I sing barbershop so probably have a better understanding of harmony than most, but seeing it laid out here so well and simple to understand makes harmony accessible to all, great video 👍
I’ve been listening to the Beatles religiously for fifteen years and everytime I go further in depth with their music I come away with more and more respect for Paul McCartney every time
I've spent countless hours trying to tweeze out some of those harmonies. In particular, 'Because'. Your teaching style is clear and easy to receive. Thank you!
No way, I’ve been looking into beatle harmonies lately and James has just made a video on it. Nice one again, you know exactly what we want. Keep it up James.
Yes It Is is great. It’s the best harmonies of the early Beatles as they explore more intricate parts. It’s not “butchering” the sandwich-it’s evolving past it to more colorful harmonization. That’s why, to make it sound bad, you had to make it sound bad yourself.
The F natural (or at least something significantly closer to an F natural than it is to an F#) that George inexplicably sings over every F# chord in “Yes it Is” is not “more colourful harmonization”. It’s just being really, really horribly flat. Like all human beings, the Beatles had their off-days, and the day they recorded the vocals for that song was one of them.
The “Because” example is a mystifying choice to illustrate countermelody where “all of them are singing something completely different, and are not locked to a pattern” With the exception of Paul’s embellishment at the end, which briefly puts a major sixth, then a seventh, then a ninth into what is essentially an F#minor chord, they are literally just arpeggiating triads in total lock-step with each other. Throughout the song, in fact, they remain rhythmically and harmonically locked together. With (again) a couple of very minor embellishments from Paul as the exceptions to the rule, they are totally “locked to a pattern”. They go up at the same time, they go down at the same time. In fact, the parallel motion of the three parts (*not literally parallel in the technical sense because the size of the intervals changes) is almost the defining quality of the harmony. It’s difficult to imagine how you could have chosen a worse example. If you want a good example of independent counterpoint, look at “Help” The idea that “Because” is the Beatles most complex harmony is frankly bizarre. The vocal harmony in “Drive my Car” is more complex. “Because” is a beautiful song, and the harmonies are impeccably sung and gorgeously recorded. It may be their best three-part harmony PERFORMANCE. But while some of the chord choices are interesting, the vocal arrangement in which they are rendered is really quite simple. They’re essentially just singing the composite parts of the chords, in a very straightforward manner.
This is a really GREAT way to telling what you're revealing about their awesome harmonies. Stimulating graphic diagrams with entertaining examples. Thx for doing this!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you James. Such a nice video, could be an example for music TH-camrs: no clickbait or other BS, no beating around the bush for half a video, straight to the point which is explained and demonstrated with craft. I'm glad I found your channel, and I've been a subscriber ever since, and you don't disappoint. Great job!
The key to singing harmony is chord tones. Know the notes that make up the chord you’re singing over at any given time and always be singing one of those, and you really can’t go wrong. Rather than thinking of a single seven note scale for the song as a whole, think about a new one for each new chord, where the root note of the chord is #1. The three most important numbers for the harmony singer are always going to be 1,3 and 5, the three notes that make up a triad. Unless it’s a diminished, augmented, or suspended chord, if you’re hitting one of those three (with respect to the particular CHORD, not the overall KEY), and it isn’t the same one the other singer is singing, you’re harmonizing. BUT… it’s important to note that this will inevitably mean that there will be times when one voice moves and another remains static. Thinking that you need to follow an identical arc, in parallel harmony, is what gets people in to trouble. If you remain exactly a third (or fourth, or fifth, or sixth, or whatever) above or below the other singer at every turn of the melody, slavishly following their arc, you’re inevitably going to be horribly out of tune with some of the chords. The space between the voices HAS TO grow and shrink unless you are performing a piece of music specifically composed with parallel harmony in mind. The vast majority of Beatles chords are, fundamentally, simple major and minor triads. They each have a root, a third (occasionally replaced by the second or fourth in a suspended chord) and a fifth. So, for the most part, you are always responsible for either the root, the third (or its substituted suspension as noted above), or the fifth. But you won’t always be responsible for the same one. On one chord the lead singer might be singing the fifth, and you the root above them. On the next chord, their note has now become the root, and so you now sing the third. In both cases, you’re singing the closest higher note that is also a chord tone, but because the distance between a fifth and the root above is larger than the space between a root and a third above, the space between the two vocal parts has changed. While there are obviously exceptions that are more complex, the basic job of the close harmony singer is to always be singing a note that is as close to the note the other singer is singing as possible, while also being a chord tone. If you follow that basic premise, your harmony can’t really fail.
