Harmonies... Brian or Freddie

I read somewhere that Brian improved a few of the vocal harmonies in Killer Queen after he did the guitar parts.

Is there enough knowledge among fans to suggest that Brian was better than Freddie at constructing the intricate harmonies they were so good at? (not just with KQ, but in general)

I don't know enough about Brian's solo material, nor am I musically educated enough, but Freddie's solo songs where full of layered vocals but personally i don't think they were as tight as Queen's material (and I know that Queen had three voices to work with).

One more question for music experts... in Days of Our Lives... the chorus is sung by Freddie in two different tunes... in musical terms what is this type of technique called? (hope i'm clear enough in what I'm asking)

[QUOTE]

[b]Zebonka's Tiny Ding-a-ling wrote: [/b]

I read somewhere that Brian improved a few of the vocal harmonies in Killer Queen after he did the guitar parts.

Is there enough knowledge among fans to suggest that Brian was better than Freddie at constructing the intricate harmonies they were so good at? (not just with KQ, but in general)[/QUOTE]

It's more likely that a few details of the vocal harmonies had to be changed to fit in better with the guitar parts. They both knew what they were doing, harmony-wise.

[QUOTE]I don't know enough about Brian's solo material, nor am I musically educated enough, but Freddie's solo songs where full of layered vocals but personally i don't think they were as tight as Queen's material (and I know that Queen had three voices to work with).[/QUOTE]

Layering vocals or instrumental sounds isn't very different. Brian usually went for instrumental orchestration (Prophet's Song, Father To Son, etc.), Freddie often went choral. But they could both arrange vocal and instrumental parts.

[QUOTE]One more question for music experts... in Days of Our Lives... the chorus is sung by Freddie in two different tunes... in musical terms what is this type of technique called? (hope i'm clear enough in what I'm asking)[/QUOTE]

Counterpoint.[/QUOTE]


[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

[b]Zebonka's Tiny Ding-a-ling wrote: [/b]

I read somewhere that Brian improved a few of the vocal harmonies in Killer Queen after he did the guitar parts.

Is there enough knowledge among fans to suggest that Brian was better than Freddie at constructing the intricate harmonies they were so good at? (not just with KQ, but in general)

I don't know enough about Brian's solo material, nor am I musically educated enough, but Freddie's solo songs where full of layered vocals but personally i don't think they were as tight as Queen's material (and I know that Queen had three voices to work with).

One more question for music experts... in Days of Our Lives... the chorus is sung by Freddie in two different tunes... in musical terms what is this type of technique called? (hope i'm clear enough in what I'm asking)


[/QUOTE]
Sebastian can provide some good inputs on these questions you're making, he has both the knowledge about Queen, and its history, and the more complex technical aspects concerning music theory. He articulates both aspects, Queen's peculiarities and the universality of musical theory, quite well, so I'd really recommend you, just so that you can already get a taste of what you're interested in, to check user Sebastian's posts. It may provide you some guidance before more people come in and join the interesting thread.

I don't have much to say besides recommending and inviting people to speak their minds about it.

Best regards!

Creating four-part harmonies, like Queen often did, is a task that is mostly done 'by the book' because there simply isn't much room to play around with. Apart from selecting the chords to harmonize with, and occasionally more than one voicing being feasible, there isn't much to creating harmonies once you've already written the main melody around which they revolve.

Thank you both for contributing. I will check out Sebastian's posts too.

TQ, you said that it's kind of "by the book"... do you mean in general for all bands or just the way Queen was used too?

Also, you mentioned chord changes that ultimately may change the harmonies, if say in TATDOOL, how would they have gone about creating the two part harmony in the main chorus? Would someone like Freddie just listen to the original and play about with different ways to add the backing harmony? In this particular song, as in others, it is beautiful to listen to the song over and over again, each time letting your ears concentrate on a different harmony.

Sorry, I have no music background so trying to describe what i mean is difficult!

[QUOTE]

[b]Zebonka's Tiny Ding-a-ling wrote: [/b]

Thank you both for contributing. I will check out Sebastian's posts too.

TQ, you said that it's kind of "by the book"... do you mean in general for all bands or just the way Queen was used too?[/QUOTE]

In general. Four-part harmonies are based around complete triads, occasionally augmented with sevenths, and as such tend to follow the rules of classical harmony, in order to get a fluent, smooth result. Bypassing the rules creates disjunct effects, which can be desirable, but is mostly reserved to modern classical music.

