Thank you David for this again great analysis on this outstanding song. Besides the other unique Beatles songs mentioned below, I would love to hear a David Bennett analysis of Pink Floyd's Shine On You Crazy Diamond - a song that is unlike anything else, whereby its album almost marks an own genre.
No, seriously, David. Is that a photo of Barry from Eastenders - Shaun Williamson - in the strings of that acoustic guitar behind you? Sorry, it just catches my eye every time I watch your videos and, like, it does - blurred, from a distance - look like Barry from Eastenders. And I just like the idea of you being the biggest fan boy of the Beatles, Radiohead... and Barry from Eastenders. Wait, what?!?
If asked, I would also say "Strawberry Fields Forever" is my favorite song. And I was asked once. I grew up in Africa, where the Beatles (and white music generally) were not particularly popular. Nonetheless, in my teens, I got turned on to them and painstakingly learned to play the entire Beatles catalog on guitar from all the scratchy records I could get my hands on. They were hard to find because nobody really listened to them. And I struggled a lot trying to reproduce John's complicated songs. I had a friend whose father hosted one of the top music shows on the FM radio in the country. One day, she showed up and asked me to turn her dad's show on. He played the Beatles' "Strawberry Fields Forever", the entire song, before moving on to his usual roster of popular rhumba music. I was stunned. It was her belated birthday gift to me. She had once casually asked me what my favorite song was, and I had blurted out "Strawberry Fields" without hesitation. And she remembered and got her father to start his radio show off with it. I think the shabeens and dance halls throughout the country were puzzled for a few minutes.
A Day in The Life is great. Personally, for nostalgia reasons, I'm very fond of With a Little Help from My Friends. It's nothing too funky harmonically, but it's just a nice, fun listen.
Indeed. You'd think that when music gets very complex, it becomes weird and ultimately not very good to listen to and enjoy. But the Beatles maintained their classic harmony and melody.
@@josephchristoffel More like the combined genius of the Beatles and George Martin. I still can't believe how little Martin was paid for all his fantastic efforts and creativity. The Beatles were unforgivably cheap in not correcting this. Of course every record company in existence has always done the same thing to every band it could do it to.
@@DavidBennettPiano David, does the four chord progressions apply all throughout these songs? If so, how do they apply? If not, what formula does apply throughout these songs? These songs seem to have chord progressions that don’t correspond to the 12 bar blues or the four chord progressions.
Wow. I’ve listened to this song my whole life, and I know it like the back of my hand. But seeing it transcribed in this video made me realize just how odd the whole thing is - I’d never even noticed the compound meter or the odd bars of 2/4 here and there, much less thought about the tonality. Super cool to see, thanks for making this video!
There's a reason for that. Much of late Beatles work are examples of melody driven song writing. Those time signature changes aren't awkward due to how they are integral to how we hear the melody. The same is true of all the various parts of the song. Those same changes would work a lot less well if the chords changed every bar as much of contemporary songwriting does rather than allowing the melody to dictate chord changes. Parts of this analysis greatly misses the point by trying to give John Lennon credit for unusual harmonic choices when they're really melodic choices. If you go back and listen to the demo and other takes of this song it's apparent how the vocal melody and harmony evolved back and forth over time.
@@DavidBennettPiano Ride My Seesaw by The Moody Blues would be a great one. I think I hear Phrygian there. perhaps you can corroborate and elucidate, my fine sir??
@@lO_-_Ol If David does "She's So Heavy", he'll end up talking about the song for the first half, but then repeating himself over and over and over again, ad nauseam, for the second half.
Anyone else noticed John playing Strawberry feilds intro in a hotel room on The Beatles First US Visit film, he playing it on a bontempi melodian mouth organ, years before the release of the song. Mind blowing, well worth a watch
The 6/8 "Strawberry Fields Forever" line has a feeling of triplets. I think that's what tricks your brain into feeling the song slows down as to incorporate those 6 notes into two beats the song would have to slow down. It's a great tempo illusion, just perfect
The sound engineers had balls of steel in those days. When you consider they had to actually CUT the tape. Imagine physically cutting any Beatles recording... cold sweat.
In some cases yes, in others, no. What brought this to mind for me was my own experience as a musician in a studio, where the engineer did an expert splice of a multi-track tape to allow room for a previously unimagined guitar solo. It was fascinating to watch how he went about it. If he'd buggered it up, it would have meant either re-recording or using a different take of the track.
The variable time signatures in Lennon's work illustrates one part of his genius. He's not thinking about time signatures at all when he's composing. It's done by feel, intuitively, which is simply amazing.
“Happiness is a Warm Gun” is my favorite example of Lennon’s brilliance for time signature changes. Even “Good Morning” definitely not among his top tracks still has an amazing shift in time signature, as does “I want You She’s so Heavy” and so many more
8:46 "[The fade out, fade in, fade out] wasn't a creative decision. It was more a problem-solving decision." Problem solving is the core of creativity.
Imagine myself at 12 years old listening to this masterpiece in a cassette that my father gave me. One of the best songs ever composed and recorded. That orchestral part I used to listen to just using one speaker to feel all the strings and brass in that magnificent score. Even today I try to concentrate and listen to carefully how the bow rubs the strings in that lower C. Now I am 47 and still feel the thrill of this song. Words cannot express what this piece of art make me feel. Thanks for the instrumental part of your video.
This song created a whole new world, I also could spend hours just enjoying the timber of the horns or the sound of the cellos. Everything is perfect from the writing to the arrangement to the production. I wouldn't change anything about it, not even the slightly distorted and out of tune sound of the mellotron
I find your take on the outro's structure being a problem-solving choice rather than a creative one to be a bit too dichotomous (although I know you must be simplistic to some degree for teaching purposes). The silver lining of that era's technological limitations is clever innovation. When it comes to John's voice sounding dreary when initially slowed down or the music being microtonal or the decrescendo then crescendo; these are all emotionally impactful and idiosyncratic byproducts of clever problem solving that created an entirely new way to construct pop music. I find most innovation occurs from problem-solving and I love John and the Beatle's stubbornness around what they wanted because it encouraged solutions and creativity.
Almost every Beatles song is a masterpiece, and this one is indeed. My favourite Beatles song is probably Blue Jay Way (it has such an unique melody), but Strawberry Fields Forever would also be in my top 5.
"She's Leaving Home" is probably my fave, or maybe "If I Fell", but SFF is certainly top 10, and paired with "Penny Lane" is the best 45 ever put out, it being almost ridiculous at that point, how good their compositions are, and you wonder how in the world do they keep coming out with new and varied melodies, and different types of song structures, it's just incredible.
Beato's What Makes This Song Great videos are good for demonstrating production and guitar/drum techniques. But he doesn't often include on-screen sheet music transcriptions - in the ones I've seen he mostly just calls out chord names and their harmonic functions as they happen. I find it more informative to do what this video does, and show a sheet music transcription with a marker moving in sync with that section of the song.
@@variousthings6470 Well said. Rick seems to have a need for showing off rather than educate, while David educates without showing off. Guess who I prefer?
I still remember hearing this song for the first time on the radio in early 1967. It was like a lightning bolt, like nothing I had ever heard before, It felt like a quantum jump in pop music. And the song gained a tremendous amount of depth and power with its ramping up with cello and brass, something that wouldn't have been there if it had stayed with its earlier instrumentation.
Okay, one thing that just I find incredibly infuriating, is how you can't even have small, crumb-sized audio clips of Beatles music without the video being taken down. Yet "reaction" channels can get away with putting up the FULL songs/albums WITH music videos and it's totally fine. 99.9% of them don't even offer ANY commentary or reaction to make it worth wile. The song will be like 3 minutes long, and the video will be 4 minutes long in total, (with a 30 second intro and outro) LIKE HOW DOES THAT EVEN WORK????
Indeed. Frankly I have no interest in watching someone simply reacting (whatever that is supposed to mean these days) to a song but they, as you mentioned, can use the real recording while someone like David who is both paying homage to the artistry behind the composition and also teaching, cannot use even the shortest snippet. It's ludicrous and beggars belief.