Yes. This applies to people who play piano or guitar or mandolin or ukulele, or who have a bit of the Knowledge. Lots of little kids love singing, but have no experience of chords, or sadly, not even a musical instrument to practice on. I reckon we need more singing lessons in schools - those which make use of two or three part harmonies, because that practice of bringing up a mysterious different melody in your head could be learnt young. And, like languages - it's with you forever. (I think James Hargreaves' explanation was just right - particularly for people who don't play an instrument).
@@alysk2522 It applies to anyone who wants to harmonise effectively. It especially applies to those who don’t play a chordal instrument, because those who do are more likely to already have a grasp of it. It is literally impossible to harmonise with chordal music unless you have an understanding that with each change of chord the notes available to you as a harmony singer, and the fundamental harmonic relationships between those notes, also change . Naturally musical people who harmonise by ear, having never been “taught” to do so, have this understanding intuitively, even if they never think about it consciously, couldn’t put into words what it is that they are doing, and couldn’t name the chords or cadences to which they are instinctively responding. The problem with telling people who have neither the level of innate musicality I just described, nor a broader understanding of music theory, that the way to think about harmony singing is to think of a single numerically ranked scale that applies throughout a melody, and throughout any harmony line that joins it, is that it’s going to end up being extremely misleading and confusing the moment they are confronted with a song with more than one chord in it. They’re not going to understand why the “3” note that they chose to harmonise over the lead singer’s “1” (using James’s “two notes up” formula), and which sounded beautifully harmonious a moment ago, now sounds horribly wrong even though the lead singer is still singing the same note they were singing then. They’re not going to understand that the harmonic relationship each of those two notes has to each other and to the wider sonic context in which we’re hearing them, has fundamentally changed in ways that must be taken into account by a harmony singer, if they are to produce a pleasing harmony. The key understanding that will have been missed is that once we’ve moved to a new chord, and in all the ways that actually matter for harmony singing, we’re effectively (if not literally) in a new key. “1” is no longer “1” and “3” is no longer “3”. Instead, the exact same two notes are now 7 and 2 (where our harmony singer’s note, which is now 2, will clash with the 3 in the chord), or 6 and 1, or 5 and 7 (where our harmony singer’s note, now 7, will rub against the 1 in the chord) or 4 and 6 (where our harmony singer’s note, now 6, will clash with the 7 that is either present or implied in the V chord). And THAT’s in a song that is 100% diatonic (includes zero notes, in either melody or harmonic structure as a whole, from outside of a single key). Once a song includes chromatic chords or key modulations (as virtually every Beatles song, for example, does), the confusion will only get worse. The numbers that matter to the harmony singer are those that describe a given note’s relationship to the root of the current chord, NOT to the overall key centre of the song.
Absolutely. I've long been convinced the Beatles harmonies are not simply instinctive - they are clearly based on a knowledge of chords. For example, the parts in Nowhere Man do not mirror each other in the way the video suggests. George's line in particular deviates quite markedly from the melody. George has the reputation of being the most studious of the group when it came to guitar phrasing and his vocal line in Nowhere Man is most likely derived from studying the underlying chords. Same goes for the bridge in This Boy. George and Paul go in quite opposite directions in order to complete the underlying chords. John's counter melody in If I Fell is largely derived from following the root notes of the underlying chords. One could go on.... And Yes It Is is definitely NOT the mess up that the video suggests. Their employment of dissonance is deliberate and quite masterful.
