in the same room together. I have a hutch they're the same person.
there are two words to the correct answer to the one-chord-song question, and they are: smokestack lightnin'
Reincidentes.
don't ask me about chords.
:)
Cuba Libre.
Me, I like this woman more. Not that I don't like JJ.
I just like this stuff more.
Hasta luego.
Sweet dreams to you.
Some of Bo Diddley's songs are one chord, including his signature "Bo Diddley".
I think Bob Dylan's "Ballad of Hollis Brown" is one chord if I remember correctly.
I love's me some Jam & Lewis. Pre-Janet jam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8luxaT0JRs
JUMP INTO THE FIRE -- by harry nilsson... and the detuned bass at the end still sounds too cool for school
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7wq81sFQwo
"Tomorrow Never Knows" by The Beatles is mostly one chord.
I understand that it's fashionably cool to slam Micheal Jackson as a washed up freak, but the list of artists who basically plagiarized his show is amazing. Janet, Madonna(especially her early days), Usher, Timberlake, etc. The list could go on and on.
When I see this video again, all I can think of is could this had been made without the idea of the book "1984"? Or the movie "Metropolis"? Both influenced this video a lot. It really makes me wonder if this video would have been possible without them.
I thought I was the only one who secretly listens to Rhythm Nation in between my usual NIN and Ministry.
I feel like the thing that's best about all three of those is the same element.
Sade - Sweetest Taboo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwuUuvZ4dAo&fe...
Yummy goodness.
Smooth Operator
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efdfGeUKXuU
And this one!
Sade - Never As Good As The First Time
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCihQPnma64
Thanx ... gna.
Heavy? You actually refer to this as "heavy". Pass the pipe, please.
During the chorus, the bass line stays on E, but there is a repeating chord change over it: D, A, E.
Secondary and plagal cadence with a pedal. Except there is never a dominant, never a D# to establish an E major.
ah, you had to get all technical on us, didn't you? ;)
in E mixolydian, a fairly common key for rock. Mixolydian avoids the leading tone present in major, hence the D natural.
(This was meant as a reply to Alice X.)
'Mixolydian' is the MODE of the major keys dominant. It is not a 'key', ie tonality, but it is a sonority.
If you must say E mixolydian, in standard harmony, you are saying the key of A major.
You can call the key 'E major' but in western harmony the the Dominant is required to establish a Tonic.
Rock types never learned (thoroughly, if at all) the Dominant Tonic relationships that held sway in European art music from the time of Rameau to Schoenberg and still is in play in formal composition.
That doesn't change what this piece is or whether I like it.
The tune is entitled 'Rhythm Nation' for good reason, they will not be worried that technically they have never established a tonality.
a mode, which can be thought of as the key of E with a key signature of A Major, or, more simply, as E Major with a lowered seventh degree, or "subtonic," rather than a leading tone. I hope I didn't imply that this was in E Major. The tonic in Major and two of the three traditional forms of minor is established by the tritone between degrees four and seven; in the other modes it is made clear to the ear by the cadences used. I'm not a "rock type;" I'm a classical composer, but thanks for the history lesson.
one of my favourite modes. I am extremely fond of the Aeolian mode as well.
It's been a secret I've kept since I learned about modes. I am a dorky geek, too.
a very cool sound. I remember as a kid, before learning any theory, noticing the sound of the lowered seventh in many jazz and rock tunes, and liking it. I of course didn't know what I was hearing; only that I liked it. BTW, Aeolian is also called "natural minor." If you play around with the seventh degree, you can arrive at harmonic minor and melodic minor, the two forms which are normally used in traditional classical music. (Raise the 7th by a half step to create harmonic minor; raise the 7th, but only when the melody is ascending, to create melodic minor.)
This is all strictly interpretation, but I really think the whole thing is just an E7, and while there's no A in that chord and it sneaks in in the chorus (thus making an E11) it is for all intents and purposes one chord. We are dorks.
in the D chord. Admittedly, since this progression takes place over an E pedal, it could be classified as an E11, but my ear definitely hears a three chord progression in the chorus, especially as the A resolves to the G sharp. Generally when a D chord appears over an E, it functions as a dominant 11th, but in the context used here it's more of a mixolydian chord progression of VII, IV, I over the pedal E. I guess I'll agree with you that it's a matter of interpretation, and that we are dorks.
MDave said it was three chords D A E over a pedal E.
I agreed, two successive plagal cadences. The actual major tonality, only in terms of spelling, is more likely D, with the G# as an accidental. Rather than the D as an accidental. That is only a matter of opinion.
The entire twentieth century, it is argued, was spent running away from the Dominant Tonic relationship. Of course much of the running was done in place, if you follow me.