[QUOTE]Also, you mentioned chord changes that ultimately may change the harmonies, if say in TATDOOL, how would they have gone about creating the two part harmony in the main chorus? Would someone like Freddie just listen to the original and play about with different ways to add the backing harmony?[/QUOTE]

Ah yeah, this is the fun part. When three or more voices are used, you're stuck to harmony. But with *two* voices, there is a bit more freedom. Composition would start with the writing of a melody (either the highest or lowest voice is possible. I'm not exactly sure right now which one was the basis in TATDOOL, but it's bound to be the one with the smoothest melody). When that melody is finished, every note is matched up with another note. There are several possibilities: popular is adding a melody identical to the original, but a third higher or lower than the original melody. However, the more imaginative counterpoint (which, as I recall, is used on the chorus of TATDOOL) uses a variety of intervals between the two voices. The key point then is to make sure the voices do not make the same steps all the time (if voice #1 goes up a perfect fourth, you don't want voice #2 to go up a perfect fourth all the time too. Usually, you will want the two voices to either move in different directions (one up, one down) or in oblique motion (one stays on the same note, the other moves either up or down). It's an altogether more complex process, and ideally involves writing two fully independent melodies that just so happen to be compatible, but usually one is a supporting voice and one the lead voice.

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]





[b]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/b]





[QUOTE]











[/QUOTE] Usually, you will want the two voices to either move in different directions (one up, one down) or in oblique motion (one stays on the same note, the other moves either up or down). It's an altogether more complex process, and ideally involves writing two fully independent melodies that just so happen to be compatible, but usually one is a supporting voice and one the lead voice.

[/QUOTE]
Yep, this is what interests me... how do you decide on what is the lead voice and the support voice in a song like TATDOOL? It's not like one is more clearer or louder than the other (imo anyway)?

Would they just add the support voice after the lead is on tape?

Freddie was a genius live at changing tunes - depending on the state of his voice most times - would it be more likely for someone as creative as him to just keep the lead in his earphones and play around with "compatible" melodies and then see what sounds best or would there be more planning with chords first?

In Heaven For Everyone's mid section where the melody gets much more up tempo after first couple of verses, it goes a little similar to TATDOOL in the way two different melodies are playing simultaneously. I'm guessing then that the same technique is being used?


PS... sorry for all the Qs at once, but this really interests me.

[QUOTE]

[b]Zebonka's Tiny Ding-a-ling wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]













[b]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/b]













[QUOTE]



























[/QUOTE] Usually, you will want the two voices to either move in different directions (one up, one down) or in oblique motion (one stays on the same note, the other moves either up or down). It's an altogether more complex process, and ideally involves writing two fully independent melodies that just so happen to be compatible, but usually one is a supporting voice and one the lead voice.

[/QUOTE]
Yep, this is what interests me... how do you decide on what is the lead voice and the support voice in a song like TATDOOL? It's not like one is more clearer or louder than the other (imo anyway)?[/QUOTE]

If it's well-written, this is very difficult indeed. It'd be logical to make the top voice the lead, as higher notes are more clearly picked up by the human ear, and it would thus sound *very slightly* louder at the same objective volume than a lower voice would, and this is quite probable, but I am not absolutely sure.

[QUOTE]Would they just add the support voice after the lead is on tape?[/QUOTE]

Probably, though it's quite possible that they notated the melody first, then wrote a second part and only started recording when they'd done that.

[QUOTE]Freddie was a genius live at changing tunes - depending on the state of his voice most times - would it be more likely for someone as creative as him to just keep the lead in his earphones and play around with "compatible" melodies and then see what sounds best or would there be more planning with chords first?[/QUOTE]

It's quite possible, but if memory serves the chorus part of TATDOOL was quite inventively written. It would've been easier to write the part out (especially as that would allow an instrumental guide-track to be used, as you want to get your pitches exactly correct in a multi-voice vocal).

[QUOTE]In Heaven For Everyone's mid section where the melody gets much more up tempo after first couple of verses, it goes a little similar to TATDOOL in the way two different melodies are playing simultaneously. I'm guessing then that the same technique is being used?[/QUOTE]

I can't recall this passage precisely, I'd need to have a listen, but I believe HFE featured a four-part harmony at some point. A two-part counterpoint I don't recall, but I'm by no means infallible.

[QUOTE]PS... sorry for all the Qs at once, but this really interests me.[/QUOTE]

No trouble. I'm always glad to help out with questions about music.

[/QUOTE]

Going back to my original question TQ, have you got a view on who was maybe stronger with vocal harmonies... Freddie or Brian?

[QUOTE]

[b]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/b]

Creating four-part harmonies, like Queen often did, is a task that is mostly done 'by the book' because there simply isn't much room to play around with. Apart from selecting the chords to harmonize with, and occasionally more than one voicing being feasible, there isn't much to creating harmonies once you've already written the main melody around which they revolve.
[/QUOTE]
And that's where the genius lies - and all four band members had that.  Anyone can learn harmonies, but not everyone can write that perfect melody that rings for generations to come.