I’ve seen some interesting Reaction videos. They can make you appreciate certain qualities of a song. I watched a young black man watch Say it ain’t So by weezer for the first time and during the “Dear, daddy” bridge, the viewer said “Oh, they’re really letting it out here.” I’ve loved & have been listening to that song for 26 years & that video was a reminder of how raw and personal those lyrics are. It’s sometimes like listening to it for the first time again.
@@Neal_Schier you can always use the song, everyone can , you just dont get the money from the video. Sometimes the video gets taken down, but most of the time it's just the owner who gets the money and the video is still up. No need to attack reaction channels, you may not like it, but some people do , and like I said they dont earn money from it , they just do it because they like discovering new music and sharing their reaction
Listening to music is fine and all, but the real magic happens when you also see the songs being played by other humans ... and beyond that it's these kinds of analyses that really make you be able to appreciate the thing in its entirety. Keep 'em coming!
5:55 That triplet-based cello line has always been my favorite aspect of the song. (At least since I heard it "brought out" by a primitive "out-of-phase stereo" mix on a cassette ca. 1985.) I am SO GLAD the cello section was finally given 'full spread' in 2015!
Yeah I was mind blown when I looked at the chord progression of this song, it's the most brilliant, magnificent chord progression I've ever seen. John Lennon never fails to amuse me
You cannot emphasize enough on the fantastic work of Ringo Starr in this superb piece of music. The fill-ins and the outburst-like groove in the end! He is the featured musician in the closing part as in the one of "I Want You (She's so Heavy)". They gave him the space and he was able to fill it up outer-worldly. Ringo is so tragically underestimated, it's ridiculous.
Ringo was quite humble about it too, they wanted him to have a drum solo for “The End” but he refused to do it, so they had to trick him by playing along with him as he did the solo and then just cut out the bass and guitars on the tape.
This song is brilliant and bonkers in equal measure, love it! I also love I am the Walrus, which is even closer to gibberish, but brilliant gibberish! George Martin was definitely the fifth Beatle, Billy Preston also receives and honourable mention IMO!
Also worth mentioning! The "nothing is real" section in the chorus where he uses the Ab note on top of G chord is so interesting, that discord shouldn't have worked but he makes it work in the best way and it suits the lyric perfectly.
Well, if you think about it, it simply seems like they replaced a diminished 7th chord with a dominant 7th chord. The melody suggests the use of a D diminished 7th chord (and in the orchestral part, the cellos are playing a D, and I hear no one playing a G). G7b9 is (enharmonically) the same notes as Ddim7, but with one added note (G7b9 = G B D F Ab, Ddim7 = D F Ab Cb). I guess G7 was simply an easier chord to play on the guitar. Interpreting it as a Ddim7 also makes the resolution to Eb major make a lot more sense. It's just the leading tone diminished chord of Eb. This way, the Fm7 - Ddim7 - Eb actually pretty much suggests a ii V I progression in Eb major. The Ddim7 could also be seen as a rootless Bb7b9. And I think that's what they are doing here - they are taking advantage of the different ways you can interpret a single diminished chord. Playing Fm7 - G7b9 suggests C minor. But it resolves to Eb major just fine too, because the G7 chord is actually just a "reinterpreted Ddim7". The Ab also makes melodic sense. The melody over Fm7 is Ab Bb C F. The melody over the G7/Ddim7 is Ab Bb Cb F. It's the same exact melody, but with the C lowered by a half step to follow the harmony. So, melodic repetition also "justifies" the Ab and Bb over the G7 (I mean, it doesn't have to be "justified", but that's what's happening - it's the same melodic phrase twice, but altered so that it follows the harmony). And this is actually the simplest explanation. You don't even need to think of it as a "diminished chord" - it's simply melodic repetition.
Fascinating analysis - thank you. So hard to choose my favourite song though, it changes almost daily. Currently one of their simplest 2-chord rockers; Paperback Writer
Between this, Paul David's recent video, and the new Get Back trailer there's been a wealth of great Beatles content lately. Also, I just finished reading Here, There, and Everywhere by their sound engineer, Geoff Emerick. Highly recommend it if you're at all interested in the behind-the-scenes studio techniques used to get all their strange sounds. By the way, isn't it awesome that "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane" are essentially John and Paul writing the same type of song? And that they both feature two of the Beatles' most unusual, elegant progressions and arrangements?
That’s a great book I’ve been wanting to revisit Many people don’t realize that the Beatles even changed the way bands and labels did business , when they were given free reign of the studio is when they were able to get real creative with the sounds and recording techniques.
Didn't it strike you as odd----or something----that in that book, Emerick just casually blurts out that he once saw a UFO? I mean, in light of the fact that Lennon also claimed to have seen one from his apartment at the Dakotas?
I loved Geoff Emerick’s book (which I found much better than George Martin’s!) As to SF and PL the songs have the same subject matter , that is John’s and Paul’s respective recollections of their youth in Liverpool . What I find fascinating is the differences that the songs show between their respective mindset and approach of music
@@christianlacheze3323 yep. It shows why they were such a good pairing. Paul has a more grounded approach to music and life. His songs frequently looked "out" at the world of other people. He was a storyteller. Meanwhile, John was more introspective and dreamy. His lyrics were more abstract, and his approach to composition was more fumbling. I don't mean that in a bad way. But look at the difference between the recording process for the two songs. Paul had "Penny Lane" mapped out. He even knew he wanted a piccolo trumpet after seeing it in a performance on TV. John had the band record dozens of versions of this song, and finally decided he liked parts from two different versions and told George Martin to stitch them together. He couldn't be bothered about the details. I think these two approaches really complement each other. John added some necessary surrealism and cynicism to Paul's approach, whereas Paul kept John focused. It's why they never quite achieved the same magic on their own. Don't get me wrong. They both have some brilliant solo songs. But those songs aren't as good as the best Beatles songs. And as solo musicians, they didn't come close to the kind of sustained level of quality The Beatles managed over four years from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road. On a side note, it's mindblowing how much groundbreaking music they produced in that four-year period.
This is my favorite song as well. I don't find too many people who think that this is one of the most extraordinary songs in human existence. Your deep dive was impeccable! This song was responsible for my extreme love of music. Bravo!
2:48 - that is so cool. He sings what is enharmonic in spelling to an Fdim chord over the G7. F, Fm, Fdim. Just another example of melodic ingeniousness.
You could also think of it as a G7b9#9 which is cool too :) You'd have to account for the Bb in the F chord, especially since it lasts longer than the b5, so it probably is more theoretically thought of as an altered dominant chord,, unless you'd want to be like "Fdim add4" lol or "Fdim add 11" hahaha. Or you could suggest Bb7b9 even, since you have the 1, 5, b7 and b9 which would be a good secondary dominant resolving to the Eb. Or call it Bb 13b9 to account for the G right before the chord changes to Eb omg. If you accept it as Bb7 instead of G7, you'll then have a ii V in Eb if you call the v7 a ii7 or ii7/IV then V7/IV omggggg
@@kylestevensanders very true. The F° works because it creates a 7b9 sonority over the dominant chord present (G7). But the F° also works to resolve utonally (see negative harmony… the B and Ab resolve to Bb and G) down to Eb, which next occurs, on “and no-thing”. This is followed then by the G7 again, which is followed again by the Eb & Dm (minor-parallel of the dominant, F) and then Bb, and then cycling back down to F. The Eb by the way works to create a reverse deceptive cadence, as the implied or outright spelt out G7b9 resolves strongly to C minor via lower leading tones B & D and upper leading tone Ab (F also works here as it mirrors G), but also strongly to Eb through D, F, and Ab, the B not functioning much as a Cb here because it hasn’t a context like the F° spelling to color it as an upper leading tone. Someone actually described this song as a very extended variant of the 50s progression (I vi IV/ii V - in Eb: Eb Cm Ab/Fm Bb; in F: F Dm Bb/Gm C; in Bb: Bb Gm Eb/Cm F). I think if one juxtaposes the three examples from each key used in the song there’s some case for it. From what I can recall of the song: Intro - F Am F7 (F#dim7), Gm Bbmaj7 Eb Bb The first phrase tonicizes F, the second G minor (and then Bb, its relative major). Verse A - Bb… Fm, G7b9, Eb G7, Eb Dm Bb The first phrase is arguably F dorian but tonicizes C minor as well, especially through the G7b9. Then Eb followed by F (as Dm), followed by Bb. Verse B - F Am F7 (F#dim7), Gm F Eb, Eb F Bb Gm Eb F Eb Bb. This one sounds most like it to me. It can be contracted to F (I of V if in Bb overall), Gm (ii of V as well as vi of Bb), Eb (IV in Bb), F (V)… followed by Bb, Gm, Eb, and F, resolving back to Bb. The emphasis of Bb, G (which resolves otonally to C), Eb, and F in near sequence is what I think makes the whole thing feel like a very elaborate version of the 50s progression, and the Verse B makes it feel like it much more directly, but this could be just a crude reduction of it. It definitely borrows from its help though.
