I feel it as: Paul's lines were not written musically to fit in. It's the emulation of breathless resignation or acceptance, that dull exhalation. The word 'again' is an acceptance of fate or failure. He spoke these lines out loud and made a song to build around. It didn't matter how it was composed it followed the emotion of the lyric.
With songs like "The Sound of Silence", it's very easy to overdo the harmony. I'm glad Simon went with a more minimalist approach. He only added what needed to be added, and the piece is more delicate and precious because of that.
I agree with many previous commenters: On a song like Sounds of Silence, if one adheres too slavishly to a triadic harmony, it begins to sound predictable and cliched, and loses its edginess. Particularly given the somber content of the song, they didn’t want to sound like the Kingston Trio. Simon’s decision to use a more drone-like harmony was an inspired choice.
Ha! I have always struggled to sing along with them and nail Paul's part. (No, I've never looked at the music - just singing by ear.) Turns out I've been getting pulled into this hidden 3rd part.
I think droning has an important function in and of itself other than flattering Art (although that may still have been a factor). Droning emphasises the melancholy of the song while the varying intervals in the 2-note harmony make for interesting listening. The fact that the remaining 3rd note is often awkward is another clue. They wanted to craft countermelodies while keeping the transitions smooth without awkward jumps.
18:30 My guess as to why Paul Simon held the Eb, Db drone line on the bottom was to anchor the dark, unmovable and ominous feeling of the Sounds of Silence, that all is not well, imho. Also, to let Art shine.
I think with "Sound of Silence" in particular, the interval of a perfect fifth on the word "friend" illuminates the emptiness and longing of the lyrics. A perfect fifth always sounds empty, longing for the third. I think your conclusion is right on - Simon's is a very easy, supportive part to sing. Excellent, thoughtful analysis!
I had been listening to the song for decades and one day someone asked me to sing Paul’s part. I thought “no problem.” I thought it would just be normal 3rd harmony. Blew my mind. I had a very hard time with that rascally part. Finally realized how difficult it really was. Thanks for pointing this out. It’s just not normal!
Their brilliance was in their 5th tones, not their 3rds necessarily, Simon often complemented the bass line more than the melody itself, but they blended perfect together to create one hell of a uniform tone. Another unique example are the BG's, Barry would often sing harmony when they blended and his voice was the most robust, Robin, whose voice was more subdued was the melody, typically a paradox, but they blended so perfectly, they sounded as one uniform voice.
More like this please! Everley Bros, Andrews Sisters, Beatles? You bring a rich background in the practice of harmony sining, and theory. Most harmony singers just "do it", without the insights and knowledge you bring.
totally agree man! I was just gonna say that Aimee is so great, I've just discovered her chanel and I'm so glad for that. Because, there is a bunch of stuff about how to understand music etc but most of it is for total begginers. I was always looking for something like this, to make a new step in building my knowledge and experience. now I know that not going in music school when I was younger wasn't so bad decision hahah
Simon and Garfunkel were masters of two-part harmony, as were the Beatles. So many of their early songs have phenomenally beautiful and effective harmonies with only two parts. A lot of the time, those 4-3 resoltions you felt compelled to add were left out, implied by what the two voices were singing, and by the instruments. There's a great deal of country and bluegrass music which is marvelously effective with only two vocal parts, and wouldn't likely be improved by the addition of a third voice to "fill out the chords." In a way, it's an expression of trust in one's listening audience to appreciate what's there, and to hear the harmonies implied rather than to insist upon being spoon-fed, smacked in the face with the obvious.
you are absolutely dead on. S&G arrangements are perfect as they are in two parts and a 'third' vocal is just superfluous - even offensive. Why this video is interesting is it breaks down their actual two part vocal arrangement, which is so good and clever I find it hard sometimes to decipher who is singing what on their records. And I'm not exactly chopped liver.
@@sibionic Rather than "offensive" if offer a milder, less accusatory adjective, simplistic. Perhaps people will for it a little counter-intuitive to say that adding a third part is simplistic, but it's the mindset that vocal harmonies need to be in three parts that I'm describing. We hear SO much music that uses three parts - background vocals on pop songs especially, but also music like a lot of Crosby, Stills & Nash, where they sing in the parts throughout, and it's difficult sometimes to say which, if any, of the three parts is "the tune." Listen to the Beatles' "If I Fell" and it's clear as a bell which line is the melody, as with "Sounds of Silence." Add a third part to "fill out" the harmonies, and it might be beautiful, but it wouldn't be better. A lot of folks (my ex-wife, for instance) can't resist the urge to do that kind of filling in on songs that use three or more parts on different verses of the same song. I always cringe a little at that because I treasure the variety of textures that indicates a more thoughtful approach to arranging.
@@tenpiualto I just think a duet is more powerful than a trio actually - especially with S&G. 'If I Fell' works just as beautifully as a two parter (whatever the Beatles did)
This is a great study. I've often been stunned at what I thought of as "Scottish" harmony or "note-under" harmony. Starting with the Everly Brothers. Garfunkel often doing that above and then below in the same song. The Association used it a lot; Beatles; Big Country; Byrds. Having learned music by ear, I didn't identify the intervals, but suspected it had much to do with 4ths and 5ths above, and 3rds below. This morning my old brain said why not study it, and I landed on this. Thanks, sister!
Being jazz snobs at 13 (how laughable in retrospect), we thought they were good pop songwriters. This explanation so well illustrates the S & G's genius that we came to realize as we matured musically. Thanks for doing this one, Aimee. Cool stuff.
I think it might be important to remember that Simon was also playing guitar and minimising the complexity of his part left him more of his brain to keep the guitar playing as clean and perfect as possible. Not so important when recording, but when playing live he's given himself the space to keep it spot-on without overstretching in a live situation. Simon's an excellent guitarist and he will have taken pride in this as well as in singing and in songwriting.
Not only do I enjoy your singing voice but I also enjoy your talking voice as well. So smooth and easy to listen to. Keeps me and my short attention span engaged.
It’s called genius. Perfection in music is rare, but “The Sound of Silence” is perfect. It needs no improvement. It’s like “Piece of My Heart” by Janice Joplin. That needs nothing that isn’t there.
I love stuff like this because it teaches us that harmonizing doesn't have to be parallel motion - and really, that's all you hear these days. Sometimes notes remaining static while others move around is magical, as demonstrated here.