You hope that was helpful? Ummmm, how to put this? Yes, yes it was helpful. I’ve been trying for 4 decades to understand their harmonies. Solved!! Brilliant
This is so helpful James. Im in bad with female singer and been struggling to get harmony right on some songs. Excited now to try it out 👍 will thank you when we're headlining Glastonbury 🤣🤣🤣
This is really helpful, James! I've used the Beatles' harmonies as my 'go to' songs. I think they are very simple and easy to follow. I have never heard it explained like you have however and it really makes sense. I love the idea you called the 'melody sandwich'. Really a cool video. Thank you!
This was so very clearly presented and easy to follow, thank you; I learned the proper names for what I've been singing when it's my turn to stick a harmony in. In the 1960s the Beatles would have been accustomed to the close harmonies of the songs of their parents' era. If you like - it's not only practice, but also learning an "ear in your head" for it when you're young. I suppose this is why The Beatles didn't find "Moonlight Bay" difficult when they sang it on the Morecambe and Wise show in 1963. (A two note difference, which the Everley Brothers also used to get their unique fraternal sound). Everyone loves harmonies, so satisfying when it goes right. We seem to have mostly stopped using them in primary schools, which is a bit of a shame. Thanks again.
This is ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT!!! You were able to explain the “ear worm” that I’ve always heard in Please Please Me!! I knew there was something special going on but I never understood what it was. THANK YOU!!
It’s so funny, I was in the car today listening to Abbey road and when “Because” came on I was thinking about how awesome the vocal harmonies were. Now I’m watching a video explaining it lol
Thank you very much. This video is like the videos that show how amazing magic tricks are made. The magic doesn't fade away but you understand what's happening: double pleasure
I've recently been working on my first deep investigation of Beatles harmonies, figuring out the individual voices in the chorus of the rooftop concert version of "Don't Let Me Down". I think I've worked out what John and Paul are singing, and have not yet gotten George's part. The notes that clearly sound to me like the main melody, no one is actually singing! It's an auditory illusion! So this may be a step beyond the Double Counter Melody method described here! I could be wrong, as my ears are really challenged by this, and I'd love to see someone else's take on it! Thanks a lot for this great lesson!
That was pretty cool, I’ve always sang along to Beatles tunes and picking out the different melodies and singing the different parts. Because is a great one. I’m going to go listen to Yes It Is now lol
4:50 I remember I had a conversation with my mom about melodies, back when I hadn't started studying music for real yet. I forget a lot of it, but she said the melody line goes on top. The heavy metal guitars of "Porky Means Business" from EarthBound and The Beatles were my reference points for why I thought the "main harmony" usually goes above the melody. To this day they're the things I come back to to remind myself it's possible to make the melody go underneath the harmony yet still clearly be the melody. That's the part of it that's tricky, though, because the very reason the melody usually goes on top is because our ears want to focus on the highest voice. 6:00 exactly Harmony #3 is the first that comes to mind for me. Just from the title, I'm Only Sleeping and Please Please Me to a tee.
Great video James just watched it I’ve just joined your channel. I’m a big Beatles fan and living so close to Liverpool helps to. I also sing myself got a pretty good voice I’ve been told I’ve even done recordings at my cousins studio he has at his house. I even sing in my room along to Beatles songs and do harmonies with them while I’m singing a long to them I have to say it comes out pretty good. I’ve got a guitar to and keyboard. Look forward to more of these ones. I’ve got a more McCartney sound me though can sing quite high
Thanks. I’m in a band that has recorded 8 albums. I have a hard time with reading music and theory stuff. Some of my band mates are experts at it, so this was a helpful visualization.
The Sound of Silence by Simon and Garfunkel is one of the best examples of what you refer to as "fanfare." Paul's vocal changes notes maybe a dozen times from the beginning to the end of the first verse while Art hits note number 12 on the word "creeping."
Sorry, you are wrong about Yes it is. It was meant to be like that. The harmonies are sometimes so close to each other that it sounds dissonant - but great!
