so, what makes a hit song a hit song?

please understand that I'm not talking about 'popular song', or 'pushed song', but hit song - as in generally liked and received. these song usually last the test of time. songs by dianne warren, songs such as 'land down under', 'zombie', all those evergreen & everlasting song, oldies, the beatles, etc.

a pushed song usually a spike in graph - put it out, advertise like hell, and reap profit. a hit song usually a long tail, even if it were marketed heavily at start (it stupid not to market a hit song).

even people who likes different genre usually agree when they heard a 'hit song', no matter what the genre.

is it how our brain wired?

i once read an article about 'in an aeroplane over the sea' where at first music magazine trashed the song, but after a while admitted that it was one of the best song that came out that time. and i have to admit, it's true.

a great song, it's just great.

even when i'm not actually a fan of jazz, when i heard the song 'dance me to the end of time'? when Allison Mack put it on her blog (2005?) I knew I like the song - even when i'm not a fan of jazz.

i once saw a youtube clip of Rio & Jack black (pick of destiny?) - don't know if it death metal or what metal, but I kind of like that song, and the jokes).

Quote:

What makes a hit song a hit song?

In order of importance:

1) catchy chorus and a simple melody
2) adherence to one of the very few universally recognized structures
3) simple and generic lyrics
4) universal theme (lyrics)
5)

">don't get too original with your chord sequences

Additional factors:

6) a unique vocal characteristic
7) a non-generic and preferably controversial public image for the band and/or performer

Quote:

Original post by irreversible Quote: What makes a hit song a hit song? In order of importance: 1) catchy chorus and a simple melody 2) adherence to one of the very few universally recognized structures 3) simple and generic lyrics 4) universal theme (lyrics) 5) ">don't get too original with your chord sequences Additional factors: 6) a unique vocal characteristic 7) a non-generic and preferably controversial public image for the band and/or performer

and auto-tune

no, in my opinion, not auto tune. a hit song (at least in my personal preferences) will sound just as fine:

a) without lyrics
b) lyrics replaced with other musical instruments
c) composed with MIDI (as in .mid file).


Dr. Dre is someone I respect in this sense, his 'bar' is soo catchy. even for 'without me', I just goes 'na na na na nar, na na na na nar, na na na na, na na na nar'. in my personal opinion, a lot of rap just beats, and dr. dre, now that's rhythms. his bar/beat is what you can say synergy. it was something simple, but something great comes out of it.

i'm a fan or abba & carpenters - in those days there is no autotune, AFAIK.

Original post by FableFox
no, in my opinion, not auto tune.

I'm willing to wager w2l2c might have been joking.

Quote:

a hit song (at least in my personal preferences) will sound just as fine: a) without lyrics b) lyrics replaced with other musical instruments c) composed with MIDI (as in .mid file).

Ugh, dude. Allow me to give this the short treatment:

a) not a song then, is it?
b) see (a)
c) just plain no, no and one more no

MIDI is a protocol to describe musical note and automation information - at its core it doesn't have anything to do with sound itself. MIDI soundbank renditions are implementation-specific and have, and in every imaginable likelihood will, never ever have any success in any commercial capacity. The fact that The Prodigy managed to pull off the tracker sound stunt at the beginning of the 90's was essentially a fluke and will never be repeated successfully. It succeeded because it was novel and new. It was fresh. MIDI soundbank renditions never have been and never will be "fresh". That is a fact, because pop music in particular excels in sound treatment (read: effects upon effects upon effects), which the MIDI soundbank rendition is an opposite of.

I wouldn't group a "hit song" and "song that lasts test of time" together.

Hit songs are simple. To the point, a single theme, and very straightforward. Usually a very simple chord progression, and an equally simple melody. You can identify with hit songs no matter what the genre because of the simplicity, you find an element immediately appealing to you: whether it's the melody, chord progression, lyrics, or the drum beat. Usually because there is a sense of familiarity, even if you've never heard that song before. This is especially true in pop music, which tends to recycle things like chord progressions and melodies pretty often.

Songs that last the test of time are the ones that make an actual unique, authentic statement. Whether it is a lyrical statement or a musical statement, they do something new and it sticks. Most hit songs do not do this, in fact quite a few hit songs (especially today) are very formulaic. They sound good at first, but after a while you grow tired of them.