One thing no one ever seems to mention is how uncanny it is that the two versions, recorded at different tempos and in different keys, just happened to fit perfectly together when combined through the slowing down of one version and the speeding up of the other, or whatever they did. They did not have the kind of pitch shift capability that we have now. It would never have worked unless the difference between the two, in terms of pitch and tempo, were just so coincidentally perfectly related so as to fit together when such modifications were applied. This kind of evokes the idea of destiny or divine intervention, or something. It could just as easily have turned out that, with the technology of the time, the two versions could not be so precisely reconciled in the way that they were. Mind-boggling!
The first time I heard this was in 1978 as part of a talk about the whole "Paul Is Dead" controversy (which I'm surprised you didn't mention). But the person giving the talk was focused on *that* aspect (i.e., the "evidence" of Paul's "death") rather than the workings of the song itself. So here we are, 43 years later, and now I truly understand what makes this piece so great. Better late than never.
Another interesting part of this song is the end of the verses. Like the part that goes “it doesn’t matter much too me” . The melody circles the home note. Bb and then lands on it. As the melody does that the chord progression is IV, V and then IV for 2 beats before resolving to I. The most straightforward way to write that would have been IV-V-I so the melody and harmony come home together instead the harmony goes back to IV which creates an unsettling mismatch between the melody which is already home and the harmony which goes back to the subdominant before coming home 2 beats after the melody.
Wonderful analysis. December of 1966 I got a radio as a Christmas present. It was my first chance to listen to pop music.The first song that blew me away was Good Vibrations by the Beach Boys. Then, a couple months later, out came Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane. That was it. I was hooked.
Also my favorite Beatles song. I remember hearing this when the song first came out. I could not fathom what I was hearing --- I have yet to hear a band that will write or will have written songs with such staying powder as did the Beatles. The Beethoven of our time.
Sorry no led zeppelin as a band will be remembered you may have a few songs but no-one will care about the band this applies to just about every artist in the world only the Beatles and their story will be discussed continually
I agree. This is my favorite Beatles song, and favorite song of all time. I feel it relates to my life in my teenage years. Living is easy with eyes closed. Misunderstanding all you see. It's getting hard to be someone, but it all works out. It doesn't matter much to me. As I look around at today's teens, many of them seem to reflect that feeling. The Beatles hit home with this song, making it their best.
I feel like every time I listen to it I hear a new thing, or focus on a different element so I never get tired of hearing it. My favourite of Lennon's. Thank you so much
An enjoyable and very perceptive analysis. Keep up the good work 👍🏼 Truly, Lennon's use of 'erratic' meter and non-standard harmonic progressions really give us insights into his musical brain and heart. SFF ranks in my top 10 Beatles songs and on a compositional point of view, top 5 all time pop songs from the 20th century, ranking with the likes of Kern, Bob Wells, and Mel Tormé.
It's amazing that when Martin spliced the two versions together he was able to adjust them so that both meter AND key were synced up. Almost like it was meant to be.
Fascinating! I'd watched your video about it being in A half-sharp major before (I always thought something was up with it, but wondered if it was my ears... evidently not) but didn't realize you made this one as well. It honestly might be my favourite song as well.
Lennon in 1967, on the back of Rain, I'm Only Sleeping, She Said She Said, Tomorrow Never Knows in '66, came up with Strawberry Fields Forever, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, A Day In The Life (with Paul) and I Am The Walrus. A great Psychedelic phase which turned out some of his greatest songs ☮️
Same for me. My favourite song ever. I was a kid when I heard the first time, and it really shocked me. I am an amateur musician but you gave me some little details that I was not aware of. I play it without knowing... You are great!
Mr. Bennett, I have loved I am The Walrus by The Beatles since I first heard it in 1967 as a 14 year old fan. Now I’m a 69 year old fan and I still love it, amongst all the other brilliant songs they wrote. I feel privileged to have grown up listening to The Beatles, they’ve been the soundtrack to my life ! You are clearly a very accomplished musician and I think you did a great job playing on and recording this song, it’s not an easy one. So, we’ll done, you and your great singer can be proud of your efforts. Also, it’s lovely to see a young man who has been brought up well, good manners, not the centre of his own universe and one who does not feel the need to shamelessly self promote. It’s also refreshing to see a young man with a good grasp of English (Am I correct in assuming English is not your first language or have I read too much into the German flag on your guitar case)? If it is the former, then you are all the more impressive. I can’t describe how pleasant it is to hear a young man using concise language, without lapsing into imprecise word usage where ‘like’ seems to be ever second word. You have so much going for you that your future can only be brilliant! Again, we’ll done and thank you, I really enjoyed that. From Australia.
From day one. Their first single had Lennon and McCartney's name on it. Listen to what Lemmy said about the Beatles always being the tougher group as well. They were real working-class lads as opposed to posh London accountants... and I say all that with a great deal of love and respect for the Stones.
im glad that I am not the only one(as evident by this video and people in comments) who is eternally fascinated by this song. I have such a hard time choosing my favorite song ever, but strawberry fields is absolutely it. Nothing has moved me more!
A brilliant examination, David! Your passion is shared by many. I was thirteen the first time I heard the group. I saw them in Toronto on their last tour in August, '66. Three months later, they started recording this song. It ushered in a new direction that was seen by the musical world like a supernova. The first listening for me was stunning! Happy Christmas,David!
Really engaging and insightful. My favorite song as well, and for all those reasons, but also and mostly for the poetically ingenious verse so aptly contextualised and colorized, if you will, by the music. Few but Lennon, and no other Beatle, could turn scatterbrained mumblings of everyday language like “Oh yeah, you know, sometimes, think it’s me” and turn it into something profoundly existential and personal and relatable, a moment when, looking back, we realize we never knew who we really are, and yet feel nostalgic about threat time before it started “getting hard to be someone” though “it all works out.” His journal confessions about his bouts of depression made the song all come together for me. I never tire of this song. And yeah, Martin deserves more recognition!! Thanks!
Such a great song. George Martin’s arrangement is amazing…this era of Beatles music is my favorite. Moving out of the teen pop stuff and into more experimental approach to their music. Revolver, Rubber Soul, Magical Mystery Tour, and St. Peppers.
This video is brilliant! I'm 75, and allowed myself to believe it was written for me - "Geoffery Field forever" ! Now I know better. Thankyou so much, David.
Wow … that was really well done. Without your much deeper understanding of signature, tempo and key, I just let the music wash over me. You help me understand why a song like this leaves such a strong and lasting impression. Some might think that level of detail undermines the artistry but it helps me understand “why” … and “why” is often (but not always) a vital consideration. Incredible to think that without all this theory, it’s just the way Lennon heard it in his head. Thanks!!
My favourite beatles tune as well, the meaning behind it where we all have a strawberry fields and the out of body way the tune flows is just brilliant
I'm surprised you didn't get more specific about the song - particularly the use of accidentals, and how it created these really cool melodies. When it goes to the relative 6th major, the notes in 'Nothing is real' in chromatic sequence. Just the way it seems to go left and right for no reason but it's actually kind of brilliant melody craftsmanship. People rarely write songs that complex and good anymore.