As a kid growing up I would listen to these records, the early Simon & Garfunkel and early Beatles albums. They taught me how to sing or at least find the right notes to sing. Fun stuff. Well done working out that part young lady.
I am a old man, never tried to play a instrument until last year. Will be a year in December Lol I am not a natural so it’s a struggle. So thankful the more I try, the better I get. I understand these videos more and more as I go along. I do not learn fast at this point but thank you for these insightful videos. I find them very helpful.
Thank you for sharing this! I am an old soul and absolutely love S&G! I do the same thing you do. I am not educated in music, but I am so fascinated by music! It did surprise me when I found a lump in my throat listening to your harmony! So, so beautiful. I am now a big fan of YOU!
I always add a harmony to them. The key seems to be to harmonize with Art's harmony rather than think about Paul's melody. Also, I don't think occasionally duplicating notes is always a problem to be solved.
Aimee - I think the answer... is to just sing Art's part. It's the best part. But it is the combination of their two voices that makes the overall sound so exquisite. If you want to sing along - do Art's part. Otherwise just enjoy how wonderful they sound together. Since you brought up "The Boxer"... I wanted to mention the part near the end of the record where Art sings this lovely little bit that I always look forward to hearing (right around 4:44 into the song - shortly after the "lie lie lie" part ends). It's sort of a "la-la-lee" wafting high above the music. It is another great moment from the voice of Mr. Garfunkel.
I am so pleased to have just discovered this channel. I could watch you analyze classic rock songs like this for days on end. This is fantastic. Thank You.
Art's high harmony on the "I am leaving . . ." phrase just brought a tear to my eye. I've been listening to this song for 55 years and that's the first time it's ever happened. Thank you for showing me this.
Another reason that Paul simplified his vocal parts could be due to the fact that he is often playing an instrument (acoustic guitar) while singing. More importantly, he often uses a fingerstyle pattern when playing. So singing in more of a drone style allows him him to play more complex arpeggiated guitar patterns to accompany the vocals.
@@halcooper3070 I completely agree. Paul wrote what was right for each song musically. He didn't omit parts or alter parts because he couldn't perform something he would have rather played. Paul is an uncompromising genius. You think he is actually going to settle for anything? Beethoven was once criticized for writing things violinists would complain were impossible to play. Beethoven's response was I write what I write. You're the violinist. It's your job to figure out how to play it.
My comment was not intended to suggest that Paul Simon needs a crutch or that he's settling for anything. I'm sure he arranged the song the way he wanted them to be. It was an observation that musicians either sing more elaborate harmonic lines or play more elaborate harmonic patterns on an instrument, but rarely if ever do both simultaneously. A musician understands this.
@@MiserableLittleDoomGoblin if you knew anything about Paul Simon, you would know thats not the case, he is known for intricate arrangers on guitar as well as difficultelody and harmony lines simultaneously. It's something he is famous for. As a real musician myself, although decades removed from being a pro, no, never done what you suggest. If I can play it on guitar, and I can sing it, then with a basic amount of practice, I can do both, muscle memory is a handy thing. Funnily enough, no amount of practice will ever let me play the drums, it's legs or it's arms, the two cannot be mixed, they refuse to work together.
I know nothing about music composing, structure, or anything. I can barely play the drums but I find these videos fascinating. Sounds like Aimee has perfect pitch!
Love the analysis. I would suggest Paul wasn't necessarily trying to lay low, but was looking for the shape where each phrase spreads apart pitch-wise for the effect it gives. It creates a second rhythmic structure that rolls along on it's own. Instead of just another voice to sound pretty, the harmony contributes to the message and effect.
Ha. This is the exact thing I do when listening to them-sing the third harmony. Although I've never written anything down. It's a fun challenge indeed for all the reasons you mentioned.
I love how this struggle is both fascinating and pointless: fascinating in writing out all the chords and finding the missing note in each triad, and pointless in the beauty of the music as is and the fact that no notes are really missing. This was truly a worthwhile exercise, instructive in both its technical aspect as well as the analysis of what is going on artistically. I think we would all benefit from doing the same kind of analysis with a similar majestic piece of music, especially those of us who do not compose or arrange music on a regular basis. Aimee, fantastic job; thanks for sharing.
Great stuff! The only theories I have as to why he would sing those particular notes are that 1) If he was thinking ahead to live performances, maybe he wanted a simpler part so he could focus on the guitar or 2) Maybe they just really thought that sound was hip ;) Either way, it is a bit of a nightmare to try and write a 3rd part to. This video made me realize that as a composer, I tend to write 2 part harmonies as if there were still a 3rd part there. I might take a cue from these two and change that up a bit and see what happens. Thanks for the insight!
Also enjoyed the video! To the theme of a simpler part - for me the simpleness and drone sound is because of the lyrics telling about sounds of silence, creeping etc. The lyrics are also in the Jazz Standards the best explanation of the melody, thats why I allways took the Real Book with lyrics, no matter if I needed it for singing or bass. Thanks for this video and discussion.
I was for long time in classic singing lessons, and there I noticed that "Corcovado" melodie has much less movement than "Girl from Ipanema" so from then on the lyrics where allways allmost more important than the chords, because they are often nearer by the intention of the song than the cords - specially by musicians that are "routiniert" excuse my english :-) Also the end of Corcovado, where it gets personal, there is very much movement in the tones. So I m very thankful to my singing teacher (she dont live anymore), to show me.
Yes it does. I've seen him live once and many more times on video, and he is certainly capable of some impressive musicianship, but they were really young when they recorded this and I wonder if there was an element of "playing it safe" involved in the harmonies. Again, he also may just have wanted that echo-y drone because of the meaning of the song. Who knows? :)
I too love the harmonies of s&g and csny too like you do. Those guys really knew what they were doing. Generations come and go and each generation will love those harmonies. Those harmonies are eternal. Art Garfunkel...... What can I say..... His voice is angelic. His solo albums are great too. Another voice is that of Jon Anderson from the YES. Really mystic voice. I love your harmony lessons Aimee. Thanks.
Great topic. Folk groups were really exploding in the early to mid 60s & if you listen to PP&M you'll hear many of the same or similar techniques used by S&G. Harmonies below the lead, changing intervals, drones, unison voices etc. all being varied & switched around for dramatic effects. What's really cool about S&G is that they sounded so full with only 2 voices. It's almost like the music was the 3rd voice & they could both harmonize to that in various sections to create a 3 part harmony.
