Home > Messages from the Ether > The fade cadence

The fade-out more as an artistic choice than a sign of laziness...I mean, how hard is it to just put an emphatic stop at the end of a measure in your typical 4/4 song?

The intention of the fade-out is to imply a neverending song:

...if we the label's support we'd have made this song 8 minutes long...if we didn't have to cut to this commercial we'd continue playing this song.
Stuff like that. Of course, it could always come down to something as lame as...we don't have any songs that fade out on this record, so let's fade a couple of them out.

Regarding the accusation of laziness: it's much more fun for the musicians to jam at the end of the song and just fade out with whatever they've done. However, have they made any effort to actually compose an ending? Nope. It's infinitely easier to jam endlessly over a few rock chords--it's more difficult to come up with closure to the song and not have it sound like it's been cut off, or not have it sound hokey with a Big Fat V-I progression.

I didn't bring up the "radio" mix where 8-minute songs are rearranged and faded at some convenient point, because that's a business choice and not an artistic choice.

What makes people writing the 3- and 4-minute songs fade them out? Most bands exist as live performers 99% of the time and studio performers 1% of the time: how then does a studio technique become so dominant when most of the time they're playing these songs with a full stop?

I think it comes down to: "that's a cool lyric," "that's a cool chord progression," or "hey-let's-jam." Are they really thinking, "I want this to go on for infinity"?

I don't think there's a hard and fast rule which means that the "lazines" or "lack of creativity" can be an applicable criticism. However there are artistic reasons of which one I think you alluded to in your original post. I think there are thematic developments, for lack of a better term, where "emphasis" on a lyric and perhaps the chord progression where the artist intends for the listener to pick up the thread and continue it in their head. One song I can think of where this happens for me is the "fade out" of Vital Signs by Rush where the lyric repeats Everybody's got to deviate from the norm...Everybody's got to elevate from the norm. I see the structure of the song as summarizing and repeating in perhaps an attempt to drive the point home. It can also be dramatic in a sense that the listener is being "left" as the vehicle (the song) passes them by. Thoughts fade in and out and provide an evocative sense in that manner. Why can't songs?

I've written poetry that does this and could cite several examples where this has been done (more in contemporary works). I don't think, in all cases, the artist was being lazy...at least it wouldn't be the first supposition to pop into my head. Artists depict "fading" themes geometrically in paintings or sketches where "infinity" is indeed the intention. As a figure shown from behind walking through a series of concentric rectangular frames which progressively get smaller and smaller.

"I want this to go on for infinity?". Let the listener decide where it ends. I think it's plausible. Who wants to be forgotten? ;)

The main point of my post was that there are legitimate reasons besides laziness to fade a song out and that there is in fact some historical examples of a similar practice. I used the word "lazy" once in the post. It was in reference to the opinions of an external discussion, and it was immediately followed by "We can never really know, but [laziness is] certainly a possibility. An equally possible reason is that they wanted to emphasize a specific phrase." In other words, let's assume artistic intent and try to understand what was being communicated from the art itself rather than try to get into the brains of the artists.

If we're going to go out on a limb and pick on the artists, then yes, choice of a fade out can be lazy in the terms I've described (jamming to fill space). Again, we can't ever know if that's what the musicians were doing, so we have to assume that they chose repetition for aesthetic reasons. My first question tried to enumerate those reasons. My second question tried to guess the effects it has on the listener. Just as certain techniques can sound heroic or maudlin, I think that this technique has a specific effect.

Fade outs, and the repeated phrases within them, can be evocative or otherwise (would anyone care to Wang Chung tonight?). Rusmo forced me to consider: why is this so common? Most people aren't cutting down 8-minute songs and most of their experience is with live performance. Is the fade out the musicians' true intentions that simply couldn't be expressed effectively live? Or are they parroting a studio trope? This gets back to non-artistic intent, so maybe we're safest assuming that it was meant artistically.

I hadn't considered fade outs in the visual arts. I think the reciprocal would be soft-edge photos or vignettes. Fading internal to the image is part of the structure (atmospheric perspective). The musical fade we're discussing eliminates one of the boundaries of the work (tangent: Some examples of musical fade ins are DJ Qbert's Wave Twisters, ELP's Tarkus, and Yes's Close to the Edge. All of these pieces are long forms lasting 20-minutes or more. And all of them build, somewhat predictably, to a fortissimo section.). I'm a little uncertain about how a fade out would be done in pure text. Repeat phrases with an ellipsis at the end? An ellipsis fades the semantic thought but not the material structure. Use progressively lighter or smaller fonts? That seems more like the musical fade out: struggling to hear the music equals struggling to see the text (equals struggling to see the edge of the painting or photograph).

I understand you were leaving the question open and my response was already formulated this afternoon but I had a meeting to go to so I posted later when I had the first chance and hadn't read your response (completely) to Will. My response was directed at the thread you cited more than anything.

That said, I'm inclined to think that a significant portion of pop music is manufactured and fade outs seem to be a very commonly trick from the bag without much of an apparent reason for doing so. (A - B - A - B - B - B....) I think it's more than a worthwhile question to ask.

Another thought that comes to mind about "fade outs" is they certainly have to be awkward to execute them live...what?...just play on while the man at the board just works the sliders to the end? I'm thinking that wouldn't work very well....when does one applaud and whistle?

Your description of pre-recording examples (Hayden) reminds me of Faith by The Cure which is commonly used to end their shows. It's a meandering song, as most Cure tracks are. Towards the end Smith repeats the phrase "I went away alone...with nothing left but faith" as the other band members exit the stage one by one (effectively dropping out the instruments one by one), lights progressively dim ultimately leaving Smith and the drummer alone on the stage then he exits then the drums just slow to a stop.

This is a bit different than your typical fade out and it seems obvious what the aesthetic intent is (not necessarily original) but I thought it was interesting to note as a modern example of what you described earlier.

Perhaps the fade out is a distant relative of the unresolved chord?

What about songs that fade out and then fade back in?!?!?!?
"No, I don't want you to leave!"
"OK, I came back - do ya still like me?"