Let me tell you, after in my teenage and early adult years I underwent intensive training in classical music (a long time ago), even compared to my conservatory teachers you are a great teacher: you subdivide complex units into smaller and smaller, and more understandable, units until anyone capable of understanding music can learn from you. Great!
Strawberry Fields Forever introduced me to the distinctive draw of The Beatles, and your analysis opens perspectives and insight into these feelings. Thank you.
Love the analysis of Strawberry Fields. Great info on the notation and meter changes. What you didn't cover was Ringo's genius drum fills where he just didn't play the usual 1/8th or 16/th type fills. It's where Ringo does not play and hesitates to get you guessing "how will he fill this time"? Add to the drumming George Martin's production of picking up those low Tom tones. And the end where it sounds like Ringo is almost doing a double bass drum but probably doing it on a very low Tom. Pure genius!
I didn't know about that 1:00 part. All the time when I listen this, it feels a bit scary, John voice become more lower, those strings sounds like horror filmscore, but it sounds satisfying 😆
I love that that it was most likely all feel and no theory when they wrote it. Just 4 ordinary lads making extraordinary music. Really interesting to see the analysis, thank you.
C'mon, I am the walrus is the other great Lennon song. Tricky, too. Maybe worth a video, too? I remember rehearsing Strawberry Fields with my first band for the first time. No-one was aware of the meter changes, the whole song collapsed. It took some time until we figured it out. But we finally made it.
A deep dive on I Am The Walrus would be great. I wrote a 12-page paper about it for a music theory class in college, so there’s plenty there to work with! The Anthology version provides a lot of clues illuminating how it was constructed. 🎺🎶🎹
Also my favourite. A rarified experience. John’s elliptical ideas in the lyrics mirror those in the music. Paul’s glittering introduction counter-melody is a wonder, as is the one in Lucy. George Martin’s cello & brass arrangements are legendary.
Great analysis, David, as always. Thank you. My favourite Beatles song changes from week to week. But Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane are always contenders.
I would second your appraisal of SFF being one of the best pieces of music ever written. It is also my fave of all time and I SERIOUSLY do not like lists or rankings...it is that this is just a stunning composition.
Wow, David. Strawberry Fields Forever is not only my favourite Beatle song but also my favourite song of all time, since I first heard it back in 1989. I thought I was the only one...
This is also my favorite Beatles tune. I think you need to consider "rootless" chords...The intent as to what the rootless chords represent is pretty clear, due to what harmonic changes are occuring. The structure of the line as well as the simplification of what chords could be borrowed... Fmaj--Fmaj7/E--F7/Eb--Eb--D7b9/Eb--Gm\D--F\C--Eb/Bb--Bb The F7/Eb is a rootless chord and the V7 chord borrowed from Bb (the key the harmony is moving to). The Eb is the IV chord in Bb. The D7b9/Eb (rootless) is the vi chord in Bb. The F\C is the V chord in Bb, the Eb/Bb is the IV chord in Bb. Of course the Eb/Bb to Bb is a plagal cadence. None of the Beatles analyzed this chord progression, but knew it was a winner by the way it sounded. Of course, Martin knew what it was due to his formal musical study and knew it would work being the genius he was(is). There is no doubt that McCartney had a hand in arranging and playing keyboard parts. The way you have Eb diminished written (pointing out that it's actually Eb-Gb-Db), the F# is the leading tone of Gminor (which the Eb dim resolves to) is really an indicator of the chord being a dominant chord in Gminor (relative minor of Bb). Getting people interested in formal analysis is a great thing and I applaud you for it.
I wish more people, when discussing this song, would spend some time on the percussion. Some of Ringos finest work and the song just wouldn't sound as good without it.
Last fade in and out part is quite trippy. It is taking the song to another level. It can be a practical solution to a specific problem but a moment of silence before this trippy part was just the right thing.
I love it when I find deep analyses on songs that I like and what I've been hearing is put into words. I've definitely heard the change in pace when time signatures shift but I've never realized it happening.
Great as always! I would love to see your analysis of I Want You (She's So Heavy) . I think there's a lot of interesting elements in this song. greetings from Argentina!
When I first heard SFF , in 1976, my jaw literally dropped. Not only was it groundbreaking genius in its own time, it blew everything in the UK charts in 1976 out of the water. 57 years later it still sounds timeless, mysterious, unfathomable. With its druggy half tone drop it is the closest thing to a pure surrealist/dreamstate in music. The Anthology outtake with extended drum solo was a harbinger of trip hop
David, you are a legend! We thank you for helping to keep the relevance/importance of the greatest band ever and for helping us to understand what music makes us feel, man.
![เปิดใจ พี่ญา คนรุม หลังทัวร์ลง หนักสุดในชีวิต!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2-OJZRtclro/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you to Musiversal for sponsoring this video! Sign up with coupon code DavidBennett50 for 50% off your first month 🎵
Thank you David for this again great analysis on this outstanding song. Besides the other unique Beatles songs mentioned below, I would love to hear a David Bennett analysis of Pink Floyd's Shine On You Crazy Diamond - a song that is unlike anything else, whereby its album almost marks an own genre.
But did your cellist tune down to B flat?
Could you analyze I’m only sleeping ? That’s my favorite beatle song!
No, seriously, David.
Is that a photo of Barry from Eastenders - Shaun Williamson - in the strings of that acoustic guitar behind you?
Sorry, it just catches my eye every time I watch your videos and, like, it does - blurred, from a distance - look like Barry from Eastenders.
And I just like the idea of you being the biggest fan boy of the Beatles, Radiohead... and Barry from Eastenders. Wait, what?!?
If asked, I would also say "Strawberry Fields Forever" is my favorite song. And I was asked once. I grew up in Africa, where the Beatles (and white music generally) were not particularly popular. Nonetheless, in my teens, I got turned on to them and painstakingly learned to play the entire Beatles catalog on guitar from all the scratchy records I could get my hands on. They were hard to find because nobody really listened to them. And I struggled a lot trying to reproduce John's complicated songs. I had a friend whose father hosted one of the top music shows on the FM radio in the country. One day, she showed up and asked me to turn her dad's show on. He played the Beatles' "Strawberry Fields Forever", the entire song, before moving on to his usual roster of popular rhumba music. I was stunned. It was her belated birthday gift to me. She had once casually asked me what my favorite song was, and I had blurted out "Strawberry Fields" without hesitation. And she remembered and got her father to start his radio show off with it. I think the shabeens and dance halls throughout the country were puzzled for a few minutes.
What a beautiful story T-T
Bro that’s beautiful
That's so cool!❤
Gave me shivers dawg
Awesome story!
When it switches from take 7 to take 26 it is one of the best beat drops in music history
I personally prefere take 26
Paul's reaction to hearing this song for the first time was, "That's f*cking brilliant, John."
Actually?? Thats so interesting
Fantastic analysis, really enjoyed it - my favourite would probably be either A Day In The Life or even I Want You (She's So Heavy)...
I Want You is a banger
Why did you mention the two exact Beatles songs I'm hooked onto at the moment??
Those are mine as well
A Day in The Life is great.
Personally, for nostalgia reasons, I'm very fond of With a Little Help from My Friends. It's nothing too funky harmonically, but it's just a nice, fun listen.
@@yt.lilsantee it's a proper banger ...and they used the 'moog ' on the outro ....it's hard core
The genius of the Beatles was that they could do all this and still remain incredibly melodic and listenable. Well, that was one of their geniuses.
Indeed. You'd think that when music gets very complex, it becomes weird and ultimately not very good to listen to and enjoy. But the Beatles maintained their classic harmony and melody.
@@tyrannosauruszeppelin2205 Mozart and Beethoven are very complex and still very enjoyabme
More like the genius of George Martin.
