Catchy Tunes

[MN Dave]

They can't be so easy to write or there'd be a lot more rich musicians around. What are your thoughts on catchy melodies and how important they are in music?

[DavidW]

They are important for advertising so that you remember their ad, they are not important in music imo.

[MN Dave]

Catchy tunes aren't important? Hm. Lovely melodies? Righteous riffs?

[karlhenning]

Catchy Tunes is surely the right thread for this . . .

And now, some Beethoven, sponsored by tamponcrafts:

http://www.youtube.com/v/EjEV5si59W0

[springrite]

Kimi loves catchy tunes, especially those composed by Daddy, like "Sweet Little Kimi".

[MN Dave]

 0:)

[MN Dave]

Kimi loves catchy tunes, especially those composed by Daddy, like "Sweet Little Kimi".

I don't know that one.

[Franco]

Of course they are important for music.  The da-da-da-dom from Beethoven's Fifth is about as catchy as it gets.  But more to the point, it is part of the craft of writing a good pop tune to create melodic hooks, or transitional riffs, that lodge in a listeners mind and get them to sing along.  Just about every song by Led Zeppelin on their first two records has an guitar riff that most people of a certain age can sing, or remember the song by.   The same can be said for countless other rock/pop songs.

I've been told that a good pop song can be learned by a first time listener by the time the chorus comes around the second time, and I have witnessed this happening when stuck in traffic and seeing in the car next to me someone hearing (as I was too) the Tears for Fears song "Shout" for the first time and begin singing along (and pounding the steering wheel) - very happily, I might add - with the chorus, second time around.

There is something exhilarating about a good pop song, it enters your brain and gives you a thrill just to hear it, and dance along, or tap or sing along.  The best pop music offers something for me that classical music doesn't, and it is this quality.

For sure, pop music is lightweight ephemeral stuff that is not built to last - but not everything is supposed to be built to last, some things are good and worthwhile and great passing fun.

Yeah - Catchy Tunes - right on, baby!

[springrite]

I don't know that one.

Wait till I sell it to Huggies, or Mattel. Then everyone would know.

[MN Dave]

Well said, Franco.

Even your classical warhorses have catchy tunes.

[Grazioso]

They can't be so easy to write or there'd be a lot more rich musicians around. What are your thoughts on catchy melodies and how important they are in music?

Melody is one of the foundational elements of music, and catchy melodies can have an enormously powerful emotional and even physical impact on listeners. Witness the phenomenon Franco describes, and the fact that most of the classical warhorses are notable for, among other things, melodies that lodge in your head for a lifetime. The most-beloved classical composers have also been some of music's most gifted melodists: Mozart, Schubert, Tchaikovsky, Mahler, Dvorak, Verdi, Puccini, et al. And a composer who can't write good melodies can never, imo, be truly great. That would be neglecting a key component of the craft and one of the thing most listeners seek most avidly.

OTOH, a catchy tune isn't as vital in classical music since form, harmony, dynamics, tone color, etc. tend to be refined to a much higher degree than in popular music genres and can carry the weight of the work in the absence of a memorable tune. (Cf. jazz, wherein rhythm, harmony, personalized improvisation, etc. can suffice to make a great piece/performance, with melody pushed the sidelines.)

[karlhenning]

Melody is one of the foundational elements of music

Even music for unpitched percussion ensemble?

[Grazioso]

Even music for unpitched percussion ensemble?

The exception that proves the rule 

[MN Dave]

Great post, Grazioso!

[karlhenning]

My point of course is that if there is music without Melody-capital-M, then melody as an element is hardly foundational.  It can be important when it is present, but . . . .

[MN Dave]

My point of course is that if there is music without Melody-capital-M, then melody as an element is hardly foundational.  It can be important when it is present, but . . . .

I needz it. 

[springrite]

A composition can have many 'catchy' features.

I need my catchy dynamics.

[karlhenning]

I needz it. 

(I know there's a cute photo of a cat that goes with this . . . .)

[MN Dave]

(I know there's a cute photo of a cat that goes with this . . . .)

[DavidW]

I just wanted to clarify that I meant that catchy tunes are not necessary for good music, but I agree that pop music is certainly popular due to catchy tunes.

But I completely disagree with Grazioso post, melody is but one aspect of music, and melodic classical is not necessarily catchy, nor is it a requirement that music be melodic for it to be great.  There is so much great music that has a complete absence of catchy tunes, and what does it matter?  Music is to be listened to, to be played, to be experienced... not to be memorized. 

If you agree with Grazioso's thesis that the ability to compose catchy tunes is necessary for greatness than you must favor Telemann over Bach, Rossini over Schubert and Beethoven, Glass over Carter, Elgar over Sibelius and Bartok, Rachmaninoff over Shostakovich... pretty lame.