Are there even any songs out there besides opera and story type songs that don’t follow this theme?
In: 2
Well, “the “solo” type thing I don’t know the name of” is called a “[bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_(music))” or “release”, or else a “[break](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Break_(music))”, and the reason why songs follow the same flow is simply because people respond well to patterns. They make songs easier to remember, easier to follow, and therefore easier to understand, and easier to sing along to (or at least listen along to). They become popular.
Here’s an overview of organizational structures that are [common in popular music](https://www.musical-u.com/learn/anatomy-of-a-song-the-three-most-common-song-forms/). It mentions AABA format. AABA format is essentially two interleaved phrase structures; you can’t really define either as “the chorus”. It gives “Yesterday” by the Beatles as an example.
And if this seems like “oh, it’s not really different, though the B section is just a chorus, and the A section is just a verse type”, well, you can totally think of it that way if you want. But you’re the one doing the meaning-making then; you’re observing the repeating pattern and assigning it the name, and then any different section that the musician puts in, you assign the name of “bridge” or “break”. So then if you ask why musicians repeat elements, well, see above: people respond well to patterns, they make songs easier to remember.
So the question then, is to ask; what kind of music would not have repeating patterns, interleaved, with one bridge intervening?
* There’s music out there that you could interpret as having “multiple bridges”. One of my own favorites is CloZee’s [*Symfonia*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRtt897etDM).
* There’s music out there that keeps the listener on their toes the whole time. Queen’s [*Bohemian Rhapsody*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ9rUzIMcZQ) is a great example; but arguably that fits under the “operatic” or “story” description you already named.
But honestly? I’d say that the best pointer would be simply to “larger-scale works in general”. I don’t want to say “classical music”, because I’m not just talking about hour-long orchestral works by people who’ve been dead a hundred years, I’m also talking about pieces *like* *Bohemian Rhapsody*, since Queen there gave themselves leeway *to play with* longer structures *by* extending the song out longer than was typical.
But as long as I’ve said classical music, yes; even if you don’t think you like classical music, sit down sometime and block out an hour (while you’re doing something else, if you want, sure, feel free) to listen to Holst’s [*The Planets*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Isic2Z2e2xs) (edit: which has its own Wikipedia [page here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Planets)). If nothing else, listen to it because I’m pretty sure that every single movie composer has taken inspirations from it. You can see how the musical structure there — both as a whole, and in every one of its pieces — is more complicated and less-strictly cyclical. Longer works like this tend to use more complicated structures precisely *because* they’re aiming to hold the listener’s attention span for longer than five minutes.
Latest Answers