@@josephchristoffel More like the combined genius of the Beatles and George Martin. I still can't believe how little Martin was paid for all his fantastic efforts and creativity. The Beatles were unforgivably cheap in not correcting this. Of course every record company in existence has always done the same thing to every band it could do it to.
That deep dive blew my mind apart.
🤯
Where you in a car by any chance? Didn't notice that the light changed? 😉
@@DavidBennettPiano David, does the four chord progressions apply all throughout these songs? If so, how do they apply? If not, what formula does apply throughout these songs? These songs seem to have chord progressions that don’t correspond to the 12 bar blues or the four chord progressions.
leokimvideo himself.
Get well soon.
Wow. I’ve listened to this song my whole life, and I know it like the back of my hand. But seeing it transcribed in this video made me realize just how odd the whole thing is - I’d never even noticed the compound meter or the odd bars of 2/4 here and there, much less thought about the tonality. Super cool to see, thanks for making this video!
Same! I just always knew it was kinda hard to sing and play properly hahaha
There's a reason for that. Much of late Beatles work are examples of melody driven song writing. Those time signature changes aren't awkward due to how they are integral to how we hear the melody. The same is true of all the various parts of the song. Those same changes would work a lot less well if the chords changed every bar as much of contemporary songwriting does rather than allowing the melody to dictate chord changes.
Parts of this analysis greatly misses the point by trying to give John Lennon credit for unusual harmonic choices when they're really melodic choices. If you go back and listen to the demo and other takes of this song it's apparent how the vocal melody and harmony evolved back and forth over time.
the problem is that on a cd beatles don´t sound like the Beatles
Love these deeper dives into a single song, would love to see more of them!
Great! I'm planning on doing them more regularly 😁
@@DavidBennettPiano I would also like to see a video on She’s so heavy
@@DavidBennettPiano Ride My Seesaw by The Moody Blues would be a great one. I think I hear Phrygian there. perhaps you can corroborate and elucidate, my fine sir??
@@lO_-_Ol If David does "She's So Heavy", he'll end up talking about the song for the first half, but then repeating himself over and over and over again, ad nauseam, for the second half.
@Eric Siegel Have you seen 12tone's single song deep dives? His videos are in my regular rotation as well as David Bennett's. :-)
Anyone else noticed John playing Strawberry feilds intro in a hotel room on The Beatles First US Visit film, he playing it on a bontempi melodian mouth organ, years before the release of the song. Mind blowing, well worth a watch
The 6/8 "Strawberry Fields Forever" line has a feeling of triplets. I think that's what tricks your brain into feeling the song slows down as to incorporate those 6 notes into two beats the song would have to slow down. It's a great tempo illusion, just perfect
I too always thought of them as triplets which some of their musical heroes like Buddy Holly would use.
Quarter note triplets
The cut between different takes still amazes me
The sound engineers had balls of steel in those days. When you consider they had to actually CUT the tape. Imagine physically cutting any Beatles recording... cold sweat.
@@johnberkley6942 Didn't they have backup tapes though?
In some cases yes, in others, no. What brought this to mind for me was my own experience as a musician in a studio, where the engineer did an expert splice of a multi-track tape to allow room for a previously unimagined guitar solo. It was fascinating to watch how he went about it. If he'd buggered it up, it would have meant either re-recording or using a different take of the track.
The variable time signatures in Lennon's work illustrates one part of his genius. He's not thinking about time signatures at all when he's composing. It's done by feel, intuitively, which is simply amazing.
“Happiness is a Warm Gun” is my favorite example of Lennon’s brilliance for time signature changes. Even “Good Morning” definitely not among his top tracks still has an amazing shift in time signature, as does “I want You She’s so Heavy” and so many more
8:46 "[The fade out, fade in, fade out] wasn't a creative decision. It was more a problem-solving decision."
Problem solving is the core of creativity.
Imagine myself at 12 years old listening to this masterpiece in a cassette that my father gave me. One of the best songs ever composed and recorded. That orchestral part I used to listen to just using one speaker to feel all the strings and brass in that magnificent score. Even today I try to concentrate and listen to carefully how the bow rubs the strings in that lower C. Now I am 47 and still feel the thrill of this song. Words cannot express what this piece of art make me feel. Thanks for the instrumental part of your video.
This song created a whole new world, I also could spend hours just enjoying the timber of the horns or the sound of the cellos. Everything is perfect from the writing to the arrangement to the production. I wouldn't change anything about it, not even the slightly distorted and out of tune sound of the mellotron
We are the same age, 47, and was close to the same age when I first heard this song. I was entranced by it. So beautiful and mesmerizing.
I find your take on the outro's structure being a problem-solving choice rather than a creative one to be a bit too dichotomous (although I know you must be simplistic to some degree for teaching purposes). The silver lining of that era's technological limitations is clever innovation. When it comes to John's voice sounding dreary when initially slowed down or the music being microtonal or the decrescendo then crescendo; these are all emotionally impactful and idiosyncratic byproducts of clever problem solving that created an entirely new way to construct pop music. I find most innovation occurs from problem-solving and I love John and the Beatle's stubbornness around what they wanted because it encouraged solutions and creativity.
I'm really digging this format, I would love to see more!
Great! I’m planning on doing more! 😃
Best Beatles song. Such a unique song too. Nothing else like it. God I miss John Lennon.
I reallly reallly love when you always analysing Beatles songs, love those knowledge. Thank you!
Thanks!
06:30 that low Bb note has a nice big smile going on
i thought i was the only one who saw that
Almost every Beatles song is a masterpiece, and this one is indeed. My favourite Beatles song is probably Blue Jay Way (it has such an unique melody), but Strawberry Fields Forever would also be in my top 5.
"She's Leaving Home" is probably my fave, or maybe "If I Fell", but SFF is certainly top 10, and paired with "Penny Lane" is the best 45 ever put out, it being almost ridiculous at that point, how good their compositions are, and you wonder how in the world do they keep coming out with new and varied melodies, and different types of song structures, it's just incredible.
When Rick Beato doesn't make a What Makes this Song Great about your favorite song
Beato's What Makes This Song Great videos are good for demonstrating production and guitar/drum techniques. But he doesn't often include on-screen sheet music transcriptions - in the ones I've seen he mostly just calls out chord names and their harmonic functions as they happen. I find it more informative to do what this video does, and show a sheet music transcription with a marker moving in sync with that section of the song.
@@variousthings6470 yeah totally agree
@@variousthings6470 Well said. Rick seems to have a need for showing off rather than educate, while David educates without showing off. Guess who I prefer?
I think the two best music TH-camrs right now
The Beatles are blockers-the video would get taken down. Beato has alluded to this before
I still remember hearing this song for the first time on the radio in early 1967. It was like a lightning bolt, like nothing I had ever heard before, It felt like a quantum jump in pop music. And the song gained a tremendous amount of depth and power with its ramping up with cello and brass, something that wouldn't have been there if it had stayed with its earlier instrumentation.
Probably my favourite too. And probably the greatest double A-side single ever.
That was great, probably my favourite Beatle song along with "A day in the life" both outstanding songs even 50 odd years after.
Okay, one thing that just I find incredibly infuriating, is how you can't even have small, crumb-sized audio clips of Beatles music without the video being taken down. Yet "reaction" channels can get away with putting up the FULL songs/albums WITH music videos and it's totally fine. 99.9% of them don't even offer ANY commentary or reaction to make it worth wile. The song will be like 3 minutes long, and the video will be 4 minutes long in total, (with a 30 second intro and outro) LIKE HOW DOES THAT EVEN WORK????
Indeed. Frankly I have no interest in watching someone simply reacting (whatever that is supposed to mean these days) to a song but they, as you mentioned, can use the real recording while someone like David who is both paying homage to the artistry behind the composition and also teaching, cannot use even the shortest snippet. It's ludicrous and beggars belief.
those channels don't get money from the video because of copyright claims
it's a choice
I’ve seen some interesting Reaction videos. They can make you appreciate certain qualities of a song. I watched a young black man watch Say it ain’t So by weezer for the first time and during the “Dear, daddy” bridge, the viewer said “Oh, they’re really letting it out here.” I’ve loved & have been listening to that song for 26 years & that video was a reminder of how raw and personal those lyrics are. It’s sometimes like listening to it for the first time again.
The guy’s name is JayveeTV. I thought it was a good video
@@Neal_Schier you can always use the song, everyone can , you just dont get the money from the video. Sometimes the video gets taken down, but most of the time it's just the owner who gets the money and the video is still up. No need to attack reaction channels, you may not like it, but some people do , and like I said they dont earn money from it , they just do it because they like discovering new music and sharing their reaction
Listening to music is fine and all, but the real magic happens when you also see the songs being played by other humans ... and beyond that it's these kinds of analyses that really make you be able to appreciate the thing in its entirety. Keep 'em coming!
5:55 That triplet-based cello line has always been my favorite aspect of the song. (At least since I heard it "brought out" by a primitive "out-of-phase stereo" mix on a cassette ca. 1985.) I am SO GLAD the cello section was finally given 'full spread' in 2015!
Yeah I was mind blown when I looked at the chord progression of this song, it's the most brilliant, magnificent chord progression I've ever seen. John Lennon never fails to amuse me
You cannot emphasize enough on the fantastic work of Ringo Starr in this superb piece of music. The fill-ins and the outburst-like groove in the end! He is the featured musician in the closing part as in the one of "I Want You (She's so Heavy)". They gave him the space and he was able to fill it up outer-worldly. Ringo is so tragically underestimated, it's ridiculous.
Ringo was quite humble about it too, they wanted him to have a drum solo for “The End” but he refused to do it, so they had to trick him by playing along with him as he did the solo and then just cut out the bass and guitars on the tape.
He literally mentioned they had to fade out a part where he played like shit
David Bennett just took me down too. Why are the English such excellent musicians? Absolutely BRILLIANT.
Thank you! 🏴
This song is brilliant and bonkers in equal measure, love it! I also love I am the Walrus, which is even closer to gibberish, but brilliant gibberish! George Martin was definitely the fifth Beatle, Billy Preston also receives and honourable mention IMO!
Also worth mentioning! The "nothing is real" section in the chorus where he uses the Ab note on top of G chord is so interesting, that discord shouldn't have worked but he makes it work in the best way and it suits the lyric perfectly.
It’s oddly menacing!
Well, if you think about it, it simply seems like they replaced a diminished 7th chord with a dominant 7th chord. The melody suggests the use of a D diminished 7th chord (and in the orchestral part, the cellos are playing a D, and I hear no one playing a G). G7b9 is (enharmonically) the same notes as Ddim7, but with one added note (G7b9 = G B D F Ab, Ddim7 = D F Ab Cb). I guess G7 was simply an easier chord to play on the guitar.
Interpreting it as a Ddim7 also makes the resolution to Eb major make a lot more sense. It's just the leading tone diminished chord of Eb. This way, the Fm7 - Ddim7 - Eb actually pretty much suggests a ii V I progression in Eb major. The Ddim7 could also be seen as a rootless Bb7b9. And I think that's what they are doing here - they are taking advantage of the different ways you can interpret a single diminished chord. Playing Fm7 - G7b9 suggests C minor. But it resolves to Eb major just fine too, because the G7 chord is actually just a "reinterpreted Ddim7".
The Ab also makes melodic sense. The melody over Fm7 is Ab Bb C F. The melody over the G7/Ddim7 is Ab Bb Cb F. It's the same exact melody, but with the C lowered by a half step to follow the harmony. So, melodic repetition also "justifies" the Ab and Bb over the G7 (I mean, it doesn't have to be "justified", but that's what's happening - it's the same melodic phrase twice, but altered so that it follows the harmony). And this is actually the simplest explanation. You don't even need to think of it as a "diminished chord" - it's simply melodic repetition.
Fascinating analysis - thank you. So hard to choose my favourite song though, it changes almost daily. Currently one of their simplest 2-chord rockers; Paperback Writer
One of the greatest chord progressions and choruses of all time. Thanks John
Between this, Paul David's recent video, and the new Get Back trailer there's been a wealth of great Beatles content lately. Also, I just finished reading Here, There, and Everywhere by their sound engineer, Geoff Emerick. Highly recommend it if you're at all interested in the behind-the-scenes studio techniques used to get all their strange sounds.
By the way, isn't it awesome that "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane" are essentially John and Paul writing the same type of song? And that they both feature two of the Beatles' most unusual, elegant progressions and arrangements?
That’s a great book I’ve been wanting to revisit
Many people don’t realize that the Beatles even changed the way bands and labels did business , when they were given free reign of the studio is when they were able to get real creative with the sounds and recording techniques.
Didn't it strike you as odd----or something----that in that book, Emerick just casually blurts out that he once saw a UFO? I mean, in light of the fact that Lennon also claimed to have seen one from his apartment at the Dakotas?
@@kennethlatham3133 😂 I’m having a vague memory of that
It’s been at least 15 years since I read it but sounds familiar
I loved Geoff Emerick’s book (which I found much better than George Martin’s!)
As to SF and PL the songs have the same subject matter , that is John’s and Paul’s respective recollections of their youth in Liverpool . What I find fascinating is the differences that the songs show between their respective mindset and approach of music
@@christianlacheze3323 yep. It shows why they were such a good pairing. Paul has a more grounded approach to music and life. His songs frequently looked "out" at the world of other people. He was a storyteller. Meanwhile, John was more introspective and dreamy. His lyrics were more abstract, and his approach to composition was more fumbling. I don't mean that in a bad way. But look at the difference between the recording process for the two songs. Paul had "Penny Lane" mapped out. He even knew he wanted a piccolo trumpet after seeing it in a performance on TV. John had the band record dozens of versions of this song, and finally decided he liked parts from two different versions and told George Martin to stitch them together. He couldn't be bothered about the details.
I think these two approaches really complement each other. John added some necessary surrealism and cynicism to Paul's approach, whereas Paul kept John focused. It's why they never quite achieved the same magic on their own. Don't get me wrong. They both have some brilliant solo songs. But those songs aren't as good as the best Beatles songs. And as solo musicians, they didn't come close to the kind of sustained level of quality The Beatles managed over four years from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road.
On a side note, it's mindblowing how much groundbreaking music they produced in that four-year period.
This is my favorite song as well. I don't find too many people who think that this is one of the most extraordinary songs in human existence. Your deep dive was impeccable! This song was responsible for my extreme love of music. Bravo!
2:48 - that is so cool. He sings what is enharmonic in spelling to an Fdim chord over the G7. F, Fm, Fdim. Just another example of melodic ingeniousness.
You could also think of it as a G7b9#9 which is cool too :) You'd have to account for the Bb in the F chord, especially since it lasts longer than the b5, so it probably is more theoretically thought of as an altered dominant chord,, unless you'd want to be like "Fdim add4" lol or "Fdim add 11" hahaha. Or you could suggest Bb7b9 even, since you have the 1, 5, b7 and b9 which would be a good secondary dominant resolving to the Eb. Or call it Bb 13b9 to account for the G right before the chord changes to Eb omg.
If you accept it as Bb7 instead of G7, you'll then have a ii V in Eb if you call the v7 a ii7 or ii7/IV then V7/IV omggggg
@@kylestevensanders very true. The F° works because it creates a 7b9 sonority over the dominant chord present (G7). But the F° also works to resolve utonally (see negative harmony… the B and Ab resolve to Bb and G) down to Eb, which next occurs, on “and no-thing”. This is followed then by the G7 again, which is followed again by the Eb & Dm (minor-parallel of the dominant, F) and then Bb, and then cycling back down to F.
The Eb by the way works to create a reverse deceptive cadence, as the implied or outright spelt out G7b9 resolves strongly to C minor via lower leading tones B & D and upper leading tone Ab (F also works here as it mirrors G), but also strongly to Eb through D, F, and Ab, the B not functioning much as a Cb here because it hasn’t a context like the F° spelling to color it as an upper leading tone.