[QUOTE]

[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]

[QUOTE]





[b]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/b]



Creating four-part harmonies, like Queen often did, is a task that is mostly done 'by the book' because there simply isn't much room to play around with. Apart from selecting the chords to harmonize with, and occasionally more than one voicing being feasible, there isn't much to creating harmonies once you've already written the main melody around which they revolve.

[/QUOTE]
And that's where the genius lies - and all four band members had that.  Anyone can learn harmonies, but not everyone can write that perfect melody that rings for generations to come.

[/QUOTE]

Very true. For that reason alone, it can be no coincidence that melody is the only aspect of Western music that music theory has not been able to satisfactorily fit into a set of 'rules'.

[QUOTE]

[b]Zebonka's Tiny Ding-a-ling wrote: [/b]

Going back to my original question TQ, have you got a view on who was maybe stronger with vocal harmonies... Freddie or Brian?
[/QUOTE]
If I had to answer that, I'd say Freddie, but the only evidence I have for that is that he used them more often than Brian did. As I explained, there is little technical difference between choral and instrumental harmonies, so it boils down to a matter of preference: Brian preferred instrumental orchestrations, Freddie was more likely to choose vocal harmonies.

Both Mercury and May had loads of instrumental and vocal harmonies, and they were distinctive on both. Btw, the fact Bri sang the baritone voice in the chordal backing for KQ's verse doesn't mean he was 'better' at harmonies, just that his voice worked better on that part (especially when combined with Fred's falsetto tenor on the same part). For [i]Love of My Life[/i], they needed a different effect so no May was required; for [i]Bo Rhap[/i], Fred could have sung all the high falsettos, but instead Roger did them, because he sounded better for what they needed (a mock operetta).

Something else: Bri [b]sang[/b] a harmony line in [i]Killer Queen[/i], but it doesn't mean he [b]arranged[/b] it. And btw, [i]Days of Our Lives[/i] isn't a counterpoint, it's one of the simplest ways to harmonise: parallel thirds. The song needed something nostalgic and to overlayer it with elaborate choirs would've ruined it IMO; the choice of a simple Simon/Garfunkel-esque block was a good Occam's razor solution, and a perfect one (when your singer is Mercury, both simple and complex harmonies sound great).

As for who's better... Mercury wouldn't come up with such an original and inventive semi-parallel part as the one in [i]'39 [/i]or [i]Teo Torriatte[/i] choruses, but May's expertise as arranger isn't enough for the sort of tricks Freddie used in things like [i]Man from Manhattan, Don't Stop Me Now [/i](the climax) and [i]Bo Rhap[/i] (the seven 'no' phrase). So it's not a matter of 'better' or 'stronger', just two very different (but equally wonderful) arrangers whose output we're privileged to enjoy.

[QUOTE]

[b]Sebastian wrote: [/b]

Both Mercury and May had loads of instrumental and vocal harmonies, and they were distinctive on both. Btw, the fact Bri sang the baritone voice in the chordal backing for KQ's verse doesn't mean he was 'better' at harmonies, just that his voice worked better on that part (especially when combined with Fred's falsetto tenor on the same part). For [i]Love of My Life[/i], they needed a different effect so no May was required; for [i]Bo Rhap[/i], Fred could have sung all the high falsettos, but instead Roger did them, because he sounded better for what they needed (a mock operetta).

Something else: Bri [b]sang[/b] a harmony line in [i]Killer Queen[/i], but it doesn't mean he [b]arranged[/b] it. And btw, [i]Days of Our Lives[/i] isn't a counterpoint, it's one of the simplest ways to harmonise: parallel thirds. The song needed something nostalgic and to overlayer it with elaborate choirs would've ruined it IMO; the choice of a simple Simon/Garfunkel-esque block was a good Occam's razor solution, and a perfect one (when your singer is Mercury, both simple and complex harmonies sound great).

As for who's better... Mercury wouldn't come up with such an original and inventive semi-parallel part as the one in [i]'39 [/i]or [i]Teo Torriatte[/i] choruses, but May's expertise as arranger isn't enough for the sort of tricks Freddie used in things like [i]Man from Manhattan, Don't Stop Me Now [/i](the climax) and [i]Bo Rhap[/i] (the seven 'no' phrase). So it's not a matter of 'better' or 'stronger', just two very different (but equally wonderful) arrangers whose output we're privileged to enjoy.
[/QUOTE]
Brilliant, as usual. Thanks for the amazing insights and inputs, Sebastian. Your posts have been just the very best one can read here on Queenzone. Don't Stop It!!! : )))  

Best regards.

Wonderful topic! I don't have anything to add because my theoretical knowledge is close to zero but I understand what you're guys aresaying.  it's very interesting. thanks!