By the way, a great example that was missing is the final “yeah” harmony sung in She Loves You, which even George Martin didn’t think would work, but they proved that the arranged harmony was the right decision.
@@Korn1holio He’s flat every time the F#m chord happens in the first line of the verses (the third chord in the sequence, which falls on the word “tonight” in the first verse). It’s so wildly off - virtually a full semi-tone, so enough to be wrong but not enough to be so wrong it’s “right” again - that it’s difficult to tell whether he’s trying to sing an F# (the root note of the chord, which would make sense) and badly missing, or deliberately trying to sing an F natural, which would make no harmonic sense whatsoever. It sounds like maybe he couldn’t hear the chord properly in his headphones, so couldn’t tell how out of tune with it he was. Still, it’s one of the most bizarre “why didn’t they fix that” moments in the band’s entire output.
I've spent decades trying to figure out what hooked me that Sun night in 64. PO’d from being dragged away from our wiffel ball game and made to watch these (according to my father) long haired girls thing. By the end we were combing our hair down and hooked! 60yr later, as a musician and retired recording engineer I finally concluded that it was the Johns Vox with George & Pauls harmony that was so different it set the hook!
This is a great lesson. IMHO any cover band should rig as many mics as they can and have as many voices in mix as possible even if just "ooo aah" in choruses
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
I sing barbershop so probably have a better understanding of harmony than most, but seeing it laid out here so well and simple to understand makes harmony accessible to all, great video 👍
Finally, after a life time waiting for someone to explain this to a non music theorist!!!! I learned so much in this video, thank you Sir!!!
I’ve been listening to the Beatles religiously for fifteen years and everytime I go further in depth with their music I come away with more and more respect for Paul McCartney every time
I've spent countless hours trying to tweeze out some of those harmonies. In particular, 'Because'. Your teaching style is clear and easy to receive. Thank you!
No way, I’ve been looking into beatle harmonies lately and James has just made a video on it. Nice one again, you know exactly what we want. Keep it up James.
Glad to hear it! Enjoy 👍👍
Same here man the timing was perfect
You did a great job at explaining, James. The graphics helped a lot, and showing each vocal part in a different color. Thanks!
Yes It Is is great. It’s the best harmonies of the early Beatles as they explore more intricate parts. It’s not “butchering” the sandwich-it’s evolving past it to more colorful harmonization.
That’s why, to make it sound bad, you had to make it sound bad yourself.
The F natural (or at least something significantly closer to an F natural than it is to an F#) that George inexplicably sings over every F# chord in “Yes it Is” is not “more colourful harmonization”. It’s just being really, really horribly flat. Like all human beings, the Beatles had their off-days, and the day they recorded the vocals for that song was one of them.
Thanks James, you explanation is so simple yet profound, thank you so much❤
The “Because” example is a mystifying choice to illustrate countermelody where “all of them are singing something completely different, and are not locked to a pattern”
With the exception of Paul’s embellishment at the end, which briefly puts a major sixth, then a seventh, then a ninth into what is essentially an F#minor chord, they are literally just arpeggiating triads in total lock-step with each other. Throughout the song, in fact, they remain rhythmically and harmonically locked together. With (again) a couple of very minor embellishments from Paul as the exceptions to the rule, they are totally “locked to a pattern”. They go up at the same time, they go down at the same time. In fact, the parallel motion of the three parts (*not literally parallel in the technical sense because the size of the intervals changes) is almost the defining quality of the harmony. It’s difficult to imagine how you could have chosen a worse example. If you want a good example of independent counterpoint, look at “Help”
The idea that “Because” is the Beatles most complex harmony is frankly bizarre. The vocal harmony in “Drive my Car” is more complex. “Because” is a beautiful song, and the harmonies are impeccably sung and gorgeously recorded. It may be their best three-part harmony PERFORMANCE. But while some of the chord choices are interesting, the vocal arrangement in which they are rendered is really quite simple. They’re essentially just singing the composite parts of the chords, in a very straightforward manner.
Yep...I concur!
"Chains" was in their first album and it was perfect harmony in unison
Wow! Incredible. I loved your vocal harmonies and presentations. I gives me a renewed appreciation for the Beatles music.
I’ve always loved “Yes It Is”
'Because' from Abbey Road is stunning. Great video, James.
This is a really GREAT way to telling what you're revealing about their awesome harmonies. Stimulating graphic diagrams with entertaining examples. Thx for doing this!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Just Wonderful.👏👏👏👏
More Beatles Please.!🙏
Well done. Thank you!
Thank you James. Such a nice video, could be an example for music TH-camrs: no clickbait or other BS, no beating around the bush for half a video, straight to the point which is explained and demonstrated with craft. I'm glad I found your channel, and I've been a subscriber ever since, and you don't disappoint. Great job!
A-M-A-Z-I-N-G lesson!!! I have been watching Beatles lessons on youtube for years. This one is one of the best I´ve seen it! Thanks from Brazil.
thank you very much for this video!!! it will help me a lot
Love this. Clever way to present it too.
Glad you liked it!
Phenomenal representation of harmony. Please do more analysis like these.
The key to singing harmony is chord tones. Know the notes that make up the chord you’re singing over at any given time and always be singing one of those, and you really can’t go wrong. Rather than thinking of a single seven note scale for the song as a whole, think about a new one for each new chord, where the root note of the chord is #1. The three most important numbers for the harmony singer are always going to be 1,3 and 5, the three notes that make up a triad. Unless it’s a diminished, augmented, or suspended chord, if you’re hitting one of those three (with respect to the particular CHORD, not the overall KEY), and it isn’t the same one the other singer is singing, you’re harmonizing.
BUT… it’s important to note that this will inevitably mean that there will be times when one voice moves and another remains static. Thinking that you need to follow an identical arc, in parallel harmony, is what gets people in to trouble. If you remain exactly a third (or fourth, or fifth, or sixth, or whatever) above or below the other singer at every turn of the melody, slavishly following their arc, you’re inevitably going to be horribly out of tune with some of the chords. The space between the voices HAS TO grow and shrink unless you are performing a piece of music specifically composed with parallel harmony in mind.
The vast majority of Beatles chords are, fundamentally, simple major and minor triads. They each have a root, a third (occasionally replaced by the second or fourth in a suspended chord) and a fifth. So, for the most part, you are always responsible for either the root, the third (or its substituted suspension as noted above), or the fifth. But you won’t always be responsible for the same one. On one chord the lead singer might be singing the fifth, and you the root above them. On the next chord, their note has now become the root, and so you now sing the third. In both cases, you’re singing the closest higher note that is also a chord tone, but because the distance between a fifth and the root above is larger than the space between a root and a third above, the space between the two vocal parts has changed.
While there are obviously exceptions that are more complex, the basic job of the close harmony singer is to always be singing a note that is as close to the note the other singer is singing as possible, while also being a chord tone. If you follow that basic premise, your harmony can’t really fail.
quite right
Yes. This applies to people who play piano or guitar or mandolin or ukulele, or who have a bit of the Knowledge.
Lots of little kids love singing, but have no experience of chords, or sadly, not even a musical instrument to practice on.
I reckon we need more singing lessons in schools - those which make use of two or three part harmonies, because that practice of bringing up a mysterious different melody in your head could be learnt young. And, like languages - it's with you forever.
(I think James Hargreaves' explanation was just right - particularly for people who don't play an instrument).
@@alysk2522 It applies to anyone who wants to harmonise effectively. It especially applies to those who don’t play a chordal instrument, because those who do are more likely to already have a grasp of it.
It is literally impossible to harmonise with chordal music unless you have an understanding that with each change of chord the notes available to you as a harmony singer, and the fundamental harmonic relationships between those notes, also change . Naturally musical people who harmonise by ear, having never been “taught” to do so, have this understanding intuitively, even if they never think about it consciously, couldn’t put into words what it is that they are doing, and couldn’t name the chords or cadences to which they are instinctively responding.
