There Are The Same 4 Chords In Every Popular Rock Song Ever Written

[Duncan Glenday]

This (tongue firmly in cheek) video is hilarious, and probably rings true to most of us here.



I've never heard of these guys before, but plan to spend a bit of time exploring their YouTube channel...

[The Dark Elf]

This already has been done, and it is Pachelbel:

[soundsweird]

This video has been the topic of multiple threads here before, one every year or two, but it deserves to be re-posted. I always forget the name of the band, so thanks for reminding me...

[Duncan Glenday]

This video has been the topic of multiple threads here before, one every year or two, but it deserves to be re-posted. I always forget the name of the band, so thanks for reminding me...

I guess I missed the previous threads...

[GuitarGeek]

This already has been done, and it is Pachelbel:

Except that's five chords, I believe.

[Interstellar]

Thanks for posting this. It could be applied to a lot of the french pop songs I casually hear on the radio.
I sometimes tell people these songs use the same chord progressions, but then it feels like I'm the only one who can hear it.
From a creative standpoint, I find this uniformity a bit annoying. But most people don't seem to care, as long as they like the tune. Good for them.

[infandous]

Yeah, saw this before, but it's always good for a laugh. My buddy and I have a "medley" we do mostly for our own amusement of half a dozen songs (sometimes more) that use the same 3 chords, G - C- D (all major). We could probably do this just for Pink Floyd, let alone more "pop" stuff.

[alanterrill]

The Ukelele Orchestra of Great Britain do a simialr thing in a few of their songs -here's one that combines, Life On Mars with My way, For Once in my Life, Born Free, Substitute and One Day I'll Fly Away.

[No Pride]

This (tongue firmly in cheek) video is hilarious, and probably rings true to most of us here.

Yeah, this has been posted here once or twice before. I love it because it made me laugh about something that generally pisses me off. If you've played or listened to the "standards" from The Great American Songbook; the pop of the '30s, '40s and '50s, you'll know that in those days, each tune generally had a chord progression that was as unique to the song as the melody itself. If I tune in to a jazz artist/band playing one of those songs in the middle of the track where they're improvising a solo, I can tell what song it is by the chord progression. Then something happened by the '70s; everybody started using the same handful of chord progressions as a template. Laziness or just lack of creativity? I don't know, but it irks me. Glad these guys found and shared some humor in it.

[Fracktured]

I must be really out of touch with pop music because I only recognized a few of the songs that they were playing but did recognize the artists that they came from. I'm not sure if they deviated much from the original song but what's really makes it more frustrating is the fact that they are all in the same key.

[No Pride]

I must be really out of touch with pop music because I only recognized a few of the songs that they were playing but did recognize the artists that they came from. I'm not sure if they deviated much from the original song but what's really makes it more frustrating is the fact that they are all in the same key.

The original versions are not all in the same key. The point these guys are trying to make is that those songs all use the same numeric chord progression, I-V-vi-IV. It just becomes more obvious when you hear them together transposed to the same key.

[Garden Dreamer]

...but not all of them make a million...

[georob]

...but not all of them make a million...

"4 Chords That Made A Million"
- Porcupine Tree

[Reid]

Then something happened by the '70s; everybody started using the same handful of chord progressions as a template. Laziness or just lack of creativity? I don't know, but it irks me. Glad these guys found and shared some humor in it.

Every one of those insipid pop ditties they poked fun at were from the 80s or later. Thank heaven for joni Mitchell and Stevie Wonder.

[Yodelgoat]

But thankfully, there are probably many more "chords" in those songs. Its just the "hook". Why I love Prog is that here is variety. There are only 12 notes. How repetitive is that? Whats even more disturbing is that all those hits had basically the same rhythms.

even though I have been listening to those progressions all my life. They still do have a certain level of comfort in them. Its just a certain inner resonance that those chords seem to invoke. My love of prog goes against that, but prog is a response to this structure. It mostly exists as an "anti" statement. Its like writing "anti-hit" songs.

[No Pride]

Every one of those insipid pop ditties they poked fun at were from the 80s or later.

Not every one, but the majority of them.

But thankfully, there are probably many more "chords" in those songs.

Some of them have more chords, others don't.

I agree that it's a popular chord progression because of the "certain level of comfort." It's the same reason people love blues/rock clichés. However, I don't find any comfort in the ultra familiar; I prefer hearing stuff that makes me think "WTF was THAT?!" I suppose it's a "muso" thing. And it's not that I can't occasionally enjoy a 4 or even 3 chord song; it's just the exception rather than the rule.

[Reid]

Forgot about The Beatles and Bob Marley.

[Fracktured]

Every one of those insipid pop ditties they poked fun at were from the 80s or later.

That would explain why I don't know most of them. I gave up on rock music in the 80's. were all of these songs really hits?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jefferson James]

If you've played or listened to the "standards" from The Great American Songbook; the pop of the '30s, '40s and '50s, you'll know that in those days, each tune generally had a chord progression that was as unique to the song as the melody itself.

Truth! Even Beatles' songs were generally unique from one another in terms of chord changes, time signatures, stylistic influences, bridges, etc.

Then something happened by the '70s; everybody started using the same handful of chord progressions as a template. Laziness or just lack of creativity?

Back in my power-pop band days I learned quickly most of my peers were unwilling to give any ideas a chance that didn't sound exactly like one of the power-pop "templates" (upbeat rocker, mid-tempo jangle, pop ballad) and their accompanying chord progressions.

I had this one jangle-pop tune in A major where, for the bridge, I slid down to Ab. I loved it but my band mate was, like, "Uh, sorry man, that's just too jarring."

It wasn't even that interesting of a move, you know?

Standardizing chord progressions is a snake-eating-tail kind of thing, most people want to hear the familiar stuff so most musicians will write music to cater to them.

Freedom in choosing chords and arrangements is exactly why I enjoy writing classic-rock styled "prog-rock". I still love crafting something tight and to the point but the freedom of longer pieces is far more gratifying to me these days.