2nd verse problem

[vbakh]

I just heard the term "2nd verse problem" from Adam Rafferty's podcast, "Fingerstyle Guitar Hangout" and realized that I have that problem too.

When I arrange a song, it's quite easy to come up with how to play the first round / verse. Usually in the beginning it would be a plain melody with simple bass line and chords, so the listeners would understand the idea of the song. But in the second and further rounds it's necessary to do something differently such as adding variations to the melody and solo improvisations, use more advanced chord substitutions, play walking bass, play percussion tricks and so on.

What do you do in the second and further verses not to sound boring and repetitive?

Thanks,
Vlad

[rick-slo]

Couple of example of my originals. It's usually combination of a melody line repeated usually with some variations and compatible second, and possibly third melodies. The first tune is more typical for what I write. The second one has less distinct variations and sections but sets up a pretty mood IMO.

Often it can take a lot of work and experimentation, but other times is comes together pretty quickly. They are just guitar pieces and it usually does not pay to get carried away by throwing in various styles. Keep it a digestible whole.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Felicity.mp3

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Mu...ereToOnC10.mp3

[agfsteve]

Originally Posted by vbakh

I just heard the term "2nd verse problem" from Adam Rafferty's podcast, "Fingerstyle Guitar Hangout" and realized that I have that problem too.

When I arrange a song, it's quite easy to come up with how to play the first round / verse. Usually in the beginning it would be a plain melody with simple bass line and chords, so the listeners would understand the idea of the song. But in the second and further rounds it's necessary to do something differently such as adding variations to the melody and solo improvisations, use more advanced chord substitutions, play walking bass, play percussion tricks and so on.

What do you do in the second and further verses not to sound boring and repetitive?

Thanks,
Vlad

I am tackling that very same problem right now, in my own mediocre way (I'm a lifelong hobbyist player). I am learning to play Norwegian Wood, from the book, "Fingerpicking Beatles", and I managed to learn it as per the book, but then I realised it is too repetitive, so for about the last two weeks I have been trying to come up with variations for the verses and bridges. My basic approach has been to start simple, with root and fifth bass notes on the one and three (6/8 timing), and single-note melody, then picking up the pace (not tempo) by playing the same bass notes, but on more beats. Then I add harmony for the bridge (as per the original song), but then keep the harmony for the second verse, and adding more of a walking / complex bass line. Then for the last verse I take liberties with the harmony (I think I'm playing an F#m/D instead of a D). Then I bring it back to simple for the outro, mimicking the intro.

The above is probably all obvious and cliche to the more advanced guitarist!

My problem always seems to be the same: I play a variation that I really like (sometimes stumbling on it by mistake, sometimes through imagination), and then I set out to practice it to get it down, but by the time I have got it down I am fed up with it and to my ears it has usually become corny and trite. I guess it gets stale before it is ready to record.

OK, bit of a ramble there, but I can totally relate to your problem. I think the fix for me personally is that I simply need to develop better technique--I need to be able to play what's in my head without taking so long that it sounds boring to me.

[Silly Moustache]

Originally Posted by vbakh

I just heard the term "2nd verse problem" from Adam Rafferty's podcast, "Fingerstyle Guitar Hangout" and realized that I have that problem too.

When I arrange a song, it's quite easy to come up with how to play the first round / verse. Usually in the beginning it would be a plain melody with simple bass line and chords, so the listeners would understand the idea of the song. But in the second and further rounds it's necessary to do something differently such as adding variations to the melody and solo improvisations, use more advanced chord substitutions, play walking bass, play percussion tricks and so on.

What do you do in the second and further verses not to sound boring and repetitive?

Thanks,
Vlad

Hi, almost everything I/we follow one of these patterns :

1. intro (usually a four bars instrumental)
2. verse 1 - setting up the storyline.
3. Instrumental break
4 - verse 2 - filling out the storyline
5. Inst.
6. Verse 3,
7. Inst.
8. verse - plus turnaround
9. Outro.

Or
1. Intro
2. Verse 1
3. Chorus
4. Verse 2
5 Chorus
6 Inst
7. Verse 3
8 Outro

Sometimes :

1. Chorus
2. Verse
3. Chorus
4. Break (usu. verse pror but could be Ch progr.)
5. Verse
6. Chorus
7. Outro

or

1. Intro (sometimes verse progr)
2. Verse
3. Verse 2
4. Bridge (or chorus)
5. Break (verse progr)
6. Verse 3
7 Bridge
8. Verse 1 reprise)
9. outro

essentially

The intro sets the tempo and "feel".
Verse 1 sets the scene for the storyline
Chorus defines the storyline
Verse 2 - details the story
Verse 3 resolves the story.