The problem with telling people who have neither the level of innate musicality I just described, nor a broader understanding of music theory, that the way to think about harmony singing is to think of a single numerically ranked scale that applies throughout a melody, and throughout any harmony line that joins it, is that it’s going to end up being extremely misleading and confusing the moment they are confronted with a song with more than one chord in it.
They’re not going to understand why the “3” note that they chose to harmonise over the lead singer’s “1” (using James’s “two notes up” formula), and which sounded beautifully harmonious a moment ago, now sounds horribly wrong even though the lead singer is still singing the same note they were singing then. They’re not going to understand that the harmonic relationship each of those two notes has to each other and to the wider sonic context in which we’re hearing them, has fundamentally changed in ways that must be taken into account by a harmony singer, if they are to produce a pleasing harmony.
The key understanding that will have been missed is that once we’ve moved to a new chord, and in all the ways that actually matter for harmony singing, we’re effectively (if not literally) in a new key. “1” is no longer “1” and “3” is no longer “3”. Instead, the exact same two notes are now 7 and 2 (where our harmony singer’s note, which is now 2, will clash with the 3 in the chord), or 6 and 1, or 5 and 7 (where our harmony singer’s note, now 7, will rub against the 1 in the chord) or 4 and 6 (where our harmony singer’s note, now 6, will clash with the 7 that is either present or implied in the V chord). And THAT’s in a song that is 100% diatonic (includes zero notes, in either melody or harmonic structure as a whole, from outside of a single key). Once a song includes chromatic chords or key modulations (as virtually every Beatles song, for example, does), the confusion will only get worse.
The numbers that matter to the harmony singer are those that describe a given note’s relationship to the root of the current chord, NOT to the overall key centre of the song.
Absolutely. I've long been convinced the Beatles harmonies are not simply instinctive - they are clearly based on a knowledge of chords. For example, the parts in Nowhere Man do not mirror each other in the way the video suggests. George's line in particular deviates quite markedly from the melody. George has the reputation of being the most studious of the group when it came to guitar phrasing and his vocal line in Nowhere Man is most likely derived from studying the underlying chords. Same goes for the bridge in This Boy. George and Paul go in quite opposite directions in order to complete the underlying chords. John's counter melody in If I Fell is largely derived from following the root notes of the underlying chords. One could go on.... And Yes It Is is definitely NOT the mess up that the video suggests. Their employment of dissonance is deliberate and quite masterful.
The first time that somebody explained that to me - just great!
This was a terrific explanation of the Beatles harmony and harmony in general. I love studying harmony as it can add so much!
You hope that was helpful? Ummmm, how to put this? Yes, yes it was helpful. I’ve been trying for 4 decades to understand their harmonies. Solved!! Brilliant
Very well done. the examples and the visuals are very useful. Thanks so much James
Thank you for a wonderfully instructive video with the best possible imaginable explanations. Great work!
This was fascinating... and I love their rendition of "Yes It Is" lol
Very very interesting and informative thankyou
I will never hear the Beatles in the same way. Not ever again. Thank you.
Fantastic analysis of Beatles harmonies perfectly clear explained! Thank you very much James🎉😊
What a great tutorial. Ive only ever guessed at what harmonies were. Now i have a good understanding of what is actually happening.
Thanks so much. 😊
fantastic lesson James...waiting for something like this for so long...really really well done.
Cheers :)
Thought I knew more than I did(!) - really useful, thank you James
just what I've been looking for. thanks James!
Very welcome 😎
This is so helpful James. Im in bad with female singer and been struggling to get harmony right on some songs. Excited now to try it out 👍 will thank you when we're headlining Glastonbury 🤣🤣🤣
Excellent job. You're right - the boys' harmonies, long overlooked, are a key part of their musical magic.
Overlooked by whom?
Not overlooked whatsoever. Very famous for their harmonies.
Excellent lesson! Thank you very much!
Amazing! I have always been mesmerized by Johns part in If I Fell.
Fantastic video! And good singing, to be able to sing all those notes!