Brilliant analysis. As a amateur multi-instrumentalist I am fascinated and perplexed by vocal harmonies. These guys are the best. Wish you could have been there with them for the third part.
I do the same thing. I think Paul is being creative and not just doing the "regular" thing. Other musicians love my harmonies. And people love Simon and Garfunkel
You just verbalized my entire life. I'm 61 years old and I've been singing harmony with everybody on every song everyday. I like to jump around and especially with songs that I've never heard before and anticipate what they're going to do, and I'm always right. Lots of practice I've been singing Harmony since I was about 4 years old. Most of my adult life, well actually all of my adult life, I've been the lead singer, but I love the opportunities when I get to sing backup. There's just nothing like singing Harmony. Figuring out those parts, it's like a challenge but like not really challenging, but like fun. It's just fun. So I get ya girl. By the way, you are brilliant :-) Thanks so much for sharing!
Ditto, I've been doing it for decades, and now i can jump in on a harmony almost instantly. Sometimes, it's "aha, why didn't they put this in" and at other times it's obvious why. And sometimes, adding the 3rd or 4th harmony just changes the whole flavor of the song and sends it somewhere else. A little while ago, a friend's band invited me up to join them in a Grateful Dead song (one I had never done before), and at the end, I noticed that the song started to sound more like The Eagles than the Dead. The Eagles have great harmonies, but the Dead have their own sacred style. I think they already had 3 voices in this song, so I had to go where no Dead went before. Thank you Aimee.
Well you don't analyze something that works and it worked for a very long time I think Paul just retired he does not want to be doing shows when he's 80 years old went I went to the same High School years later
Simon's "Because a vision softly creeping left its seeds while I was sleeping" ...that's all just one note on the scale. The pair aren't singing in perfect harmony-- they're just blending well. If you want perfect harmony, then the Chordettes, try them.
I actually really liked the harmony you added. It enhanced the song, although you’re right it doesn’t need it. Thanks for the excellent harmony lessons from your videos. They’ve really helped me to teach a bit to my ukulele friends.
loved singing along with simon and garfunkel, and everly brothers when i was young, care-free and still had some voice albeit immature. Thank you Aimee for another wonderful episode. You are also a "songbird"!
Super awesome Aimee! Yes it doesn't have to be all perfect 3rds. And what makes their harmony special is the spots where they land on open 4ths and 5ths.
When they arranged it for 2 voices they made choices that they probably would not have made if there had been 3, e.g. Simon, Garfunkle, and Nolte. Great work. Aimee.
Karl and I are on a road trip and I just played this for him - we both found it fascinating - it led to a great discussion. :-) I also have a thought: the 4ths and 5ths intervals (drone) remind me of Gregorian chant and create a hollowness which definitely highlights the lyric. Karl loved it and said he definitely needs to subscribe to your channel.:-) ❤️
It's perfect the way it is your messing with the dynamics of this song your making it sound like the works of the Christy Minstrels .Sir Paul once said that the hardest harmony that he ever had to do was Nowhere Man with Lennon... Give that one a shot... Peace..
A third voice in triadic Harmony will always result in a few uncomfortable intervalic skips. I've experimented with this a lot writing 3-part vocal arrangements for my trio (2 guitars & bass, and we all sing). Writing out the parts is by far the best way, as you've demonstrated. The challenge then becomes how to sing the skips in a way that they don't sound strange or accented, or disjointed. Zak Brown Band does this so well.
Thank you for this video Amy I got hired into a band that had two singers and I was a third and I had to figure out everyone on those parts a lot of times I would just omit the part no instead of trying to make an uncomfortable shift other times I just go for the uncomfortable shift in those days, I got a lot of real high parts 30 years later I’ve learned how to sing low harmonies and do a similar thing. Thank you for the great learning tool.
Several songs where they actually cross harmonies. I believe "Benedictus" is one example. "The Sun is Burning in the Sky" might be another. Their early stuff was recorded on 4 track, so Garfunkel is in one ear while Simon is in the other. Makes it easy to hear them cross, which is technically a no-no, but effective because of the stereo recording technique.
They say it's a no-no, but Alice in Chains did it with great success many times throughout their career. There are no real rules if you are practiced enough...
Who says it's a no no? Crossing harmonies is pretty common in jazz, folk, really any popular or modern style of music. I think Bach even did it, so really unless you're a beginning music theory student doing a homework assignment (which probably has restrictions purely for pedagogical reasons), you can cross harmonies
This was a fantastic video. I'm so glad I stumbled across it. I've always been one of those people who have tried to find harmonies with everything; I love singing them. They fascinate me. I've been in a bunch of bands (guitarist, I like to harmonise w/ my instrument too :)) where it's been my favourite thing to do and even now, when I just jam with friends, I always try to find something unique naturally. EXCEPT with S&G. Always end up on the same note in places. It was really cool seeing the harmonies laid out like this, even if I have trouble reading music. Thanks so much. Definitely checking out more of your videos!
thanks for the breakdown and preformance of the little tiny parts i unintentionally land on. it would be a kool thing to find, have, create a library that dissects complicated/unconventional vox harmonies thanks again for sharing your insight
This video is great, in that it makes clear that harmony singing isn't just about being "mathematicly" correct. I love complex harmonies that utilize major seconds, perfect fourths and major sixth. Just as tension and release is used in chord harmony, this can be done with vocal harmony. Simon and Garfunkel are just one example. The harmony is clearly not written to fit in a 3rd part, but to create a "smoothness" to the song. It's also why I love listening to CSNY and James Taylor with Carole King or Carly Simon!
Nothing in popular music excites me more than a well-written 2-part harmony... I've been in vocal jazz groups singing chords so dense we would sometimes laugh singing them, but it doesn't compare to the beauty two perfectly interweaving voices have. That's part of the magic of S&G but it's all over if you keep your ears open. Personally I freak out when I realize a song I've heard has one of those parts. :P
If you consider "Sound of Silence" in terms of the lyrics and the tonality of the song, they were also trying to get that open sound ON PURPOSE. Starting in unison in the beginning, with passing through the 3rd when Garfunkle sings the melody, and landing on the open 5th, which as CLOSE to an octave in terms of having an "open" or "unison" sound. I think they are PURPOSELY avoiding strengthening the 3rd.
Paul and Art are singing smart countermelodies and they always get on my note too when singing 3 parts :) smart use of 3rds, 4ths and 5ths between the two of em.
