If gestalt theory is correct, and the whole is greater than the sum of its parts - then analysis often fails by seeing the trees instead of the forest.
For example, Shenkerian analysis attempts to find the core melody/harmony by reduction, gradually removing complexity to find the underlying melodic and harmonic mechanism. The "less essential" notes are written as "small" notes.
There's a classic anecdote attributed to Schonberg, where he looks at a Schenkerian analysis of Beethoven's "Eroica" Symphony and says
"Where are all my favorite passages? Ah, here in all these tiny notes!"Similarly, while harmonic analysis is useful, there are so many elements of these songs that
aren't by it that I wonder what's actually learned in the end.
As the article's author notes after the analysis of "Losing My Religion",
"Just goes to show again that to write a great song, you don’t need to try to hard to create good chords."Don't get me wrong - harmonic analysis can lead to useful insights about songs. But the author's stated goal is:
I am embarking on this project to analyse the chords of the top 20 songs of all time to see if there is anything hidden in those chord progressions that links them all, or whether each one is its own succinct packet of genius.
He never answers the question.
But fear not - I will: No, there's nothing "hidden" that links them all in the chord progressions. Now,
genius or
payola? I couldn't say.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean