Catchy Tunes

[MN Dave]

Bach's melodies are at most times more subtle which can be a good thing in the long run.

[karlhenning]

Le quattro stagioni is just a river of catchiness.

And Bach himself appreciated Vivaldi's gifts, or he would not have transcribed so many works del maestro veneziano.

[DavidW]

Just because Bach has other things going for him doesn't mean his melodies are not good.  I can't think of a single melody of Vivaldi that can compare with the melodic inspirations of Bach.

Well heck sometimes Bach does write a good melody, but rarely.  Vivaldi, Telemann, Handel are always melodically inventive and that's probably why they are so popular, they were good tunesmiths with a knack for Italian style proto-galant, that simpler homophonic sound goes hand in hand with melody.  Bach's heavy, germanic style of thick, textured counterpoint is usually not as melodic in comparison.  And the audience at the time felt that way, many had written that Bach's music was challenging and complex but rewarding.  He drew an audience but just never attained the same popularity of some of his contemporaries.

[WI Dan]

Re: "2-note melody"

Jaws starts off with two notes. Might be as close as you get to an example.

I would have thought of those two notes as a "motif", rather than a "melody".  Are these terms interchangeable?  (Or am I wrong to call that a "motif", to begin with?) 

I've always thought that the term "melody" referred to something a little more substantial and, well, .... lengthy, but I am just a layman listener, searching for clues.     Thanks.

[Franco]

I think Bach wrote great melodies in every work he composed. 

For example, I consider the subjects of his fugues great melodies, exhibiting various strengths: refined melodic arcs, rhythmic variety, and they have the added strength of offering excellent contrapuntal potential being just as good played backwards or inverted.  Most are very "catchy" and easily recognizable and very singable.  And in his fugues there's not just one great melody, but two or three - complementing each other and offering contrast and support at the same time.

Not too shabby, IMO.

Okay, Rachmaninoff it isn't (his melodies are so good they've been made into pop songs) - but to say that Bach did not write great gobs of catchy tunes is not what my ears tell me.

[karlhenning]

Bach's heavy, germanic style of thick, textured counterpoint is usually not as melodic in comparison.

Well, and one of Bach's sons IIRC (I should go back to Evening in the Palace of Reason and double-check just who it was) annoyed Old Bach by building a sort of musical slide-rule demostrating the automated nature of counterpoint . . . .

[karlhenning]

I think Bach wrote great melodies in every work he composed. 

For example, I consider the subjects of his fugues great melodies, exhibiting various strengths: refined melodic arcs, rhythmic variety, and they have the added strength of offering excellent contrapuntal potential being just as good played backwards or inverted.  Most are very "catchy" and easily recognizable and very singable.  And in his fugues there's not just one great melody, but two or three - complementing each other and offering contrast and support at the same time.

Not too shabby, IMO.

The discourse is trending to a point I've made repeatedly in the past, viz. that many of us talk about melody (and especially great melody) as if it were somehow a fixed quantity;  but each musical era decides for itself (oh, indulge my pathetic fallacy here, friends) what a great tune is.

And a good melody for a six-voice fugue is going to have traits quite different to those of a Rakhmaninov romance.

[Sergeant Rock]

Bach's heavy, germanic style of thick, textured counterpoint is usually not as melodic in comparison.

Or you could say Bach's music is even more melodic in comparison because he wrote not just one melody but one or more counter-melodies too. More melody for the price of one. Bach, the true melodic master...at least in quantity 

Edit: Just saw Franco's post above. Really, I did not steal your idea, dude. But you obviously said it first.

Sarge

[karlhenning]

Or you could say Bach's music is even more melodic in comparison because he wrote not just one melody but one or more counter-melodies too. More melody for the price of one. Bach, the true melodic master...at least in quantity 

Is that like saying the meat must be of higher quality, because there are six sauces layered over it? ; )

[DavidW]

Sarge likes quantity, he is a Mahlerite after all.   Oh wait, that applies to me too...

[MN Dave]

The discourse is trending to a point I've made repeatedly in the past, viz. that many of us talk about melody (and especially great melody) as if it were somehow a fixed quantity;  but each musical era decides for itself (oh, indulge my pathetic fallacy here, friends) what a great tune is.

And a good melody for a six-voice fugue is going to have traits quite different to those of a Rakhmaninov romance.

Nah.

[karlhenning]

Nah.

Double that and you've got yerself a melody!

[Scarpia]

Well heck sometimes Bach does write a good melody, but rarely.  Vivaldi, Telemann, Handel are always melodically inventive and that's probably why they are so popular, they were good tunesmiths with a knack for Italian style proto-galant, that simpler homophonic sound goes hand in hand with melody.  Bach's heavy, germanic style of thick, textured counterpoint is usually not as melodic in comparison.  And the audience at the time felt that way, many had written that Bach's music was challenging and complex but rewarding.  He drew an audience but just never attained the same popularity of some of his contemporaries.

This post makes me wonder if you've ever listened to Bach at all.  Bach didn't limit himself to a "heavy germanic style of thick textured counterpoint."  He certainly created dense textures in some music, but also enjoyed writing in the French and Italian style, which overflow with wonderful melodies.    I can't imagine that anyone who has heard the second movement of Bach's concerto for two violins, or the cello suite in E-flat, could say that Bach did not write extraordinary melodies.

[MN Dave]

I'm sure a fight could be had about what a "good" melody is.

[Sergeant Rock]

Nah.

Double that and you've got yerself a melody!

Multiply it several times and you have yourself a great melody:

Nah nah, nah nah nah nah, nah nah nah, hey jude



Sarge

[Scarpia]

I'm sure a fight could be had about what a "good" melody is.

Well, I've given several examples in post above, perhaps other peoples impressions will be different. 

[MN Dave]

Multiply it several times and you have yourself a great melody:

Nah nah, nah nah nah nah, nah nah nah, hey jude



Sarge

By the melody-meister himself: Paul McCartney.

[MN Dave]

...perhaps other peoples impressions will be different.

hence the fight. 

[karlhenning]

By the melody-meister himself: Paul McCartney.

Without the rhythm and harmony, that melody's merde.

[MN Dave]

Without the rhythm and harmony, that melody's merde.

I flat out disagree.