And music is arguably very subjective -- it is, after all... art. Music theory attempts to explain why certain things sound good to our ears and why certain things do not. But those rules are broken all the time. You can hit notes that music theory tells you are "bad" and make them sound incredible.

Quote:

Original post by FableFox so, what makes a hit song a hit song?

Use the same

">four chords as everyone else.

(This was hinted at above.)

blueEbola, I guess we have different meaning then, since I already separate hit song and popular song in my first post.

irreversible, what I'm trying to say is that a hit song does not hang on lyric/auto tune, but yeah, way2lazy2care might be joking. still, what I want to point out is that a hit song sound 'emotionally good' even in it's basic tune. I have listen to a lot of my favourite song in piano only format, in guitar only, and there was this popular guy that play saxophone -what-was-his-name to replace vocal/lyrics in popular/hit song.

and trust me, i've listened to a lot of midi version of songs including don't cry, superman theme, and many other hit song, and it equally interesting. maybe it's a bias, since I can appreciate chiptune, so if a hit song being lowered into .mid form, I can still appreciate it. i've listened 'eyes on me' FF7 theme in midi, i've listed to rain of memories(?) ff9 theme in midi, and still enjoy it.

I guess in the end it's about tune. it doesn't have to be catchy, it just, click.

as for lyrics, I enjoy listening to ICP 'f**k the world', but really wish they change the wording. i usually sing it with my own alternate lyrics.

It seems to me that the question "what makes a hit song a hit song?", at least in it's practical application, leads to the creation of formula based music afflicted with a lack of authenticity and spontaneity. It strikes me as the kind of question that someone interested in marketing a product asks rather than someone interested in making art asks. That doesn't mean that people who have asked that question in the past did not end up making art, but when they did make art, it was because they remembered that music isn't a widget and didn't allow marketing considerations to get in the way. For example, Motown records was so successful at one point that giving it the name "Hitsville USA" wasn't out of the question. In spite of that, it managed to give Marvin Gaye enough freedom to make "What's Going On?" even though the album broke with the Motown formula.

Back in high school I heard the song "Walking on Sunshine" on the radio on the first day it came out. I knew it would become a hit and in a few weeks it was. Bouncy, poppy, happy, bright, full of horns, straight forward lyrics about love sung by a woman, simple straight forward hook that peaks during the chorus. I also knew that I would hate the song in six months due to overexposure.

The first time I heard "Smells like Teen Spirit" on the radio I knew it would become a hit, but not because it fit a formula, at that time it didn't, but more importantly because the song rocked. It broke with the prevailing formula of the time, which had grown stale.

I could reflect back on hearing many new releases that became hits -- "My Sharona", "Heart of Glass", "Le Freak" -- from when I was a kid - "Billie Jean", "Do you really want to hurt me?", "When Doves Cry" - from high school -- but I don't see the point when what makes a hit changes from year to year.

Quote:

Original post by LessBread It seems to me that the question "what makes a hit song a hit song?", at least in it's practical application, leads to the creation of formula based music afflicted with a lack of authenticity and spontaneity. It strikes me as the kind of question that someone interested in marketing a product asks rather than someone interested in making art asks. That doesn't mean that people who have asked that question in the past did not end up making art, but when they did make art, it was because they remembered that music isn't a widget and didn't allow marketing considerations to get in the way. For example, Motown records was so successful at one point that giving it the name "Hitsville USA" wasn't out of the question. In spite of that, it managed to give Marvin Gaye enough freedom to make "What's Going On?" even though the album broke with the Motown formula.

As someone with a math major and an art minor, I think making formulas for art are interesting for reasons other than marketing. Mostly because it would just be cool. Of course the bulk of my experience in art isn't audio, but I think it would apply similarly. I find it pretty awesome how often mathematical patterns pop up in art, the most significant probably being the golden ratio.

One important thing to remember though is that even finding that if a piece of art has x/y/z characteristics it will be appealing that doesn't mean that if a piece of art doesn't have those it is not appealing. For every set of characteristics you find, there will probably be one that might be more appealing without those characteristics.