andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2010-06-24 10:12 pm

I am just a sucker for this kind of thing


Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] accordingly for bringing it to my attention.

[identity profile] bracknellexile.livejournal.com 2010-06-24 09:18 pm (UTC)(link)
Cleverly done, but it's a sad reflection on the utterly bland generic state of pop music that you can actually do that with all of the top 25 of a chart. Does no-one write in anything but 4/4 and 110-130bpm any more?

[identity profile] marrog.livejournal.com 2010-06-25 10:59 am (UTC)(link)
To add to Andy's ref to the FAQ, however, I'll observe that I think every song is in 4/4 or a straight-time variant thereof - although I have no doubt that the DJ in question could have thrown in vocals from a compound/weirdo time sig if they'd been called to.

But I will add to that that, specific genres like Prog aside, most of everything is in 4/4 (or very occasionally 6/8) time, even the good stuff.

[identity profile] octopoid-horror.livejournal.com 2010-06-25 11:19 am (UTC)(link)
Aside from what the faq and Marrog said, it's not like the top 25 in most genres would show that many differences.

Apart from punk of course, which is all about being unique and individual and non-conformity and...



wait, no. If the top 25 in a genre didn't have similarities, it wouldn't be a genre.

[identity profile] bracknellexile.livejournal.com 2010-06-25 11:28 am (UTC)(link)
But this wasn't in a genre, this was the top 25 of a year across all genres.

[identity profile] girl-onthego.livejournal.com 2010-06-25 11:29 am (UTC)(link)
tee hee. I freaking love the united states of pop video - I showed it to [livejournal.com profile] accordingly the other day after my friend passed it to me via facebook. Sofreakingcool.

[identity profile] dreema.livejournal.com 2010-06-25 09:32 pm (UTC)(link)
i like, well stitched together.