Wonderful video. I used to harmonize with my friend and Ive learned to find the chord tones instinctively. My friend who was a more talented singer would use his guitar to find the note which is ok but I find it settles in the brain better if you simply sing and instinctively find the chord tones. But our harmonies chops are no where near your level. Being primarily a bass player I find your videos very eye opening. Thanks for the wonderful lesson.
Also, because Simon is sometimes singing in thirds, sometimes in sixths, and sometimes in 5ths/4ths, the harmony is more interesting as a unit (although the melody is still emphasized). When singing entirely in thirds, songwriters usually will give each singer a melody on their own and only bring in thirds fir a chorus or bridge, precisely because listening to straight parallel thirds and even thirds and sixths can get very boring very fast. Regardless of the reason, Paul Simon certainly knew what he was doing! 😁👏🏻
Aimee - I think you are exactly right... when you said that Paul Simon "wanted to lay low. He wanted to just make his part sit in a comfortable place. Hit all the necesary harmony notes for us to follow the function of the harmony... but really to let Art Garfunkel shine. Because, like I said, he's a flippin' songbird. If I could sing with Art Garfunkel... I would do the same thing. Like a drone almost at times... just to let his voice soar and shine." 18:30
This was a great presentation. I'm 62. I've been a musician since I was 7. I put together a Country Band that did well for about 7 years in which I was the frontman. Back in the 70's, I was in the Army Band. So, I am an accomplished musician. I have found that singing is 90% hearing and 10% voice. The same applies to playing an instrument in an ensemble. It takes serious discipline and teamwork. I would rather sing back up than be a frontman. The most powerful note in all of music is the rest. When singing harmony, there are usually a lot of rests. This gives time to be mentally prepared to hit the notes. For more difficult songs, when I'm not supposed to sing, I will step away from the mike to hum my part. But it seems finding the 3rd part off the cuff can be difficult in spite of my experience.
True story~ I was just listening on Smule to the sound of silence and while I was listening I came up with the third harmony too. So I switched to TH-cam to listen just to Paul simons harmony and came across yous, and mine is almost identical to yours. Love it! I love the harmony in songs too.
Allow me to correct something.( Paul's part) the second line starting 'Becuse a vision' .... it stays on C. It doesn't jump to E until 'Planted in my brain'. My husband pointed this out to me. He's been singing Simon and Garfunkel for decades. He's right . Listen carefully to the original. Thank you for sharing your love for this great duo. Keep going!
Love this vid and love you! I was a teen when the album came out, and on the radio, and trying to sing along, no musicians in my family, no music in school, I thought I couldn't sing was the problem. I read about music though - it is fabulous the way you combine "the reading" with a recording and you singing, and video. Thanks muchly!
Aimee, you made my day! Strangely, somehow, something made click, and this whole "how and why notes on staff" thing now makes so much more sense to me; more than i ever got from any other teaching material on that subject. And that wasn't even the point of the video :D Thank you so much!
WOW this is pure gold, thank you for the analysis. For people that kinda did a little bit of music and would like to understand more like me, this is the PERFECT video. You explain everything very simply and yet not too much so that it is too simple and unhelpful, and you use a score. It's like the difference between physics videos on TH-cam (which I love but you won't demonstrate anything with it), and taking a sheet of paper and starting to really do the maths (which are the real thing and which I love too). This was so enriching. Thank you!
I have a hopeless singing voice but every time I sing along with a Simon & Garfunkel song (which in the interests of world peace, I never do when anyone else is around) somehow, I always track and instinctively duplicate Art's note - badly. Whether he is on a lead note or harmonically in support, his note is somehow always the lead note to my ear. It's what I hear. Paul's voice and choice of drone notes feel to me just like you describe, he's supporting Art and making Art the star. That is very generous for a commercial artist and songwriter. It doesn't matter to my ear whether there are missing thirds, parallel fifths or anything else. Every note the two of them produce - much as Bernstein said of Beethoven - is always the right next note, to my ear.
The Sound of Silence - To me, the choice of harmony for Paul was to support the song. By keeping his harmony mostly as a drone, it is as close to silence as you can get without actually being silent. So it was the most supportive harmony he could invent and stay true to the song.
great video! not only you're a great teacher but also you make a great analysis of music and have a sensible approach towards different styles and their features.
*................Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel have the purest form of music to me. Closet to Heavenly music. Acoustic voice with acoustic guitars. Bob Dylan takes it to another level with his Harmonica playing in the original song “All Along the Watchtower....*
I feel it as:
Paul's lines were not written musically to fit in. It's the emulation of breathless resignation or acceptance, that dull exhalation. The word 'again' is an acceptance of fate or failure. He spoke these lines out loud and made a song to build around.
It didn't matter how it was composed it followed the emotion of the lyric.
With songs like "The Sound of Silence", it's very easy to overdo the harmony. I'm glad Simon went with a more minimalist approach. He only added what needed to be added, and the piece is more delicate and precious because of that.
Jragon // Learn How To Make Minecraft Commands it is easy to overdo the harmonies but never, never, never were S & G guilty of such a crime.
I agree, I think the sparseness of the unison (not even octaves) and fifths rather than always thirds is better for the substance of the song.
Absolutely, there's this sad, monklike tone with those unisons and fifths. I think Aimeé missed the mark here
I agree with many previous commenters: On a song like Sounds of Silence, if one adheres too slavishly to a triadic harmony, it begins to sound predictable and cliched, and loses its edginess. Particularly given the somber content of the song, they didn’t want to sound like the Kingston Trio. Simon’s decision to use a more drone-like harmony was an inspired choice.
The drone-like works really well.
Ha! I have always struggled to sing along with them and nail Paul's part. (No, I've never looked at the music - just singing by ear.) Turns out I've been getting pulled into this hidden 3rd part.
I think droning has an important function in and of itself other than flattering Art (although that may still have been a factor). Droning emphasises the melancholy of the song while the varying intervals in the 2-note harmony make for interesting listening. The fact that the remaining 3rd note is often awkward is another clue. They wanted to craft countermelodies while keeping the transitions smooth without awkward jumps.
Finely crafted melancholia. Yes.
So in a way, it's contrapunctal music more than harmonic one? That's sweet!
exactly what i was thinking. adding that hopeful sounding harmony doesn't match the words or emotions being conveyed in the verse at all.
18:30 My guess as to why Paul Simon held the Eb, Db drone line on the bottom was to anchor the dark, unmovable and ominous feeling of the Sounds of Silence, that all is not well, imho. Also, to let Art shine.