Hence the apparent modernity of the sound of the plagal cadence which 'serious' composers used extensively, if not always in the most serious settings.
Leonard Bernstein in West Side Story is one that comes to immediate mind.
To be more than a little circumspect, Chuck Berry is another.
Earlier was the invention of the augmented ninth chord. Gershwin in Rhapsody, although I can't say he invented it. It was actually probably Franz Liszt.
Also the 13b9, both extend the harmony and obscure the Dominant-Tonic.
The variation between the augmented 6th chord, which jazz types insist they never use, they do, they just misspell it and the so called 'altered dominant'. The 'altered dominant' which resolving to C is typically spelled G Ab Bb Cb Db Eb F. This in a mistaken attempt, IMO, to remain diatonic when it could better spelled chromatically. Spelled from Db it looks like a major's dominant with a raised fourth. Some people use the term 'lydian dominant' which I consider silly by definition. It is better spelled as an augmented 6th with chromatics. Db Eb F G Ab (A#) B C. At least it is recognizable as a Dominant (G7).
Organization and consistency are useful, but everyone who doesn't know the wheel wants to reinvent one. Talking about modalities is a throw back to a time before 'modern tonality'. It is one vein in the attempt to no longer sound like Beethoven, as perhaps the finest example. That attempt was already under way by Franz Schubert and Beethoven was still very much alive.
In advanced musical thinking modalities can be brief and change rapidly. If the idea is to establish and maintain a tonality they provide color. If the idea is to avoid establishing a tonality they can provide cover.
Study Arnold Schoenberg's 'Structural Functions of Harmony'. He was a towering thinker in musical analytical theory.
Too bad for his artistry that he analyzed his own work. It never recovered.
I would prefer if I could to completely abandon the concern for tonality.
My favorite of the twentieth century is Krzysztof Penderecki. In the 50s and 60s he wrote 21st century music but then in the 70s retreated back to where the 20th century had left off.
Here is the goddess of the violin Anne Sophie Mutter with his second violin concerto.
Watch how she completely disses the Concert Master by plopping her cloth on his stand over his music which he liberates with his bow tip. He proceeds to make a spectacle of himself. Oh well, human nature.
She plays divinely, if the violin were my first instrument I would feel worthless.
I'm still working on the first one, it is less conservative.
chord spelling is less important than chord function. In your example of the altered dominant in C, which jazzers write as "G alt," the dominant seventh tendency created by the B-F tritone remains, regardless of what changes are made to the fifth or the ninth. In the common jazz progression known as the "tritone substitution," the tritone resolves in the opposite direction, cadencing a tritone away from the original. (The G7 can resolve to either a C or an F# triad, depending on whether the B-F resolves to C-E or Bb-Gb.)
Non-dominant chords with added or altered tones have been around for centuries, but evolved from melodic resolution of dissonances. You will find Major seventh chords as far back as Bach, but they developed and resolved linearly, as part of the counterpoint. (That same Major seventh chord, which was considered quite dissonant 300 yrs ago, makes a perfectly acceptable ending chord to our ears today.)
You lost me on the point of the key signature in this little Janet Jackson piece. After you correctly compared E mixolydian to A Major, you now suggest a key signature with 2 sharps, rather than 3. I have been known to use 4 sharps in a situation like this, to let the performers know that the key center is E, and then cancel all the D#'s with accidentals. But I can't see any reason for G# accidentals. Perhaps I misunderstood.
At the risk of sounding ridiculous, after all this analysis, one of the things I admire about jazzers is their propensity to forgo analysis and just play. They know their axe, and they know what works, and they let it fly. (For any aspiring jazzers who may be reading this, please don't try "letting it fly" until you've mastered the "knowing your axe" step.) It's the musical equivalent of one of Yogi Berra's famous lines. When asked what he thought about while in the batter's box, he said, "What do you want me to do, think or hit?"
It depends.
If you are looking at chord symbols the function can be understood even when the spelling is at odds with the facts. This might not be the case if you are reading notation.
Hence the structural functions of harmony as cited by Schoenberg which is an exhaustive study on precisely this.
There is a great carelessness in writing chord analysis, which is to say chord symbols.
If I write a B double flat six nine chord, for instance, resolving to an Ab six nine (or whatever) I will spell it correctly. Bbb Db Fb Gb Cb.
If I write the chord symbol I might just write an A (6 9). That doesn't make the A correct, it is a matter of utility.
Letting it fly is a matter of flipping these enharmonics are will.
The ability can come from playing any spelling that comes to mind, even wrong ones. Or it can come from exhaustive study.
This is paramount in improvising, you are concerned with the sound. I do it all the time. I study to G double flat and F double sharp as a matter of flipping enharmonics.