Thanks James! How cool!
This is really helpful, James! I've used the Beatles' harmonies as my 'go to' songs. I think they are very simple and easy to follow. I have never heard it explained like you have however and it really makes sense. I love the idea you called the 'melody sandwich'. Really a cool video. Thank you!
This was so very clearly presented and easy to follow, thank you; I learned the proper names for what I've been singing when it's my turn to stick a harmony in.
In the 1960s the Beatles would have been accustomed to the close harmonies of the songs of their parents' era. If you like - it's not only practice, but also learning an "ear in your head" for it when you're young. I suppose this is why The Beatles didn't find "Moonlight Bay" difficult when they sang it on the Morecambe and Wise show in 1963.
(A two note difference, which the Everley Brothers also used to get their unique fraternal sound). Everyone loves harmonies, so satisfying when it goes right. We seem to have mostly stopped using them in primary schools, which is a bit of a shame.
Thanks again.
Fascinating, clear and accessible! Thanks!
Nice job...thanks for sharing
Quanto mais detalhes conheço sobre Os Beatles, mais fico maravilhado. Thanks from Brazil.
This is ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT!!! You were able to explain the “ear worm” that I’ve always heard in Please Please Me!! I knew there was something special going on but I never understood what it was. THANK YOU!!
Amazing mate, a lot of learning here!
Wow! I love this. That was great. One of my favorite harmonies are in the bridges of Baby’s in Black and Norwegian Wood. 👍
Nice summary and examples for a harmony novice like me. Thank you.
Really excellent display and information...wish I'd seen this years ago...
Great vid James, really interesting
Thanks 👍😎🎸
A really great explanation, thank you
It’s so funny, I was in the car today listening to Abbey road and when “Because” came on I was thinking about how awesome the vocal harmonies were. Now I’m watching a video explaining it lol
I never realised this needed explanation. However, still a very interesting video tutorial
Mate that was just fantastic- thank you 🙏🏻
Nice teaching, Professor. You make me "see", because I'm not a musician, how far can go the great talent the Beatles have harmonizing
Fun to watch. Really well done and explained.
Brilliant video, so well explained.
Good stuff, James. Now I have a better idea of what I'm trying to achieve. Thanks!
Thank you very much. This video is like the videos that show how amazing magic tricks are made. The magic doesn't fade away but you understand what's happening: double pleasure
Great explanation and analysis!. I've learned a lot about harmonize technique from Beatles. Thanks Sir!
Fabtastic video (yes, a mix of fabulous and fantastic).
Wow this is amazing and explained so well i have no knowledge at all and this has made me want to understand more thankyou so very much .
Pure musical genius
Er not really. If you want vocal harmonic 'genius' go to Singers Unlimited.
Now I can see the science in Classical Music and even the science of the Beatles
Love this. I hope you'll make more and do more deep dives into The Beatles' catalogue. Dare I request...Elliott Smith deconstructions
I've recently been working on my first deep investigation of Beatles harmonies, figuring out the individual voices in the chorus of the rooftop concert version of "Don't Let Me Down". I think I've worked out what John and Paul are singing, and have not yet gotten George's part.
The notes that clearly sound to me like the main melody, no one is actually singing! It's an auditory illusion!
So this may be a step beyond the Double Counter Melody method described here!
I could be wrong, as my ears are really challenged by this, and I'd love to see someone else's take on it!
Thanks a lot for this great lesson!
Well done. Beautiful and clear.
That was pretty cool, I’ve always sang along to Beatles tunes and picking out the different melodies and singing the different parts. Because is a great one. I’m going to go listen to Yes It Is now lol
That was an absolutely incredible video! I thoroughly enjoyed it 🙏
4:50 I remember I had a conversation with my mom about melodies, back when I hadn't started studying music for real yet. I forget a lot of it, but she said the melody line goes on top. The heavy metal guitars of "Porky Means Business" from EarthBound and The Beatles were my reference points for why I thought the "main harmony" usually goes above the melody.