Someone actually described this song as a very extended variant of the 50s progression (I vi IV/ii V - in Eb: Eb Cm Ab/Fm Bb; in F: F Dm Bb/Gm C; in Bb: Bb Gm Eb/Cm F). I think if one juxtaposes the three examples from each key used in the song there’s some case for it.
From what I can recall of the song:
Intro - F Am F7 (F#dim7), Gm Bbmaj7 Eb Bb
The first phrase tonicizes F, the second G minor (and then Bb, its relative major).
Verse A - Bb… Fm, G7b9, Eb G7, Eb Dm Bb
The first phrase is arguably F dorian but tonicizes C minor as well, especially through the G7b9. Then Eb followed by F (as Dm), followed by Bb.
Verse B - F Am F7 (F#dim7), Gm F Eb, Eb F Bb Gm Eb F Eb Bb.
This one sounds most like it to me. It can be contracted to F (I of V if in Bb overall), Gm (ii of V as well as vi of Bb), Eb (IV in Bb), F (V)… followed by Bb, Gm, Eb, and F, resolving back to Bb.
The emphasis of Bb, G (which resolves otonally to C), Eb, and F in near sequence is what I think makes the whole thing feel like a very elaborate version of the 50s progression, and the Verse B makes it feel like it much more directly, but this could be just a crude reduction of it. It definitely borrows from its help though.
One thing no one ever seems to mention is how uncanny it is that the two versions, recorded at different tempos and in different keys, just happened to fit perfectly together when combined through the slowing down of one version and the speeding up of the other, or whatever they did. They did not have the kind of pitch shift capability that we have now. It would never have worked unless the difference between the two, in terms of pitch and tempo, were just so coincidentally perfectly related so as to fit together when such modifications were applied. This kind of evokes the idea of destiny or divine intervention, or something. It could just as easily have turned out that, with the technology of the time, the two versions could not be so precisely reconciled in the way that they were. Mind-boggling!
The first time I heard this was in 1978 as part of a talk about the whole "Paul Is Dead" controversy (which I'm surprised you didn't mention). But the person giving the talk was focused on *that* aspect (i.e., the "evidence" of Paul's "death") rather than the workings of the song itself. So here we are, 43 years later, and now I truly understand what makes this piece so great. Better late than never.
Another interesting part of this song is the end of the verses. Like the part that goes “it doesn’t matter much too me” . The melody circles the home note. Bb and then lands on it. As the melody does that the chord progression is IV, V and then IV for 2 beats before resolving to I. The most straightforward way to write that would have been IV-V-I so the melody and harmony come home together instead the harmony goes back to IV which creates an unsettling mismatch between the melody which is already home and the harmony which goes back to the subdominant before coming home 2 beats after the melody.
Wonderful analysis. December of 1966 I got a radio as a Christmas present. It was my first chance to listen to pop music.The first song that blew me away was Good Vibrations by the Beach Boys. Then, a couple months later, out came Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane. That was it. I was hooked.
Also my favorite Beatles song. I remember hearing this when the song first came out. I could not fathom what I was hearing --- I have yet to hear a band that will write or will have written songs with such staying powder as did the Beatles. The Beethoven of our time.
I'd say that in a hundred years, the two bands that 'everyone' will still know will be The Beatles and Led Zeppelin
Sorry no led zeppelin as a band will be remembered you may have a few songs but no-one will care about the band this applies to just about every artist in the world only the Beatles and their story will be discussed continually
@@dalegallacher7074 "have a few songs" You're funny..... :-)
Maybe it was the staying powder that was fueling their creativity!
I agree. This is my favorite Beatles song, and favorite song of all time. I feel it relates to my life in my teenage years. Living is easy with eyes closed. Misunderstanding all you see. It's getting hard to be someone, but it all works out. It doesn't matter much to me. As I look around at today's teens, many of them seem to reflect that feeling. The Beatles hit home with this song, making it their best.
I feel like every time I listen to it I hear a new thing, or focus on a different element so I never get tired of hearing it. My favourite of Lennon's. Thank you so much
An enjoyable and very perceptive analysis. Keep up the good work 👍🏼 Truly, Lennon's use of 'erratic' meter and non-standard harmonic progressions really give us insights into his musical brain and heart. SFF ranks in my top 10 Beatles songs and on a compositional point of view, top 5 all time pop songs from the 20th century, ranking with the likes of Kern, Bob Wells, and Mel Tormé.
The Beatles were totally outstanding David. I love this song, I adore the Mellotron in just about everything.
It's amazing that when Martin spliced the two versions together he was able to adjust them so that both meter AND key were synced up. Almost like it was meant to be.
Fascinating! I'd watched your video about it being in A half-sharp major before (I always thought something was up with it, but wondered if it was my ears... evidently not) but didn't realize you made this one as well. It honestly might be my favourite song as well.
From the early demo versions with only John and his guitar to the final released version, this too is my all time favorite Beatle song.
Lennon in 1967, on the back of Rain, I'm Only Sleeping, She Said She Said, Tomorrow Never Knows in '66, came up with Strawberry Fields Forever, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, A Day In The Life (with Paul) and I Am The Walrus. A great Psychedelic phase which turned out some of his greatest songs ☮️
Same for me. My favourite song ever. I was a kid when I heard the first time, and it really shocked me. I am an amateur musician but you gave me some little details that I was not aware of. I play it without knowing... You are great!
Honestly, I have tears in my eyes after watching this just as much as when I listened to the song for the first time.
Mr. Bennett,
I have loved I am The Walrus by The Beatles since I first heard it in 1967 as a 14 year old fan. Now I’m a 69 year old fan and I still love it, amongst all the other brilliant songs they wrote. I feel privileged to have grown up listening to The Beatles, they’ve been the soundtrack to my life ! You are clearly a very accomplished musician and I think you did a great job playing on and recording this song, it’s not an easy one. So, we’ll done, you and your great singer can be proud of your efforts. Also, it’s lovely to see a young man who has been brought up well, good manners, not the centre of his own universe and one who does not feel the need to shamelessly self promote. It’s also refreshing to see a young man with a good grasp of English (Am I correct in assuming English is not your first language or have I read too much into the German flag on your guitar case)? If it is the former, then you are all the more impressive. I can’t describe how pleasant it is to hear a young man using concise language, without lapsing into imprecise word usage where ‘like’ seems to be ever second word. You have so much going for you that your future can only be brilliant! Again, we’ll done and thank you, I really enjoyed that. From Australia.
i NEVER clicked a video so fast. I love this song
😁😁😁
This song sums up the difference between the stones and the beatles. The beatles simply had more musical range.
Agreed!
Indeed.
Stones are above average rock and R&B band; Beatles are uber-geniuses and greatest innovators of all time.
The Stones were always playing catch up.
From day one. Their first single had Lennon and McCartney's name on it. Listen to what Lemmy said about the Beatles always being the tougher group as well. They were real working-class lads as opposed to posh London accountants... and I say all that with a great deal of love and respect for the Stones.
im glad that I am not the only one(as evident by this video and people in comments) who is eternally fascinated by this song. I have such a hard time choosing my favorite song ever, but strawberry fields is absolutely it. Nothing has moved me more!
A brilliant examination, David! Your passion is shared by many. I was thirteen the first time I heard the group. I saw them in Toronto on their last tour in August, '66. Three months later, they started recording this song. It ushered in a new direction that was seen by the musical world like a supernova. The first listening for me was stunning! Happy Christmas,David!
Really engaging and insightful. My favorite song as well, and for all those reasons, but also and mostly for the poetically ingenious verse so aptly contextualised and colorized, if you will, by the music. Few but Lennon, and no other Beatle, could turn scatterbrained mumblings of everyday language like “Oh yeah, you know, sometimes, think it’s me” and turn it into something profoundly existential and personal and relatable, a moment when, looking back, we realize we never knew who we really are, and yet feel nostalgic about threat time before it started “getting hard to be someone” though “it all works out.” His journal confessions about his bouts of depression made the song all come together for me. I never tire of this song. And yeah, Martin deserves more recognition!! Thanks!