It is useful in writing shorthand but many bad habits prevail in the real world.
You can still be a jazzista (I am, but I also play the classical repertoire) and refine your thinking, which is say analyze.
It is far more important in writing long form, where more care needs to be taken in spelling. The first order of business is to make it readable.
As Hindemith says (another great in theoretical writings, see his Elementary Training for Musicians, far from purely elementary) sometimes in complex situations the proper spelling is difficult to determine.
---
On the piano the sound of B-F and Cb-F are the same.
In jazz theory the Db7+11 which is the same as G7 alt resolves to C. It could resolve to Gb which is a second question. That is an interesting progression as it reverses the function.
The first question is does B-F equal Cb-F. On the piano yes but not on the violin.
The tritone has one form, in resolving to C it is B and F.
You are correct to suggest the tritone is the heart of the matter. The leading tone wants to resolve up, the seventh wants to resolve down.
The revisionists want to say that Cb and F is an 'tritone equivalent' or as you say a 'tritone substitution'. I was in that school for many years but I am out now.
As far as spelling doctrine goes.
My contention is that the leading tone is the central element.
Spelling it enharmonically can be convenient, or expedient but mostly not correct.
If you reverse the function and resolve to Gb then the reverse is true.
When it comes to improvising I flip the enharmonics at will.
My point from traditional harmony which the jazz players skipped is that the Db7+11 is really a Db aug6 +11, but the die is cast and you will never get anywhere writing that chord symbol.
We have been writing things differently than they are played since very early. In Couperin's time the single dotted eight was played as a double dot.
---
As for the 2, 3 or 4 sharps. You would be understood more clearly to write four sharps but as a matter of function, two sharps is the prevalent condition.
D major (it could have a C# - hence 2 sharps)
A7 (2 sharps)
E minor (2 sharps, the modality fans would call it dorian) with blue notes to a G#.
The G# is an accidental, it is a blue note. You might not write the key that way but that is the function.
This comes from Blues Guitar and it is done all the time.
To return to your thesis that spelling is less important than function.
The E functions as a tonic. In the blues the third is the mystery note. It is blue all over the place.
Piano players cannot appreciate this but guitar players and others know it instantly.
This has precedence. In the German Baroque the practice was to write the key signature as the key of the dominant. In C you would have an F# in the signature but cancel it with a natural.
Most modern texts correct this but you still find some publishers who do not. By definition urtext should not correct this.
PRACTICAL theory as it is used today. I began by saying "to jazz musicians, chord spelling is less important than chord function." I stand by that. The strict rules of harmony you are quoting aren't in general use for most ensemble musicians today, although accomplished string players use fine differences in finger position to create a very slight difference between the G# in the Key of A, for example, and the Ab in the key of Eb. One tends up, the other down. The difference you discuss between B natural and C flat is just not that consequential to the guy comping piano chords under a sax solo. I am talking about practical application in an ensemble which contains one or more instruments with fixed, tempered pitch. Ancient marimbas had separate keys for C# and Db; we don't use that system anymore. In today's world, and especially in jazz, which is what I was talking about, any chord of a 9th or greater assumes a 7th, and you may call it an aug 6th if you like, but you will leave a lot of today's players scratching their heads if you do.
And you may have inferred that I'm a pianist, but I am a drummer.
I didn't infer anything, you said:
And a drummer, that's good. Some of my best friends are drummers or percussionists as the case may be.
Most composers are pianists to one degree or another. Belioz however, of course, was a flautist and guitarist. He suffered somewhat at the hands of his critics for not playing the piano, at least in academia which is not a bad place to avoid if you are to be renowned in history. Some of his music succeeds brilliantly.
I am a guitarist and violinist but not much of a composer. I had a forty year start and stop stint with the piano that was mostly unproductive.
I had a period of writing quite a few jazz tunes that in the end I decided sounded too much like Wayne Shorter.
I also had a period of writing industrial film scores that were probably too good for their purpose but not entirely what I wanted for my own purpose.
I play most of the violin repertoire though I am first a guitarist. Lately I have been for the first time playing jazz on the violin which uses a different part of the brain, previously only dedicated to the guitar.
It is perhaps good to think of yourself as a classical composer before you die, the critics can be fickle and might well wait till sometime after one is gone to take notice. Classical per se after all is standing the test of time. If you are to be found serious you must start serious.
People rise and fall in history, Sphor, Mendelssohn, Milhaud come mind.
And of course there is Schubert who wrote and wrote and died too young.
If he had lived another five years music would be different today.
But we would still have Janet Jackson and the tune is what it is.
On the verse she is singing a G natural.
The chorus (the choir) sings a (albeit blue) G sharp.
