Sections and Successions in Successful Songs: A Prototype Approach to Form in Rock Music by Trevor Owen de Clercq Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Supervised by Professor David Temperley Department of Music Theory Eastman School of Music University of Rochester Rochester, NY 2012 ii Curriculum Vitae Trevor Owen de Clercq was born in Montreal, Canada on March 2, 1975. He grew up in Naples, FL, and graduated salutatorian from Naples High School in 1992. He then attended Cornell University (1992-1996), where he graduated cum laude with a Bachelor’s degree in Music. After college, he worked as a Grants Manager for the Harvard Medical School (1996-1998). He then enrolled in a Tonmeister program at New York University (1998), from which he earned a Master’s degree in Music Technology (2000). Afterwards, he worked in various New York City recording studios, most notably Right Track Recording (2001-2002), where he supported albums by artists such as Mariah Carey, Fabolous, James Taylor, Britney Spears, Nas, Pat Metheny, and Mark O’Connor. He then worked as a technical support specialist at The New School (2002-2006). During this time, he also earned (via distance learning) an Associate’s degree in Electrical Engineering Technology from the Cleveland Institute of Electronics (2004). In 2006, he entered the Music Theory program at the Eastman School of Music, from which he received a Master’s degree in 2008. The recipient of a Sproull Fellowship, he has served as a graduate instructor in both the Department of Music Theory (2008-2010) and the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Rochester (2009). He has pursued his research under the direction of Professor David Temperley. His most recent position is as Adjunct Assistant Professor at Hofstra University (Hempstead, NY), where he teaches written theory and musicianship coursework to undergraduates. List of Publications: de Clercq, Trevor and David Temperley. 2011. “A corpus analysis of rock harmony.” Popular Music 30 (1): 47-70. iii Acknowledgments The final form of this dissertation is due in large part to the incredibly precise and clear insights of its primary advisor, David Temperley. Thank you, Davy, for all your hard work on this project. The other members of my committee, Seth Monahan and Chris Doll, also have my sincerest gratitude for their assistance. Thanks are due as well to John Covach, who provided helpful navigational advice during my time at sea in the early stages of this project. Overall, I would like to thank the entire Eastman music theory community for creating a highly supportive academic environment. Robert L. and Mary L. Sproull provided generous financial aid during my five years in residence. Dave Headlam helped as well by hiring me as his laboratory assistant and connecting me with various employment opportunities in the ECE Department. On a personal level, I would like to thank my family for enduring my long and sinuous path in the pursuit of knowledge. My mom, Suzanne, and dad, Ted, have never failed to provide good advice when I needed it. I will also be forever indebted to my honorary Godmother, the late Clarice Holtz. Finally, to Sarah and little Rufus: The world would be a much colder and lonelier place without you. Thank you both for the love, compassion, and sympathy through the years. iv Abstract This dissertation tackles the open question of how listeners perceive form in rock music. Extant theories of form offer only limited explanations as to how we categorize the various components of a rock song and how these choices affect our overall understanding of form in this repertoire. Research in the field of cognitive psychology shows that our categorization process involves prototype effects. Consequently, this dissertation employs a prototype-based approach to form in rock music. A central task in this regard is the development of a broader understanding of the prototypical instantiations of section roles, including verse, chorus, refrain, bridge, solo, prechorus, intro, outro, and link. Using this information, we can see how these section roles interact with different organizational schemes. Three main organizational schemes are used as points of reference: the 12-bar blues, the 16-bar SRDC, and the 32-bar AABA. As various attributes of these schemes change from song to song, we see conversions of these schemes from one section role to another. As a result, we expose possible paths in the historical development of form within rock music. During this conversion process, various types of ambiguities between section roles can be found. Often, in fact, the choice between one section role and another inherently represents a false dilemma. The notion of blends – which describe amalgamations of two or more section