This might be useful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_structure

[Mr. Jelly]

I suffer also of this issue. The redundancy and cliché issues are my biggest obstacles. This is one of the reasons I am not that interested to listen to music. Most do formula song structure poorly. It loses my interest. Story songs are naturals to overcome this issue. Though unless they have something special once you've heard the story you've been there and done that. If you can create a instrumental story song your on the right track. One trick that works for me at times is to take three or four songs and work them together. Put them into sections sort to speak. If you are doing vocals do a verse and several different choruses. Just some ideas.

[mattbn73]

With all aspects musical, it's much easier to pull back than to add additional elements. I would maybe look at your second verse as your "default" and learn to pair back the 1st more. Most of us tend to overplay anyway. Just a thought.

This is what I've always assumed studio singers were doing, though I don't really know. I can always hear a producer in my mind saying "Can you sing the first verse simpler, so that you have more headroom in the ending?"

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by vbakh

I just heard the term "2nd verse problem" from Adam Rafferty's podcast, "Fingerstyle Guitar Hangout" and realized that I have that problem too.

When I arrange a song, it's quite easy to come up with how to play the first round / verse. Usually in the beginning it would be a plain melody with simple bass line and chords, so the listeners would understand the idea of the song. But in the second and further rounds it's necessary to do something differently such as adding variations to the melody and solo improvisations, use more advanced chord substitutions, play walking bass, play percussion tricks and so on.

Not at all. (I'm going to be very literal and pedantic now...)

If it's a "song", strictly speaking, then you are (or someone else is) singing it. The change in lyrics is quite enough to make the distinction between verse 1 and 2. The guitar accompaniment can - and arguably should - be identical.

Of course, I'm guessing you're talking about an instrumental composition (using the term "song" loosely).

Even so, don't equate "repetition" with "boring". Repetition is a fundamental part of good composition. It's what makes riffs so catchy and strong. Even if you find the repetition of one section boring (because you know it so well), an audience won't. Audiences tend to be prefer simple and repetitive over complex and challenging. Simple and repetitive can equate to hypnotic.

That doesn't mean you can't be intricate, but intricacy is best when it is repeated, so that listeners have a better chance of connecting with what's going on.

So one idea, if you have already have a quite detailed arrangement, is to simplify it right down for the first verse. I.e., don't start fancy, and then work out something fancy in a different way for verse 2 - that's just going to baffle people. Worse, don't start complicated and then add more stuff.
Start simple - for verse 1, strip out a lot of what you've got, and then bring it in for verse 2.
You can then revert to simple for verse 3, and back again for verse 4.
Listeners can then perceive an overall plan of the form, recognising the pattern in the arrangement.

Alternatively, you can be cumulative. Play melody alone first time round; then add a bass line; then add more chord tones or harmony in between.

Of course, there are the conventional formal ways of avoiding too much repetition. Such as AABA song structure. The first two sections can be identical - so that listeners perceive the form, enjoying the recognition of what came before - and then you introduce a totally different section, before returning for a re-statement of the opening theme. The first two sections can, in fact, be different in their endings, because of where they are going next: A1 needs to lead to A2; A2 needs a different ending which will lead to B. A3 can have another different ending to make either a final conclusion, or another turnaround back to A1.

And if you find your total AABA structure is too short, you can always throw in a second bridge or C section, or simply modulate to a new key. But this should never be necessary (IMO) with an instrumental piece. I mean, unless you are composing a symphony....
If you find your piece is starting to get boring - just end it! Keep it short and sweet. You've made your point, why overstate it, or confuse the issue by adding more stuff?

One example:

Two identical verses, bookended by an intro and outro riff. Fade out after a minute and a half. Job done, and a stone classic.

When he recorded a vocal version some years later, then of course it was longer because of the three verses of lyrics - the guitar accompaniment was still repeated the same way each time (including a full instrumental intro verse), and in fact was simplified to allow the vocal to fit better.

IOW, think about the point of your tune. What is its essence, what are you trying to say? Don't fall into trying to impress everyone with your technical or compositional skills - nobody cares, really. OK, maybe sometimes they do, if you're playing purely for an audience of other guitarists. If that's all you care about, I have no constructive advice.

