IN THE ZONE was the first album that I bought with my own money as an 11-year old back in December 2003. The official video for Toxic wasn't released until Feb/Mar 2004. So you could imagine hearing this masterpiece AHEAD of everybody else that didn't buy the album. LOL. It was so UNLIKE anything else that was popular back then, which were either mellow Hiphop/RnB or mellow Pop Rock. The only time I could remember a song having the same "impact" on the first listen was hearing Britney's FREAKSHOW. Interestingly, later I learned that it was also produced by the same maestros Bloodshy & Avant.
I would say at times her voice is like syrup.. it’s smooth and thick and then jumps high but when it jumps up it gets more thin.. reminds me of like Judy garland.. it sounds like a doll or something vaudeville
Love the analysis one of my fave songs, but I have another question did you get permission to use the music on your video to the label or this falls under the fair use law?
It would be interesting to hear what a classical composer think of more lyrically-driven artists like the recent album of another Sagittarius superstar. I always get to an argument with my friends when a certain album they found "brillant" was only "passable" for me. Because honestly, it was sonically boring and repetitive. I would always say that lyrics are only SECONDARY/TERTIARY for me. Music could exist without words. For me it was more about how it makes me "feel". I love melodies that tell stories without words. You could probably tell I'm not a fan of Rap.
Good point! Typically, classical composers don't write their own lyrics (with Wagner being a huge exception). They tend to adapt existing lyrics to their own music, or collaborate with a poet / librettist. For composers, the music is their primary objective, but it needs to match the emotional valence of the existing lyrics. So I understand what you mean about lyrics being secondary to the music. But, having said that, music can be a vehicle for much more than solely itself! A film score, for example, can carry the storyline of the film exceptionally, without being recognized as a standalone piece of music. And music that people listen to while they work, exercise, or meditate is often less harmonically / melodically intriguing than something they would actively listen to. It really depends on the context. So, perhaps for many lyrically-driven artists, the music is just a vehicle to express their poetry. If the music were too intriguing, it may distract from their own primary objective - the lyrics. Imagine putting Shakespeare to Debussy - it would be quite confusing! Also, I think different people are motivated by different types of artistic expressions. I'm particularly attached to harmony, so I love interesting harmonic progressions, but I know people that are more interested in melodies and how they evolve throughout a piece. If a lot of people like a song, there is probably some kind of merit to it (even if the merit is that they have an extraordinarily catchy melody - that is a skill!). So I guess it depends on what perspective you are using to analyze a work of art! I haven't heard of the album you mentioned! What is it called?
Spears’s voice definitely has the versatility of a musical instrument; however, there are at least two voices, layered, on this track: hers and Cathy Dennis’s (ripped from her demo).
The bass line is a real bass guitar and played by the excellent Thomas Lindberg 😉
C- with the flat 6. Not to mention some great tri tone substitutions in the chorus, Chris Cornell just did a breakdown.
th-cam.com/video/d04-kseradA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=VIe_ih1YzSRGLpU_
Chris Cornell's video is really excellent
IN THE ZONE was the first album that I bought with my own money as an 11-year old back in December 2003. The official video for Toxic wasn't released until Feb/Mar 2004. So you could imagine hearing this masterpiece AHEAD of everybody else that didn't buy the album. LOL. It was so UNLIKE anything else that was popular back then, which were either mellow Hiphop/RnB or mellow Pop Rock.
The only time I could remember a song having the same "impact" on the first listen was hearing Britney's FREAKSHOW. Interestingly, later I learned that it was also produced by the same maestros Bloodshy & Avant.
Good reaction and analysis!
The short guitar pause at 25:45 in the scene where Britney Spears is kissing the actor is brilliant
Thank you! Yes, I agree! This song has so many interesting moments.
I enjoyed this and learned a lot - thank you!
Thank you!
Great reaction, its interesting breaking down mainstream pop song, from classic composers view😃
Thank you so much!
Sei Bellissima
I would say at times her voice is like syrup.. it’s smooth and thick and then jumps high but when it jumps up it gets more thin.. reminds me of like Judy garland.. it sounds like a doll or something vaudeville
Love the analysis one of my fave songs, but I have another question did you get permission to use the music on your video to the label or this falls under the fair use law?
Thank you! Reaction videos and commentary do fall under fair use, although that doesn't necessarily prevent any copyright claims.
It would be interesting to hear what a classical composer think of more lyrically-driven artists like the recent album of another Sagittarius superstar. I always get to an argument with my friends when a certain album they found "brillant" was only "passable" for me. Because honestly, it was sonically boring and repetitive. I would always say that lyrics are only SECONDARY/TERTIARY for me. Music could exist without words. For me it was more about how it makes me "feel". I love melodies that tell stories without words. You could probably tell I'm not a fan of Rap.
Good point! Typically, classical composers don't write their own lyrics (with Wagner being a huge exception). They tend to adapt existing lyrics to their own music, or collaborate with a poet / librettist. For composers, the music is their primary objective, but it needs to match the emotional valence of the existing lyrics. So I understand what you mean about lyrics being secondary to the music. But, having said that, music can be a vehicle for much more than solely itself! A film score, for example, can carry the storyline of the film exceptionally, without being recognized as a standalone piece of music. And music that people listen to while they work, exercise, or meditate is often less harmonically / melodically intriguing than something they would actively listen to. It really depends on the context. So, perhaps for many lyrically-driven artists, the music is just a vehicle to express their poetry. If the music were too intriguing, it may distract from their own primary objective - the lyrics. Imagine putting Shakespeare to Debussy - it would be quite confusing!
Also, I think different people are motivated by different types of artistic expressions. I'm particularly attached to harmony, so I love interesting harmonic progressions, but I know people that are more interested in melodies and how they evolve throughout a piece. If a lot of people like a song, there is probably some kind of merit to it (even if the merit is that they have an extraordinarily catchy melody - that is a skill!). So I guess it depends on what perspective you are using to analyze a work of art!
I haven't heard of the album you mentioned! What is it called?
Spears’s voice definitely has the versatility of a musical instrument; however, there are at least two voices, layered, on this track: hers and Cathy Dennis’s (ripped from her demo).
Great video!
Thanks!!
Davie504 also says the bass can do as it wishes. Slap like!
Your comments are great, but please don't waste your time on this junk.
😂