Such a great song. George Martin’s arrangement is amazing…this era of Beatles music is my favorite. Moving out of the teen pop stuff and into more experimental approach to their music. Revolver, Rubber Soul, Magical Mystery Tour, and St. Peppers.
This video is brilliant! I'm 75, and allowed myself to believe it was written for me - "Geoffery Field forever" ! Now I know better. Thankyou so much, David.
Wow … that was really well done. Without your much deeper understanding of signature, tempo and key, I just let the music wash over me. You help me understand why a song like this leaves such a strong and lasting impression. Some might think that level of detail undermines the artistry but it helps me understand “why” … and “why” is often (but not always) a vital consideration. Incredible to think that without all this theory, it’s just the way Lennon heard it in his head. Thanks!!
My favourite beatles tune as well, the meaning behind it where we all have a strawberry fields and the out of body way the tune flows is just brilliant
I know this is an extremely bold claim, but I genuinely think this could be the greatest song ever created.
It certainly could be. Impossible to say
though in my opinion
It's a contender for greatest pop song ever, definitely.
as far as I'm concerned, it is the best ever
Greatest song ever? Ha!! It's not even the best Beatles' song about Liverpool. Penny Lane is.
i would say good vibrations edges out ahead
I'm surprised you didn't get more specific about the song - particularly the use of accidentals, and how it created these really cool melodies. When it goes to the relative 6th major, the notes in 'Nothing is real' in chromatic sequence. Just the way it seems to go left and right for no reason but it's actually kind of brilliant melody craftsmanship. People rarely write songs that complex and good anymore.
Let me tell you, after in my teenage and early adult years I underwent intensive training in classical music (a long time ago), even compared to my conservatory teachers you are a great teacher: you subdivide complex units into smaller and smaller, and more understandable, units until anyone capable of understanding music can learn from you. Great!
This too is my favourite Beatles song. Been playing on repeat going to work and back.
Strawberry Fields Forever introduced me to the distinctive draw of The Beatles, and your analysis opens perspectives and insight into these feelings. Thank you.
Love the analysis of Strawberry Fields. Great info on the notation and meter changes. What you didn't cover was Ringo's genius drum fills where he just didn't play the usual 1/8th or 16/th type fills. It's where Ringo does not play and hesitates to get you guessing "how will he fill this time"? Add to the drumming George Martin's production of picking up those low Tom tones. And the end where it sounds like Ringo is almost doing a double bass drum but probably doing it on a very low Tom. Pure genius!
I didn't know about that 1:00 part. All the time when I listen this, it feels a bit scary, John voice become more lower, those strings sounds like horror filmscore, but it sounds satisfying 😆
It’s an amazing bit of studio work that splice! Check out my other video on it: th-cam.com/video/QgtzOafdoOQ/w-d-xo.html 😃
Brilliant video, David. Thank you!
Thank you!
I am glad to hear you say that. Strawberry is also my very favourite song ever and the BeGtleds amongst my favourite bands. Thank you.
This is an absolutely wonderful, insightful, revealing analysis of this masterwork song. Thank you so much for this.
It's my favorite too, and all the information about how it was created and produced just adds to my love of this song
Ringo's drum playing here too! It was just phenomenal!
The thing that always gets me is the trippy guitar in the first chorus, real hair on the back of the neck moment for me.
I love that that it was most likely all feel and no theory when they wrote it. Just 4 ordinary lads making extraordinary music. Really interesting to see the analysis, thank you.
C'mon, I am the walrus is the other great Lennon song. Tricky, too. Maybe worth a video, too?
I remember rehearsing Strawberry Fields with my first band for the first time. No-one was aware of the meter changes, the whole song collapsed. It took some time until we figured it out. But we finally made it.
My favorite Beatles song also, it is just so spectacular and ahead of its time.
Lol I thought you used VSTs for the arrangement and was surprised it sounded so good
This is my favorite Beatles tunes as well!
So many cool recording techniques and compositional elements make this one really stand out. I love it.
I'm 71 and the first time I ever heard the tune I thought..."What the hell?" It didn't take long before I began to love it!
A deep dive on I Am The Walrus would be great. I wrote a 12-page paper about it for a music theory class in college, so there’s plenty there to work with! The Anthology version provides a lot of clues illuminating how it was constructed. 🎺🎶🎹
Also my favourite. A rarified experience.
John’s elliptical ideas in the lyrics mirror those in the music.
Paul’s glittering introduction counter-melody is a wonder, as is the one in Lucy.
George Martin’s cello & brass arrangements are legendary.
Great analysis, David, as always. Thank you. My favourite Beatles song changes from week to week. But Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane are always contenders.
My fav Beatles recording is not one song, but the entire Abbey Road medley.
those 8 tracks are really special
Best ending to an album ever
I would second your appraisal of SFF being one of the best pieces of music ever written. It is also my fave of all time and I SERIOUSLY do not like lists or rankings...it is that this is just a stunning composition.
I’d love you to do an analysis of ‘ I Am The Walrus’, the other Beatles song that knocked me sideways as a 16 year old.
Wow, David. Strawberry Fields Forever is not only my favourite Beatle song but also my favourite song of all time, since I first heard it back in 1989. I thought I was the only one...
Good choice!
This is also my favorite Beatles tune. I think you need to consider "rootless" chords...The intent as to what the rootless chords represent is pretty clear, due to what harmonic changes are occuring. The structure of the line as well as the simplification of what chords could be borrowed... Fmaj--Fmaj7/E--F7/Eb--Eb--D7b9/Eb--Gm\D--F\C--Eb/Bb--Bb The F7/Eb is a rootless chord and the V7 chord borrowed from Bb (the key the harmony is moving to). The Eb is the IV chord in Bb. The D7b9/Eb (rootless) is the vi chord in Bb. The F\C is the V chord in Bb, the Eb/Bb is the IV chord in Bb. Of course the Eb/Bb to Bb is a plagal cadence. None of the Beatles analyzed this chord progression, but knew it was a winner by the way it sounded. Of course, Martin knew what it was due to his formal musical study and knew it would work being the genius he was(is). There is no doubt that McCartney had a hand in arranging and playing keyboard parts. The way you have Eb diminished written (pointing out that it's actually Eb-Gb-Db), the F# is the leading tone of Gminor (which the Eb dim resolves to) is really an indicator of the chord being a dominant chord in Gminor (relative minor of Bb).
Getting people interested in formal analysis is a great thing and I applaud you for it.
Not a huge Beatles fan, but this song is a work of genius.
How can you not be a beatles fan lol
I wish more people, when discussing this song, would spend some time on the percussion. Some of Ringos finest work and the song just wouldn't sound as good without it.
His work there is so underrated, because I feel like people only talk about Rain when they want to show how great of a drummer he actually was
@@ucf8290 I agree. Ringo has a feel for the songs and his style of play is so fitting and tasteful.
Yep I love the drums, more than the song
Last fade in and out part is quite trippy. It is taking the song to another level. It can be a practical solution to a specific problem but a moment of silence before this trippy part was just the right thing.
I love it when I find deep analyses on songs that I like and what I've been hearing is put into words. I've definitely heard the change in pace when time signatures shift but I've never realized it happening.
Great as always! I would love to see your analysis of I Want You (She's So Heavy) . I think there's a lot of interesting elements in this song. greetings from Argentina!
Good Vibrations, released October 10th, 1966. Strawberry Fields Forever, recorded late November - December 1966.
When I first heard SFF , in 1976, my jaw literally dropped. Not only was it groundbreaking genius in its own time, it blew everything in the UK charts in 1976 out of the water. 57 years later it still sounds timeless, mysterious, unfathomable. With its druggy half tone drop it is the closest thing to a pure surrealist/dreamstate in music. The Anthology outtake with extended drum solo was a harbinger of trip hop
David, you are a legend! We thank you for helping to keep the relevance/importance of the greatest band ever and for helping us to understand what music makes us feel, man.
Thank you! 😃😃
I read once that George Martin regretted not adding this one in Sgt Pepper's lonely hearts album, that would make the album more brilliant!