The formula for a "hit song"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Diverdown
  • Start date Start date
D

Diverdown

New member
I found an article written by John Mayer in Esquire Magazine with a comentary on writing a hit
Enjoy!
THen explain what he means " minor, 6,4,1,5":):confused::D

Ever wonder why a lot of the big hit songs on the radio sound the same? That's because there are only so many combinations of chords you can string together to make music. As a songwriter, I'm always analyzing chord progressions, and lately I've been hearing a lot of one in particular: minor 6-4-1-5. Forget your daily lotto. These four numbers can make a musician a lot of money. I've found that anytime this sequence of chords forms a chorus, the song is a smash. To prove it, I ensconced myself in my upstate New York toolshed, where I stayed for 12 days, subsisting on only Toblerone bars and pouches of Capri Sun.

With Project 6-4-1-5 under way, I began with my theory's bell cow: Sarah McLachlan's gigantic 1997 hit, "Building a Mystery." Using the chord progression minor 6-4-1-5 for its chorus, it is one of the most harmonically influential songs written in the last decade. I say harmonically because the sound of McLachlan's refrain is unforgettable, yet I can't really follow the lyrics. (I think the story takes place in the Bat Cave, but I'm not certain.)

Though McLachlan didn't invent this chord progression -- it appears two years earlier in Joan Osborne's "One of Us" -- it was only after she used minor 6-4-1-5 in her megahit that it began to show up elsewhere. Lee Ann Womack borrowed it to great effect three years later for the chorus of her hit country ballad, "I Hope You Dance." These two songs serve as great replacements for one another in a pinch at the karaoke bar.

The most recent 6-4-1-5 subscriber is Ryan Cabrera, with "On the Way Down," which I instantly pegged as a "Mystery" devotee. Ditto for 2001's Michelle Branch ditty "All You Wanted." Avril Lavigne's biggest song to date, 2002's "Complicated," also has the same chord progression. She liked it so much, she used it again on "Don't Tell Me" two years later. All these tunes burned up top-40 radio, and though you may not remember a single lyric, the bet here is that upon second listen you could easily hum their refrains.

So what is it about the chord progression minor 6-4-1-5 that makes it so infectious? Music theorists will tell you that the wavelengths of each chord fit together mathematically. But I just think people know a hit tune when they hear it.
 
I can't explain why that particular combination is so musically satisfying . . . but it is. I guess it's the contemporary equivalent of the 1 minor 6 4 5 that was so prevalent in the mid-twentieth century. And I further guess, musical tastes will change, and another combination will achieve prominence.
 
Could it not be that a couple of songs used this progression and were popular for just being good songs - then the progression becomes associated with success in the general listeners mind?

The 'Heart & Soul' 1 m6 4 5 progression is often (if not well hidden in an arrangement) considered kitsch now - so this is nothing to do with 'brain hard-wiring' it is just fashion.

Or maybe it is because Planet X is arriving in 2012 and it gravitational force is already effecting the sonic waves in our part of the universe? In another years time we will only enjoy music if the progression includes a dim 3 with a lemon twist.
 
Hey!

Pachelbel's progression is somewhat different, being

I V VI III IV I IV (or II, whatever you like more) G

This was used in many, many songs and despite the fact that these songs "added" a lot to this progression but the progression itself (just playing the chords) is simply beautiful. Improvising over this progression is a very funny thing.

The other progression VI IV I V also sounds very good. I've had a lot of music theory courses but in the end it all comes from your heart, whatever theory says. In this particular case, I'd suspect that this progression (and if I just checked it correctly also the Pachelbel progression) resolve a lead tone on every chord change. There are no "suprises" in there, it's pure classical resolving of lead tones;

in Cmajor (Am, F, C, G) that would be the E > F move from Am to F, the F > E move from F to C and the C > B move from C to G). This method of "resolving" and somehow "leading" one chord into another is pretty much the most satisfying one in classical music (just think of why a V7 chord resolves so great into the I chord - because in that case all two lead tones are resolved; F > E and B > C).

But as I said - after all this theory stuff - all hits written based on these progressions have added something to them - a great melody, arrangement, voice, whatever. It's never the progression alone.

You can write a million seller with just three chords and on the other hand people don't get any success with the pachelbel formula.

