Do you remember the structure of the opeth songs?

[Luann]

There is something that happens to me which I really love:
Since opeth songs are really long and a lot of times they don't have repeated parts like a chorus or whatever, with albums like ghost reveries, I notice something new everytime I listen to it, or I remember wich part continues only when I'm listening to the previous part.
I mean, If I listen to the baying of the hounds for example, at the start of the song I will not remember that it has a sort of calm bridge until I hear it.
It's hard to describe.
Does that happens to you?
I think that it's an awesome effect, and I really love opeth because of this among other things.

 

[dwoakee]

When I first listened to Opeth (BWP) I liked it immediately but I absolutely could not remember the song structures. I never knew what'll come next or which part belongs to which song. I also listened a bit to MR and SL, but it didn't get any better. I explored other music for some years until Opeth hit me over the head with GR. I liked GR so much, and I finally wanted to get the songs into my head as a whole. With GR, following the lyrics helped me a lot. Later on, I sat down and tried to capture the song structures to find out more about them:

Analyzing Opeth - the Song Structures

 

[liquidcow]

Their song structures are interesting really, it's hard to capture them in your memory sometimes, but it's structure that makes a 10 minute song feel much shorter. Structure can totally ruin a song and make 3 minutes seem like an eternity, but Opeth do the opposite to that. Some of the songs have pretty simple basic structures - I learned Master's Apprentice on guitar the other week and it's basically Death Metal Section - Mellow Chord section - Death Metal Outro, of course within that there's more to the structure but when you step back and look at it that's the gist. No repetition across those sections, but it still feels like a single song. My problem with earlier material is that there is barely any structure at all, just a load of riffs on after the other, although it's interesting that there is in fact very little repetition even on some more recent Opeth songs.

 

[hibernal_dream]

Why do people always think that there must be repetition for there to be structure? It's not true at all.

 

[liquidcow]

I didn't say that. I don't think there has to be repetition for structure, but it's often a big help. If not outright repetition then at least certain themes or elements (rhythms or chord progressions perhaps). There can be no repetition and still a sense of structure, but also there can be no repetition and no sense of structure. Closure for example has no repeated sections, but there's a clear sense of momentum to the song, it peaks in the right places. I find that stuff on Orchid has no sense of arrangement or momentum, it's just one bit then another bit then it stops.

 

[hibernal_dream]

If you're finding a difference in structure between Orchid and the later stuff, you must be trying too hard to find it.

 

[liquidcow]

I'm not trying at all, it's blatantly obvious to me, it's the reason I can't get into that album.

 

[hibernal_dream]

Well, i'm baffled. If anything the later albums appear to be a lot more cut-and-paste. Watershed is the worst culprit of them all. Fortunately, I don't see this as a bad thing.

 

[MegaMoose]

Watershed is way more cut and paste than anything else post-MAYH, but not moreso than anything on Morningrise or Orchid.

 

[dwoakee]

Why do people always think that there must be repetition for there to be structure? It's not true at all.

you don't necessarily need repetition to have structure. what you need is references and relations. repetition is just the simplest form of reference. For most people random specks of color sprinkled across a page won't be much of a picture. They must be arranged to form shapes. That is why I can't get BRI in my head as one song. It's just a hellofa bunch of riffs strung together.

Yet, I'm fully aware that breaking a song apart in sections does not tell you all about it. If the harmonic/melodic/rhythmic flow of a song makes perfect sense to your ear than no backward references are needed.

 

[hibernal_dream]

Every interval is related to another in some way, but in western music some apparently sound more related than others. Any apparent improvement upon the flow is just aesthetic. Do we want to simplify everything to make it easier for everyone?

 

[FuneralPortrait]

Once I've heard an Opeth song 2 or 3 times I generally remember the structure. There are occasional parts I forget (the only examples I can think of are the end of Harlequin Forest, and the end of Hessian Peel.. because both of those songs peak in the middle for me, and I don't enjoy the sections after as much.)

 

[DinoB]

I love Opeth because their song structure gives longevity to the music. When I listen to an Opeth song I know what song it is and I know what parts are going to come next, but I don't think I could recite a whole song off the top of my head.

 

[Witcher]

For me its a situation of if I think of an opeth song I dont necessarily remember all the parts and order... unless its my favourite tracks.. but I always know whats coming next while listening to the song.
btw playing the songs on guitar will make you memorise the tracks.. so if you want to remember song structures thats the means

 

[Iki-ilkkuja]

It's only a good thing. There's always something new to find, or at least something you've forgotten.