Truely said, and the mixing keeps paul low with Art far louder.
I think with "Sound of Silence" in particular, the interval of a perfect fifth on the word "friend" illuminates the emptiness and longing of the lyrics. A perfect fifth always sounds empty, longing for the third.
I think your conclusion is right on - Simon's is a very easy, supportive part to sing. Excellent, thoughtful analysis!
Fascinating. Your video really helped this non- musician appreciate exactly how professional and dedicated to their art these guys were.
I had been listening to the song for decades and one day someone asked me to sing Paul’s part. I thought “no problem.” I thought it would just be normal 3rd harmony. Blew my mind. I had a very hard time with that rascally part. Finally realized how difficult it really was. Thanks for pointing this out. It’s just not normal!
Their brilliance was in their 5th tones, not their 3rds necessarily, Simon often complemented the bass line more than the melody itself, but they blended perfect together to create one hell of a uniform tone. Another unique example are the BG's, Barry would often sing harmony when they blended and his voice was the most robust, Robin, whose voice was more subdued was the melody, typically a paradox, but they blended so perfectly, they sounded as one uniform voice.
This kind of in-depth look is helping me understand harmony - plus it is fascinating to watch your process, note by note -- thanks Aimee!
It is amazing soaking this in and following along.
Hit records in three different decades Paul Simon was the heart of that band
Singing your new harmony part made this song, shockingly, still more beautiful. Chills anew, all these years later. Thanks, Aimee.
More like this please! Everley Bros, Andrews Sisters, Beatles? You bring a rich background in the practice of harmony sining, and theory. Most harmony singers just "do it", without the insights and knowledge you bring.
totally agree man! I was just gonna say that Aimee is so great, I've just discovered her chanel and I'm so glad for that. Because, there is a bunch of stuff about how to understand music etc but most of it is for total begginers. I was always looking for something like this, to make a new step in building my knowledge and experience.
now I know that not going in music school when I was younger wasn't so bad decision hahah
Simon and Garfunkel were masters of two-part harmony, as were the Beatles. So many of their early songs have phenomenally beautiful and effective harmonies with only two parts. A lot of the time, those 4-3 resoltions you felt compelled to add were left out, implied by what the two voices were singing, and by the instruments. There's a great deal of country and bluegrass music which is marvelously effective with only two vocal parts, and wouldn't likely be improved by the addition of a third voice to "fill out the chords." In a way, it's an expression of trust in one's listening audience to appreciate what's there, and to hear the harmonies implied rather than to insist upon being spoon-fed, smacked in the face with the obvious.
you are absolutely dead on. S&G arrangements are perfect as they are in two parts and a 'third' vocal is just superfluous - even offensive. Why this video is interesting is it breaks down their actual two part vocal arrangement, which is so good and clever I find it hard sometimes to decipher who is singing what on their records. And I'm not exactly chopped liver.
@@sibionic Rather than "offensive" if offer a milder, less accusatory adjective, simplistic. Perhaps people will for it a little counter-intuitive to say that adding a third part is simplistic, but it's the mindset that vocal harmonies need to be in three parts that I'm describing. We hear SO much music that uses three parts - background vocals on pop songs especially, but also music like a lot of Crosby, Stills & Nash, where they sing in the parts throughout, and it's difficult sometimes to say which, if any, of the three parts is "the tune."
Listen to the Beatles' "If I Fell" and it's clear as a bell which line is the melody, as with "Sounds of Silence." Add a third part to "fill out" the harmonies, and it might be beautiful, but it wouldn't be better.
A lot of folks (my ex-wife, for instance) can't resist the urge to do that kind of filling in on songs that use three or more parts on different verses of the same song. I always cringe a little at that because I treasure the variety of textures that indicates a more thoughtful approach to arranging.
@@tenpiualto I just think a duet is more powerful than a trio actually - especially with S&G. 'If I Fell' works just as beautifully as a two parter (whatever the Beatles did)
@@tenpiualto but yes, very interesting - and I agree about finding the 'tune' in CS&N
This is a great study. I've often been stunned at what I thought of as "Scottish" harmony or "note-under" harmony. Starting with the Everly Brothers. Garfunkel often doing that above and then below in the same song. The Association used it a lot; Beatles; Big Country; Byrds. Having learned music by ear, I didn't identify the intervals, but suspected it had much to do with 4ths and 5ths above, and 3rds below. This morning my old brain said why not study it, and I landed on this. Thanks, sister!
Being jazz snobs at 13 (how laughable in retrospect), we thought they were good pop songwriters. This explanation so well illustrates the S & G's genius that we came to realize as we matured musically. Thanks for doing this one, Aimee. Cool stuff.
I think it might be important to remember that Simon was also playing guitar and minimising the complexity of his part left him more of his brain to keep the guitar playing as clean and perfect as possible. Not so important when recording, but when playing live he's given himself the space to keep it spot-on without overstretching in a live situation.
Simon's an excellent guitarist and he will have taken pride in this as well as in singing and in songwriting.
Thanks! You have a beautiful voice.
Not only do I enjoy your singing voice but I also enjoy your talking voice as well. So smooth and easy to listen to. Keeps me and my short attention span engaged.
You are generous with your talents. Seeing your troubleshooting process is helpful, thanks.
Great insight. Thanks for taking the time to pull this together.
It’s called genius. Perfection in music is rare, but “The Sound of Silence” is perfect. It needs no improvement.
It’s like “Piece of My Heart” by Janice Joplin. That needs nothing that isn’t there.
I love stuff like this because it teaches us that harmonizing doesn't have to be parallel motion - and really, that's all you hear these days. Sometimes notes remaining static while others move around is magical, as demonstrated here.
Wow.....a lot of work here......thank you for all of your time....ron castro
As a kid growing up I would listen to these records, the early Simon & Garfunkel and early Beatles albums. They taught me how to sing or at least find the right notes to sing. Fun stuff.
Well done working out that part young lady.
I am a old man, never tried to play a instrument until last year. Will be a year in December Lol I am not a natural so it’s a struggle. So thankful the more I try, the better I get. I understand these videos more and more as I go along. I do not learn fast at this point but thank you for these insightful videos. I find them very helpful.
Thank you for sharing this! I am an old soul and absolutely love S&G! I do the same thing you do. I am not educated in music, but I am so fascinated by music! It did surprise me when I found a lump in my throat listening to your harmony! So, so beautiful. I am now a big fan of YOU!