Just my cents
Bernd
 
I personally think...if you want a hit song, write commercial shit. then it'll be played on radio , tv, space, where ever !

then the majority of the people would listen to it!

HAHA
 
I think all hit songs have a bit of magic - even "shut up-a ya face!"

Well, er.. anyway..

Let's hope to write a hit song in 2009, 'commercial shit' or otherwise!

Fx
 
Effective Writing

If you are gonna call yourself a "Songwriter" at least learn the names of the tools you will be using. Take a music theory class at your local Junior College or at minimum , buy (and read) a book on music theory. You can't develop beyond a newb level without it. Get analytical about what you are hearing, at least for a while, until you develop some fluency in identifying what is going on harmonically.
Chord progressions can be used to portray emotion and action in music. If you check it out you will see that human existence is more complicated that "You're cute...let's do the nasty" . That idea can be portrayed with only one chord...even one note if you have a handle on rhythm, which , as they say in Texas, is "A whole Nother Country."
Back to the "tool" metaphor, it's good to know the names of the wrenches but more important to develop skills in their use. Go back to the Junior College and take a writing course or two. Learn a bit about structure, not to become bound by the "rules" but to learn what effective writing is and what makes it effective.

write onnnnnnnnnn

chazba
 
The I-IV-V and the I-vi-IV-V have been such a significant part of music since rock & roll became a driving force in the 1950's (you don't really hear those progessions as much going back to the 20's, 30's & 40's) that people are very "comfortable" with those progressions and anticipate the harmonies and melodies that come from those progressions.

Naturally, from a theory level, the tonic (I) leading to the subdominant (IV) or sub mediant (iv) whcich in turn leads to the Dominat (V) which in turn must resolve, normally back to the I - is the tecnical reason those chords sound "right". However, I think the listeners and the "record buying public" are so use to hearing those changes (dare I say "programmed" to hear those changes) that when they occur in a song, that song already feels right - which provides a positive stimuli - and the positive stimuli (a feel good feeling) can help fast track that song into a "hit".

As a writer, I try to write "intelligent" progressions with plenty of 6th, 7th and 9th chords, passing chords, etc. etc. - but thier most basic, most of my best songs do not stray too far from using the basic I-ii-IV-V and vi - simply because................those chords feel "right".
 
As the OP my initial and lasting impression from reading this article isnt so much that there was some secret formula but that a very talented songsmith
deemed a certain progression to be a moneymaker

It illustrated to me that even people with uber talent search and think about formulaic success, and while I hope to be spontanius and inspired in my writing, if I find myself feeling slightly contrived ,I know I have good company:D
 
While sucess means different things to different people - I think most performers and/or songwriters want to have thier music accepted by the masses - if that means conforming (within reason) to a recognized set of standards (or formulas) - that kind of goes with the business.

I think it is possible to be somewhat "contrived" without selling one's soul (although I'm sure selling one's soul would not be out of the question for some people if they could achieve Mayer's level of talent and fame - not to mentioned bedding Jennifer Anistan):D
 
mikeh said:
....would not be out of the question for some people if they could achieve Mayer's level of talent and fame - not to mentioned bedding Jennifer Anistan):D
Click to expand...

I will be next :D
 
Diverdown said:
It illustrated to me that even people with uber talent search and think about formulaic success, and while I hope to be spontanius and inspired in my writing, if I find myself feeling slightly contrived ,I know I have good company:D
Click to expand...

Contrivance (crafting) is the privilege/burden of those who create. The responsibility is to make sure the audience don't notice it.

The search for better 'work' is the search for a better way to work. You will only evolve if in addition to creating you reflect at a meta-level how you create. I think that is what people like Mayer do and that is why he noted this supposed hit making progression.

I think that is what helps the uber talented stay uber!
 
But a hit song doesn't have to be a good song right?
 
The Macerena was a big hit in Australia and so was Tubthumping by Chumbawumba. But those songs aren't good, they suck. So anyway, my definition of good, whatever it is, doesn't include those two big hits.
 
Lime in the Coconut - One chord. Million seller. How hard can it be?
 
Monkey Allen said:
The Macerena was a big hit in Australia and so was Tubthumping by Chumbawumba. But those songs aren't good, they suck. So anyway, my definition of good, whatever it is, doesn't include those two big hits.
Click to expand...

So your definition of 'good' appears to be:

'What I like..'

?:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top