Max asked what he was missing. We have filled in a few blanks.
Also a heavy 1989 hit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PaoLy7PHwk
One-chorders are very common in rap though.
HARRY NILSSON REMEMBER
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU1IMXe8EkI&fe...
One of my favs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQQmAP9Poo4
This song is a total ripoff of Sly and the
Family Stone.
Particularly unique about this song is the fact that it's just one chord (E). There's not a single chord change in this song, which makes its wealth of emotion and energy particularly stunning. The only other one-chorders I can think of are Eddy Grant's "Electric Avenue," Placebo's "Pure Morning," Beck's "Loser," and "Love You To" by the Beatles.
I would like to give you a chance to educate the musically illiterate:
1) What is the significance of a song being played in only one chord?
2) What is a chord change? It seems pretty important to writing pop music.
A chord is three or more different notes played or sung simultaneously, creating harmony. Melodies are then played or sung over these harmonies. When the notes of the harmony change during a song, it's called a chord change. The order in which the chords change is called the chord progression. There is no particular significance in the number of chords used in a song, other than adding more variation, and usually thus more interest, to the harmonies. Actually, this song uses more than one chord, as I've explained elsewhere in this thread.
Interesting, though I can't myself seem to pick out the lack of change. Presumably this is something happening behind the melody. From your description, it sounds something like the Creedence Clearwater version of Heard It Through the Grapevine, which gets my vote as one of the "Best Covers Ever," which was a discussion on Pandagon.
So, if you have several tunes played with no melody and only one chord, you get a Phillip Glass album? I keep Dancepieces around for purposes of self-hypnosis.
if you listen to the notes, lasting four beats each, just before "We are a part of the Rhythm Nation." It's hard to hear all the notes of the chords, but they're there.
A guy named John Cage wrote the ultimate minimalist piece; it uses no chords, and no notes. It's entitled "4 Minutes 33 Seconds," and features a pianist coming on stage and sitting at a piano, without playing, for, you guessed it, just over 4 1/2 minutes. He/she then gets up and exits the stage. This is absolutely true; you can Google it if you like. I wrote a shorter version, entitled, "18 Seconds," but it never caught on. (Just kidding, of course.)
Many Tom Waits songs....
Walrus: Regarding your post above about the video feeds: The exact thing is happening to me too. I have posted twice on it.Stop start freeze...it is extremely annoying. I cant watch any video anymore on this site which I love.
Deb,Vegas
Would I lie to you?
Janet Jackson is a producer's vessel. Like Madonna and Britney and that Simpson girl and Kanye, she can't actually sing much. She has a thin, high voice but she has the best "people" to make her nothing of a voice sound good. She's cute, she can dance pretty good, and she knows how to put on make-up, but please.
Anyone going to mention that there would be no song here without Sly Stone? Oh, I just did. It is one of the better examples of a song that relies completely on a sampled riff though.
First of all it i isn't one chord, there is a resonant chord that plays over the changes. Secondly what is wrong with the generation that mistakes this for art. JJ is a no talent hood ornament. She is handed these songs, she has nothing to do with the production, or arrangement, she is a schill for a corporate music money machine. Even her lame brother writes and produces his stuff. Lame...very lame.
"I've been Working" by Van Morrison is just a C9.
Didn't like the song then, don't like it now.
To each his/her own, of course.
The main sample in that song is from a killer 1 chord song:
"Thank you for letting me be myself again" by Sly and the Family stone(At least I'd be willing to bet that that is the main sample).
As an related aside, I had tickets to Miss Jackson and had the worst cold of my life. Wife took a friend and still ribs me about how great it was. It's cool though... Same thing happened in reverse with Peter Gabriel Secret World... 10th row and he rocked the house!
OLE!
hasta la vista mi amigos.
What are you missing? Not a damn thing! Fuck that "guilty pleasure" crap. If you like it, if it moves you, embrace it without shame!! Why not? Because someone else has a different opinion? Meh, who cares? Life's short. It's a terrific song and a visually compelling video....and Janet's a great performer. Enjoy!
Pink's "Get the party started" is one chord, and equally "heavy."
Everyone forgets "Black Cat" with Nuno Bettencort which she wrote and its from the same album. I don't have a problem listening to her. I have a vast appreciation for alot of artists that the industry either ignores or tries to convince the public that it's now somehow "uncool" to listen to.
I'd love to have been a fly on the wall the day they filmed the dance scene in "Scream" with her and Michael. Michael and Prince, while not my cup of tea, I can respect the prodigious talent of both.
And "LORD HAVE MERCY"! Janet's smile is sexy as hell. If she ever flashed it at the North Pole we'd all be living on boats and not worrying about global warming anymore.
Login or Register to post comments.