To this day they're the things I come back to to remind myself it's possible to make the melody go underneath the harmony yet still clearly be the melody. That's the part of it that's tricky, though, because the very reason the melody usually goes on top is because our ears want to focus on the highest voice. 6:00 exactly
Harmony #3 is the first that comes to mind for me. Just from the title, I'm Only Sleeping and Please Please Me to a tee.
Superbly explained insight as always for musical laymen like me.
Your explanations are just like the Beatles' harmony: brilliant!
Loved this video! Cheers from the US! - Ryan
What a great video.!
Thank you!
Great video James just watched it I’ve just joined your channel. I’m a big Beatles fan and living so close to Liverpool helps to. I also sing myself got a pretty good voice I’ve been told I’ve even done recordings at my cousins studio he has at his house. I even sing in my room along to Beatles songs and do harmonies with them while I’m singing a long to them I have to say it comes out pretty good. I’ve got a guitar to and keyboard. Look forward to more of these ones. I’ve got a more McCartney sound me though can sing quite high
I really enjoyed that James. Thanks. 😀
Great work James!
Brillant ! Thank you for sharing your knowledge
Jim that was terrific, thanks very much.
Thanks. I’m in a band that has recorded 8 albums. I have a hard time with reading music and theory stuff. Some of my band mates are experts at it, so this was a helpful visualization.
I love singing harmony - thank you so much!
Fascinating! Thanks for a great video.
The Sound of Silence by Simon and Garfunkel is one of the best examples of what you refer to as "fanfare." Paul's vocal changes notes maybe a dozen times from the beginning to the end of the first verse while Art hits note number 12 on the word "creeping."
Really helpful video. I'm putting down some vocals next week. Cheers 👍
Sorry, you are wrong about Yes it is. It was meant to be like that. The harmonies are sometimes so close to each other that it sounds dissonant - but great!
By the way, a great example that was missing is the final “yeah” harmony sung in She Loves You, which even George Martin didn’t think would work, but they proved that the arranged harmony was the right decision.
I agree with you.
Greetings from the Netherlands 🇳🇱.
actually, I think George was genuinely "off" in Yes It is, because he's only flat first two times
@@Korn1holio He’s flat every time the F#m chord happens in the first line of the verses (the third chord in the sequence, which falls on the word “tonight” in the first verse). It’s so wildly off - virtually a full semi-tone, so enough to be wrong but not enough to be so wrong it’s “right” again - that it’s difficult to tell whether he’s trying to sing an F# (the root note of the chord, which would make sense) and badly missing, or deliberately trying to sing an F natural, which would make no harmonic sense whatsoever.
It sounds like maybe he couldn’t hear the chord properly in his headphones, so couldn’t tell how out of tune with it he was. Still, it’s one of the most bizarre “why didn’t they fix that” moments in the band’s entire output.
Thank you very much. I learned more about harmony and I really enjoyed your video..
fav 704 great stuff brilliant presentation thanks
great interesting vid James, thank you.
I've spent decades trying to figure out what hooked me that Sun night in 64. PO’d from being dragged away from our wiffel ball game and made to watch these (according to my father) long haired girls thing. By the end we were combing our hair down and hooked! 60yr later, as a musician and retired recording engineer I finally concluded that it was the Johns Vox with George & Pauls harmony that was so different it set the hook!
This is a great lesson. IMHO any cover band should rig as many mics as they can and have as many voices in mix as possible even if just "ooo aah" in choruses
Great video. Also worth noting that in the song “Because” all words are sung with a c#, just that it’s sung by 3 different singers
Yes! the drone sound happens but with different voices, I'm sure they made sure that somebody would grab that C# through the whole line! Cool.
That was great!! Thanks for the video!!!
Thanks this was great. Very clear and easy.
brilliant way to explain, thank you for that
fantastic explanations!! Thank you!
Brilliant. Visuals really helped.
Really enjoyed that/ Excellent. Thanks. Liked and subscribed.
Brilliant- thx James!
Thanks for that. A great explanation.