Now I want a Simon, Garfunkel and Nolte album.
love these and the "everyone can harmonize" videos. thanks aimee!
Fabulous dissection and hypothesis!
I always add a harmony to them. The key seems to be to harmonize with Art's harmony rather than think about Paul's melody. Also, I don't think occasionally duplicating notes is always a problem to be solved.
Aimee - I think the answer... is to just sing Art's part. It's the best part. But it is the combination of their two voices that makes the overall sound so exquisite. If you want to sing along - do Art's part. Otherwise just enjoy how wonderful they sound together. Since you brought up "The Boxer"... I wanted to mention the part near the end of the record where Art sings this lovely little bit that I always look forward to hearing (right around 4:44 into the song - shortly after the "lie lie lie" part ends). It's sort of a "la-la-lee" wafting high above the music. It is another great moment from the voice of Mr. Garfunkel.
I am so pleased to have just discovered this channel. I could watch you analyze classic rock songs like this for days on end. This is fantastic. Thank You.
Art's high harmony on the "I am leaving . . ." phrase just brought a tear to my eye. I've been listening to this song for 55 years and that's the first time it's ever happened. Thank you for showing me this.
Another reason that Paul simplified his vocal parts could be due to the fact that he is often playing an instrument (acoustic guitar) while singing. More importantly, he often uses a fingerstyle pattern when playing. So singing in more of a drone style allows him him to play more complex arpeggiated guitar patterns to accompany the vocals.
Good point.
Its Paul Simon. He doesn't need a crutch like that.
@@halcooper3070 I completely agree. Paul wrote what was right for each song musically. He didn't omit parts or alter parts because he couldn't perform something he would have rather played. Paul is an uncompromising genius. You think he is actually going to settle for anything?
Beethoven was once criticized for writing things violinists would complain were impossible to play. Beethoven's response was I write what I write. You're the violinist. It's your job to figure out how to play it.
My comment was not intended to suggest that Paul Simon needs a crutch or that he's settling for anything. I'm sure he arranged the song the way he wanted them to be. It was an observation that musicians either sing more elaborate harmonic lines or play more elaborate harmonic patterns on an instrument, but rarely if ever do both simultaneously. A musician understands this.
@@MiserableLittleDoomGoblin if you knew anything about Paul Simon, you would know thats not the case, he is known for intricate arrangers on guitar as well as difficultelody and harmony lines simultaneously. It's something he is famous for.
As a real musician myself, although decades removed from being a pro, no, never done what you suggest. If I can play it on guitar, and I can sing it, then with a basic amount of practice, I can do both, muscle memory is a handy thing.
Funnily enough, no amount of practice will ever let me play the drums, it's legs or it's arms, the two cannot be mixed, they refuse to work together.
Nice job of analysis & thank you for sharing the walk through.
I know nothing about music composing, structure, or anything. I can barely play the drums but I find these videos fascinating. Sounds like Aimee has perfect pitch!
Love the analysis. I would suggest Paul wasn't necessarily trying to lay low, but was looking for the shape where each phrase spreads apart pitch-wise for the effect it gives. It creates a second rhythmic structure that rolls along on it's own. Instead of just another voice to sound pretty, the harmony contributes to the message and effect.
Ha. This is the exact thing I do when listening to them-sing the third harmony. Although I've never written anything down. It's a fun challenge indeed for all the reasons you mentioned.
I love how this struggle is both fascinating and pointless: fascinating in writing out all the chords and finding the missing note in each triad, and pointless in the beauty of the music as is and the fact that no notes are really missing. This was truly a worthwhile exercise, instructive in both its technical aspect as well as the analysis of what is going on artistically. I think we would all benefit from doing the same kind of analysis with a similar majestic piece of music, especially those of us who do not compose or arrange music on a regular basis. Aimee, fantastic job; thanks for sharing.
Great stuff! The only theories I have as to why he would sing those particular notes are that 1) If he was thinking ahead to live performances, maybe he wanted a simpler part so he could focus on the guitar or 2) Maybe they just really thought that sound was hip ;) Either way, it is a bit of a nightmare to try and write a 3rd part to. This video made me realize that as a composer, I tend to write 2 part harmonies as if there were still a 3rd part there. I might take a cue from these two and change that up a bit and see what happens. Thanks for the insight!
Heck yeah! Smart realization!
Also enjoyed the video! To the theme of a simpler part - for me the simpleness and drone sound is because of the lyrics telling about sounds of silence, creeping etc.
The lyrics are also in the Jazz Standards the best explanation of the melody, thats why I allways took the Real Book with lyrics, no matter if I needed it for singing or bass. Thanks for this video and discussion.
You’re the second person to mention the “sound of silence.” I think you’re right on.
I was for long time in classic singing lessons, and there I noticed that "Corcovado" melodie has much less movement than "Girl from Ipanema" so from then on the lyrics where allways allmost more important than the chords, because they are often nearer by the intention of the song than the cords - specially by musicians that are "routiniert" excuse my english :-)
Also the end of Corcovado, where it gets personal, there is very much movement in the tones. So I m very thankful to my singing teacher (she dont live anymore), to show me.
Yes it does. I've seen him live once and many more times on video, and he is certainly capable of some impressive musicianship, but they were really young when they recorded this and I wonder if there was an element of "playing it safe" involved in the harmonies. Again, he also may just have wanted that echo-y drone because of the meaning of the song. Who knows? :)
I too love the harmonies of s&g and csny too like you do. Those guys really knew what they were doing. Generations come and go and each generation will love those harmonies. Those harmonies are eternal. Art Garfunkel...... What can I say..... His voice is angelic. His solo albums are great too. Another voice is that of Jon Anderson from the YES. Really mystic voice. I love your harmony lessons Aimee. Thanks.
Great topic. Folk groups were really exploding in the early to mid 60s & if you listen to PP&M you'll hear many of the same or similar techniques used by S&G. Harmonies below the lead, changing intervals, drones, unison voices etc. all being varied & switched around for dramatic effects. What's really cool about S&G is that they sounded so full with only 2 voices. It's almost like the music was the 3rd voice & they could both harmonize to that in various sections to create a 3 part harmony.
Brilliant analysis. As a amateur multi-instrumentalist I am fascinated and perplexed by vocal harmonies. These guys are the best. Wish you could have been there with them for the third part.
I do the same thing. I think Paul is being creative and not just doing the "regular" thing. Other musicians love my harmonies. And people love Simon and Garfunkel
Ooohhh! My favorite Beatles songs to provide a 3rd part for are Love Me Do and Do You Want to Know A Secret?