[vbakh]

My apologies for confusion, but I meant fingerstyle arrangements only, not vocal versions.

Anyways, thanks a lot for your replies and advises!!!

Vlad

[mr. beaumont]

I generally play the tune straight on the in and out, and improvise a few choruses in between, based on the chord changes of the tune. It's the "jazz" approach, but it works for non-jazz tunes as well. With this, I do all kinds of variations (improvise first then gradually work in melody, start rubato then go to "in time," etc.)

This works great for AABA styled tunes, maybe not as much for verse/chorus/verse/bridge type tunes.

For a song structured like that, I have a lot of different approaches...I might improvise on the first verse, then come in with the melody on the chorus and second verse...I might start straight, use the second verse/chorus for improvising, and then come back to melody at the bridge...

Generally, when performing, I try not to do the same thing more than two tunes in a row. Keeps it fresh, for me at least...not sure the audience cares as much...maybe the musicians in the audience notice

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by vbakh

My apologies for confusion, but I meant fingerstyle arrangements only, not vocal versions.

Anyways, thanks a lot for your replies and advises!!!

Vlad

Context is helpful to zero in on the nature of the questions being asked. A tune from your youtube channel:




On this particular arrangement I would look to add variation in the rhythm, the picking pattern, and would add in some solo note lines.

[vbakh]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

A tune from your youtube channel.

Wow, Rick, you caught me off guard :-) That recording is 6 years old, but still is a good example for this topic - I still play that tune the same way as 6 years ago :-)
Thanks a lot for the recommendations, I'll check all the links later today.


Regards,
Vlad

[vbakh]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Couple of example of my originals. http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Music/Felicity.mp3
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Mu...ereToOnC10.mp3

Derek, very nice tunes, pleasant sound and great playing!

Looks like that in Felicity you changed direction of the melody from low to high and from high to low several times and added some other melodic variations. In Where to On, part B adds good variety to the song.

Thanks a lot for sharing!

Regards,
Vlad

P.S. My apologies for the mistake with your name. Those cell phone browsers are so small … :-)

[vbakh]

Originally Posted by agfsteve

I am tackling that very same problem right now, in my own mediocre way (I'm a lifelong hobbyist player).

Agfsteve, welcome to the club :-)

Originally Posted by agfsteve

My basic approach has been to start simple, with root and fifth bass notes on the one and three (6/8 timing), and single-note melody, then picking up the pace (not tempo) by playing the same bass notes, but on more beats. Then I add harmony for the bridge (as per the original song), but then keep the harmony for the second verse, and adding more of a walking / complex bass line. Then for the last verse I take liberties with the harmony (I think I'm playing an F#m/D instead of a D). Then I bring it back to simple for the outro, mimicking the intro.

Good approach, I like it.

Originally Posted by agfsteve

I think the fix for me personally is that I simply need to develop better technique -I need to be able to play what's in my head without taking so long that it sounds boring to me.

That's my issue too. Walking bass with 2-note chords is on my "To Learn" list, as well as learning how to reharmonize songs in more interesting way (and much more).

Agfsteve, thanks a lot for sharing your experience!
Vlad

[vbakh]

Folks, thanks a lot for your advises. Here is what I've compiled from your replies:

• Variations in melody, harmony, bass / "density", tempo / pace
• Modulation
• Structure
  • Make the 2nd verse 'default', simplify the 1st verse instead of making the 2nd more complex. Revert to simple for verse 3, and back again for verse 4.
  • Alternatively, you can be cumulative. Play melody alone first time round; then add a bass line; then add more chord tones or harmony in between.
  • Use song structure with different parts (AABA with different endings in A parts), ABA etc.
  • Add original intro/outro, turnarounds. Add a second bridge or section C
  • Start simple, play bass on more beats (make it 'thicker'), use bridge harmony, walking/complex bass
  • Start rubato, then go to "in time"
  • Repeat a chorus twice, with some variations
  • Repetition is a fundamental part of good composition
  • Try not to do the same thing more than two tunes in a row
• Storytelling
  • Think about the point of your tune. What is its essence, what are you trying to say? Don't fall into trying to impress everyone with your technical or compositional skills - nobody cares, really
  • Group several tunes into a story
• Techniques
  • Solo inserts
  • Walking bass
  • Percussion / tricks
• Do not overstate :-)

Thanks a lot!
Vlad