roles – becomes useful to track these ambiguous cases. Ultimately, this research appraises those factors that drive analytical practice and attunes us to the complex ways that real-world songs engage with our expectations and sustain our fascination. v Table of Contents List of Examples vi vi Chapter 1: Prologue 1 1 Chapter 2: Background 10 2.1: Introduction 10 2.2: Cognitive Science and Categories 10 2.3: Prototypes and Music Theory 17 2.4: Music Theory and Form 20 2.5: Music Cognition and Form 23 2.6: Form, Music Theory, and Rock Music 24 2.7: Summary 33 Chapter 3: Roles 34 3.1: Introduction 34 3.2: Verse and Chorus 38 3.3: Refrain 57 3.4: Bridge and Solo 70 3.5: Prechorus 89 3.6: Intro, Outro, and Link 99 3.7: Summary 110 Chapter 4: Conversions 117 4.1: Introduction 117 4.2: The Blues 123 4.3: SRDC 153 4.4: AABA 178 4.5: Summary 211 Chapter 5: Blends 213 5.1: Introduction 213 5.2: Verse Blends (Part 1) 215 5.3: Bridge Blends 221 5.4: Chorus Blends 238 5.5: Verse Blends (Part 2) 268 X 5.6: Summary 284 Chapter 6: Epilogue 287 Bibliography 294 Musical Sources 300 vi List of Examples 3.2.01: “Just the Way You Are” (Bruno Mars, 2010); verse 44 3.2.02: “Just the Way You Are” (Bruno Mars, 2010); chorus 44 3.2.03: “Little Red Corvette” (Prince, 1982); verse 48 3.2.04: “Little Red Corvette” (Prince, 1982); chorus 49 3.2.05: “Rockin’ in the Free World” (Neil Young, 1989); verse 51 3.2.06: “Rockin’ in the Free World” (Neil Young, 1989); chorus 51 3.2.07: “Just What I Needed” (The Cars, 1978); verse 54 3.2.08: “Just What I Needed” (The Cars, 1978); chorus 54 3.3.01: “Stand by Me” (Ben E. King, 1961); verse material with refrain 60 3.3.02: “Stand by Me” (Ben E. King, 1961); form chart 61 3.3.03: Phrase structure of a prototypical tail refrain 61 3.3.04: “All I Have to Do Is Dream” (The Everly Brothers, 1958); verse 63 3.3.05: “I’ve Got a Tiger by the Tail” (Buck Owens, 1965); chorus 64 3.3.06: “Old Time Rock and Roll” (Bob Seger & The Silver Bullet Band, 1978); chorus 65 3.3.07: “Old Time Rock and Roll” (Bob Seger & The Silver Bullet Band, 1978); verse 67 3.3.08: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); opening material 68 3.3.09: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); closing material 69 3.4.01: “Handy Man” (Jimmy Jones, 1960); form chart 74 3.4.02: “Handy Man” (Jimmy Jones, 1960); A section 75 3.4.03: “Handy Man” (Jimmy Jones, 1960); B section 75 3.4.04: Generic phrase organization for a classic bridge 76 3.4.05: Prototypical harmonic realizations for a classic bridge 77 3.4.06: 32 songs with classic bridge sections 77 3.4.07: “Ticket to Ride” (The Beatles, 1965); bridge (B section) 79 3.4.08: “You Can’t Do That” (The Beatles, 1964); bridge (B section) 80 List of Examples vii 3.4.09: “1979” (The Smashing Pumpkins, 1995); bridge 82 3.4.10: “1979” (The Smashing Pumpkins, 1995); core AABA pattern 82 3.4.11: “More Than a Feeling” (Boston, 1976); form chart in Covach 2005 (74) 84 3.4.12: “Whole Lotta Love” (Led Zeppelin, 1969); form chart in Covach 2003 (183) 85 3.4.13: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); classic bridge 86 3.4.14: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); form chart in Covach 2005 (75) 86 3.4.15: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); modern bridge 87 3.4.16: “Every Breath You Take” (The Police, 1983); alternative grouping 88 3.5.01: “You Belong with Me” (Taylor Swift, 2008); verse 93 3.5.02: “You Belong with Me” (Taylor Swift, 2008); chorus 93 3.5.03: “You Belong with Me” (Taylor Swift, 2008); prechorus 94 3.5.04: “You Belong with Me” (Taylor Swift, 2008); form chart 95 3.5.05: “Building a Mystery” (Sarah McLachlan, 1997); verse 97 3.5.06: “Building a Mystery” (Sarah McLachlan, 1997); chorus 97 3.5.07: “Building a Mystery” (Sarah McLachlan, 1997); prechorus 97 3.6.01: Four different treatments of an instrumental interlude (link) a) Interlude as post-chorus: “Thank You (Falettinme Be Mice Elf Agin)” (Sly and The Family Stone, 1969); form chart in Covach 2009 (370-1) 102 b) Interlude as pre-verse: “One” (Metallica, 1988); form chart in Covach 2009 (494-5) 103 c) Interlude as verse: “More Than a Feeling” (Boston, 1976); form chart in Covach 2009 (418-9) 103 d) Interlude as chorus: “All I Wanna Do” (Sheryl Crow, 1994); form chart in Covach 2009 (530-1) 103 3.6.02: “In Bloom” (Nirvana, 1991); form chart 104 3.6.03: “In Bloom” (Nirvana, 1991); alternative form chart 105 3.6.04: “In Bloom” (Nirvana, 1991); chorus into link 106 3.6.05: “My Happy Ending” (Avril Lavigne, 2004); form chart 108 3.6.06: “My Happy Ending” (Avril Lavigne, 2004); chorus into link 109 3.7.01: “You Might Think” (The Cars, 1984); form chart 112 4.1.01: Phrase rhythms in rock music, à la Stephenson 2002 120 List of Examples viii 4.1.02: Melodic phrase relationships