You are adorable. Thanks for this presentation….very entertaining and educational…!
You just verbalized my entire life. I'm 61 years old and I've been singing harmony with everybody on every song everyday. I like to jump around and especially with songs that I've never heard before and anticipate what they're going to do, and I'm always right. Lots of practice I've been singing Harmony since I was about 4 years old. Most of my adult life, well actually all of my adult life, I've been the lead singer, but I love the opportunities when I get to sing backup. There's just nothing like singing Harmony. Figuring out those parts, it's like a challenge but like not really challenging, but like fun. It's just fun. So I get ya girl. By the way, you are brilliant :-) Thanks so much for sharing!
🙌🏼🙏🏼
Ditto, I've been doing it for decades, and now i can jump in on a harmony almost instantly. Sometimes, it's "aha, why didn't they put this in" and at other times it's obvious why. And sometimes, adding the 3rd or 4th harmony just changes the whole flavor of the song and sends it somewhere else. A little while ago, a friend's band invited me up to join them in a Grateful Dead song (one I had never done before), and at the end, I noticed that the song started to sound more like The Eagles than the Dead. The Eagles have great harmonies, but the Dead have their own sacred style. I think they already had 3 voices in this song, so I had to go where no Dead went before. Thank you Aimee.
Love this
Well you don't analyze something that works and it worked for a very long time I think Paul just retired he does not want to be doing shows when he's 80 years old went I went to the same High School years later
I'm so happy you did this video!
Simon's "Because a vision softly creeping left its seeds while I was sleeping" ...that's all just one note on the scale. The pair aren't singing in perfect harmony-- they're just blending well. If you want perfect harmony, then the Chordettes, try them.
I actually really liked the harmony you added. It enhanced the song, although you’re right it doesn’t need it. Thanks for the excellent harmony lessons from your videos. They’ve really helped me to teach a bit to my ukulele friends.
loved singing along with simon and garfunkel, and everly brothers when i was young, care-free and still had some voice albeit immature. Thank you Aimee for another wonderful episode. You are also a "songbird"!
Super awesome Aimee! Yes it doesn't have to be all perfect 3rds. And what makes their harmony special is the spots where they land on open 4ths and 5ths.
I'm a technical person, not a musician at all, so seeing the music broken down this way was very enlightening. Nice work, Aimee.
When they arranged it for 2 voices they made choices that they probably would not have made if there had been 3, e.g. Simon, Garfunkle, and Nolte. Great work. Aimee.
Karl and I are on a road trip and I just played this for him - we both found it fascinating - it led to a great discussion. :-) I also have a thought: the 4ths and 5ths intervals (drone) remind me of Gregorian chant and create a hollowness which definitely highlights the lyric. Karl loved it and said he definitely needs to subscribe to your channel.:-) ❤️
.
I can really relate as I always try to do the third harmony on S & G, and even a forth on Crosby, Stills, & Nash. Good practice.
🙌🏼🙌🏼
It's perfect the way it is your messing with the dynamics of this song your making it sound like the works of the Christy Minstrels .Sir Paul once said that the hardest harmony that he ever had to do was Nowhere Man with Lennon... Give that one a shot... Peace..
Paul Simon's lower part here reminds me of the guitarist's part in the band Extreme for 'More Than Words'
A third voice in triadic Harmony will always result in a few uncomfortable intervalic skips. I've experimented with this a lot writing 3-part vocal arrangements for my trio (2 guitars & bass, and we all sing). Writing out the parts is by far the best way, as you've demonstrated. The challenge then becomes how to sing the skips in a way that they don't sound strange or accented, or disjointed. Zak Brown Band does this so well.
That was wonderful and very interesting! Thanks!
Very good knowledge mam. Hats off to you.
Thank you for this video Amy I got hired into a band that had two singers and I was a third and I had to figure out everyone on those parts a lot of times I would just omit the part no instead of trying to make an uncomfortable shift other times I just go for the uncomfortable shift in those days, I got a lot of real high parts 30 years later I’ve learned how to sing low harmonies and do a similar thing. Thank you for the great learning tool.
Opps
YES, this speaks to my soul. Thank you so much for this video.
Nice video. The best I've found on harmony.
what a superb video! I too love harmonising but don't always get it right. You've unlocked some of it for me.. Thanks
Your voice suits Simon and Garfunkel beautifully! Love your voice.
Several songs where they actually cross harmonies. I believe "Benedictus" is one example. "The Sun is Burning in the Sky" might be another. Their early stuff was recorded on 4 track, so Garfunkel is in one ear while Simon is in the other. Makes it easy to hear them cross, which is technically a no-no, but effective because of the stereo recording technique.
They say it's a no-no, but Alice in Chains did it with great success many times throughout their career. There are no real rules if you are practiced enough...
Who says it's a no no? Crossing harmonies is pretty common in jazz, folk, really any popular or modern style of music. I think Bach even did it, so really unless you're a beginning music theory student doing a homework assignment (which probably has restrictions purely for pedagogical reasons), you can cross harmonies
This was a fantastic video. I'm so glad I stumbled across it.
I've always been one of those people who have tried to find harmonies with everything; I love singing them. They fascinate me. I've been in a bunch of bands (guitarist, I like to harmonise w/ my instrument too :)) where it's been my favourite thing to do and even now, when I just jam with friends, I always try to find something unique naturally. EXCEPT with S&G. Always end up on the same note in places. It was really cool seeing the harmonies laid out like this, even if I have trouble reading music.
Thanks so much. Definitely checking out more of your videos!
thanks for the breakdown and preformance of the little tiny parts i unintentionally land on. it would be a kool thing to find, have, create a library that dissects complicated/unconventional vox harmonies thanks again for sharing your insight
This video is great, in that it makes clear that harmony singing isn't just about being "mathematicly" correct. I love complex harmonies that utilize major seconds, perfect fourths and major sixth. Just as tension and release is used in chord harmony, this can be done with vocal harmony. Simon and Garfunkel are just one example. The harmony is clearly not written to fit in a 3rd part, but to create a "smoothness" to the song. It's also why I love listening to CSNY and James Taylor with Carole King or Carly Simon!
