Talk:Refrain

message: The etymology of refrain is different from what is found on http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/refrain.  Maybe a few words on why the wiktionary says the Latin refringere means to “to break up, break” while this article uses refringere, "to repeat".
 
Joseph winston (talk) 17:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Some of the info used to make this article was merged in from Chorus. You can take a look at the history of Chorus, some of which contribtued to this article (among others), at Talk:Refrain/Old history from Chorus.--Commander Keane 06:22, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Split history

message: :However, there are also crucial differences in the structural purpose and use of the chorus as opposed to the refrain. Choruses such as those cited are musically and lyrically designed so that they can be repeated, for example, in a double-chorus, or at the end of the song, when they form the repeated outro, which very often continues into the fade-out of the recording. (Other structural elements, such as the breakdown, where the sung melodic line of the repeated chorus drops out may also be present here).  The point of this is, again crucially, that the chorus contains the lyrical and melodic hook of the song (usually the song-title), which needs to be repeated as often as possible in order to be memorable to the listening audience.  Refrains are not intended to be repeated in this way, (although they may contain a hook, but not necessarily the title, as in 'Eleanor Rigby').
:A chorus that arrives as a climax to a song is also very often approached by a bridge (which may be called a pre-chorus or climb). The bridge serves to build the song up into the chorus, often using techniques of harmony, melody, instrumentation and production.  This does not happen with a refrain. Again, the point is that the chorus is the main part of the song, containing its central message, not simply an ending to, and a comment on the verse.
:In summary, the refrain belongs to an earlier tradition of song-writing, e.g. the folk-song, sea-shanty or hymn. The pop-chorus, on the other hand, belongs to a more modern tradition aimed at providing a song-format which, through its ability to repeat a hook with great frequency within the standard three or four minutes of a pop-song, will be most successful on media through which songs are marketed to the consumer, e.g. pop-radio.
I removed the above along with some examples as uncited. Hyacinth (talk) 08:14, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed: In popular music

message: :A pop chorus is not the same as a refrain. A writer on pop-song theory, DavisDavis (1990). , . Omnibus Press. . opines that a refrain musically and lyrically resolves a verse and therefore ends it, whereas a chorus begins a distinctively new music section of at least eight bars. A refrain is often a two line repeated lyrical statement commenting on or summarizing the preceding verse, for example:
::"Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down.
::Like a bridge over troubled water I will lay me down."
:This contrasts with the chorus of a typical modern pop song, which often consists of more than one line repeated, for example the chorus to Cher's "Believe":
:"Do you believe in life after love
:I can feel something inside me say
:I really don't think you're strong enough, no."
----
I removed the above as the citation is incomplete and unverifiable and has been since 2010. Hyacinth (talk) 04:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed: Davis (1990)