Nothing in popular music excites me more than a well-written 2-part harmony... I've been in vocal jazz groups singing chords so dense we would sometimes laugh singing them, but it doesn't compare to the beauty two perfectly interweaving voices have. That's part of the magic of S&G but it's all over if you keep your ears open. Personally I freak out when I realize a song I've heard has one of those parts. :P
If you consider "Sound of Silence" in terms of the lyrics and the tonality of the song, they were also trying to get that open sound ON PURPOSE. Starting in unison in the beginning, with passing through the 3rd when Garfunkle sings the melody, and landing on the open 5th, which as CLOSE to an octave in terms of having an "open" or "unison" sound. I think they are PURPOSELY avoiding strengthening the 3rd.
WigganNuG Yes, I think this makes sense. The song is about emptiness and loneliness, which is what they're trying to express using unisons and fifths.
Paul and Art are singing smart countermelodies and they always get on my note too when singing 3 parts :) smart use of 3rds, 4ths and 5ths between the two of em.
Wonderful video. I used to harmonize with my friend and Ive learned to find the chord tones instinctively. My friend who was a more talented singer would use his guitar to find the note which is ok but I find it settles in the brain better if you simply sing and instinctively find the chord tones. But our harmonies chops are no where near your level. Being primarily a bass player I find your videos very eye opening. Thanks for the wonderful lesson.
Excellent explanation! Thanks for all the work that went into that.
I love this so much! Thanks for the lesson Aimee
Wow. Beautiful lesson/discussion/train of thought ❤
Great. you are smooth and clear. Whatever you do is an improvement to what we no longer have. Music as it should be.
Also, because Simon is sometimes singing in thirds, sometimes in sixths, and sometimes in 5ths/4ths, the harmony is more interesting as a unit (although the melody is still emphasized). When singing entirely in thirds, songwriters usually will give each singer a melody on their own and only bring in thirds fir a chorus or bridge, precisely because listening to straight parallel thirds and even thirds and sixths can get very boring very fast.
Regardless of the reason, Paul Simon certainly knew what he was doing! 😁👏🏻
Aimee - I think you are exactly right... when you said that Paul Simon "wanted to lay low. He wanted to just make his part sit in a comfortable place. Hit all the necesary harmony notes for us to follow the function of the harmony... but really to let Art Garfunkel shine. Because, like I said, he's a flippin' songbird. If I could sing with Art Garfunkel... I would do the same thing. Like a drone almost at times... just to let his voice soar and shine." 18:30
This was a great presentation.
I'm 62. I've been a musician since I was 7. I put together a Country Band that did well for about 7 years in which I was the frontman. Back in the 70's, I was in the Army Band. So, I am an accomplished musician.
I have found that singing is 90% hearing and 10% voice. The same applies to playing an instrument in an ensemble. It takes serious discipline and teamwork.
I would rather sing back up than be a frontman. The most powerful note in all of music is the rest. When singing harmony, there are usually a lot of rests. This gives time to be mentally prepared to hit the notes. For more difficult songs, when I'm not supposed to sing, I will step away from the mike to hum my part. But it seems finding the 3rd part off the cuff can be difficult in spite of my experience.
True story~ I was just listening on Smule to the sound of silence and while I was listening I came up with the third harmony too. So I switched to TH-cam to listen just to Paul simons harmony and came across yous, and mine is almost identical to yours. Love it! I love the harmony in songs too.
Allow me to correct something.( Paul's part) the second line starting 'Becuse a vision' .... it stays on C. It doesn't jump to E until 'Planted in my brain'. My husband pointed this out to me. He's been singing Simon and Garfunkel for decades. He's right . Listen carefully to the original. Thank you for sharing your love for this great duo. Keep going!
Much thanks
Love this vid and love you! I was a teen when the album came out, and on the radio, and trying to sing along, no musicians in my family, no music in school, I thought I couldn't sing was the problem. I read about music though - it is fabulous the way you combine "the reading" with a recording and you singing, and video. Thanks muchly!
I’m officially addicted to your channel. Thanks!
Such a beautiful singer
Aimee, you made my day! Strangely, somehow, something made click, and this whole "how and why notes on staff" thing now makes so much more sense to me; more than i ever got from any other teaching material on that subject. And that wasn't even the point of the video :D Thank you so much!
I’m so glad 🙌🏼
WOW this is pure gold, thank you for the analysis. For people that kinda did a little bit of music and would like to understand more like me, this is the PERFECT video. You explain everything very simply and yet not too much so that it is too simple and unhelpful, and you use a score. It's like the difference between physics videos on TH-cam (which I love but you won't demonstrate anything with it), and taking a sheet of paper and starting to really do the maths (which are the real thing and which I love too). This was so enriching. Thank you!
Beautiful, thanks so much for the lesson!
Love your voice it sounds beautiful with the original track,
Your theory is as usual spot on👍🎧🎼🎹
I have a hopeless singing voice but every time I sing along with a Simon & Garfunkel song (which in the interests of world peace, I never do when anyone else is around) somehow, I always track and instinctively duplicate Art's note - badly. Whether he is on a lead note or harmonically in support, his note is somehow always the lead note to my ear. It's what I hear. Paul's voice and choice of drone notes feel to me just like you describe, he's supporting Art and making Art the star. That is very generous for a commercial artist and songwriter. It doesn't matter to my ear whether there are missing thirds, parallel fifths or anything else. Every note the two of them produce - much as Bernstein said of Beethoven - is always the right next note, to my ear.
The Sound of Silence - To me, the choice of harmony for Paul was to support the song. By keeping his harmony mostly as a drone, it is as close to silence as you can get without actually being silent. So it was the most supportive harmony he could invent and stay true to the song.
great video! not only you're a great teacher but also you make a great analysis of music and have a sensible approach towards different styles and their features.
Interesting... I studided the gitar part to hear the complexity of that part... WOW ... to hera the matreal you presanted!
I think the answer might be even simpler: it's about contrast. Low vs high, climbing vs drone. Thank you for this video, I absolutely loved it :)
I love all the rich harmonies on the soundtrack of O Brother, Where Art Thou? It is fun to sing along with the different harmonies.
They are absolutely amazing
*................Dylan and Simon and Garfunkel have the purest form of music to me. Closet to Heavenly music. Acoustic voice with acoustic guitars. Bob Dylan takes it to another level with his Harmonica playing in the original song “All Along the Watchtower....*
Aimee, your videos are really interesting!
I love adding the third part harmony as well. I'm always doing that in the car when I'm driving. I just discovered your channel. Great job!
So great of course, but don't apologize for bass clef, it's all this trombonist can easily read, and I'm happy to see it!