Music and Maths: Perfect Harmony?

With a deep sense of nostalgia I lock my car and turn to survey the building in which many of my dreams were born. My musical education in its entirety had taken place in The Mick Jagger Centre in Dartford and up until this point I had believed I’d left it all behind. I can’t help but smile at the irony that a key part of my University course will rely on a return trip to my old secondary school.

I’m currently at Brunel University studying Music and my passions, fuelled in my teens by what I learnt in this edifice have subsided little. I’m a musician and composer and I still aspire, week-by-week to write great and individual pop songs that soon I may hear when my radio alarm cuts my slumber short each morning. Over a long period of time I have performed my songs in local venues to audiences consisting of friends and local music lovers and one factor has always puzzled me.

Although there’s always a constant buzz from the audience there are certain moments that give a venue a new energy. One or two songs, whether they are cover versions or pieces that I’ve written get a completely different reaction to the rest of the set. They stand out.

As I reach the end of the bridge and drop happily into the hook lines and choruses of this small selection of songs there’s a different sound. It’s not Wembley Arena or Hammersmith Apollo but it’s there anyway. It’s a happy, far from sober audience singing lyrics back to me. This makes me ecstatic and yet I’m rather bewildered at why it’s these tracks the audience have chosen. They certainly aren’t my personal favourites and on the contrary I don’t believe I perform them to a higher standard than any of the others.

I don’t want to give the impression this predicament holds sleep at bay because it really isn’t more than an idle wondering but it does lead to some very important questions. Why is it that every year just a handful of songs sell so much more than others? What is it about certain records that make them stand the test of time?

Recently I stumbled across an online article in The Guardian entitled ‘How many Hits’. This involved a rather clever neuroscientist named David Sulzer (The man on the right) attempting to write the perfect pop song using opinion polls and statistics. A large, random sample from the public would answer questions such as ‘what are your favourite instruments’ and ‘what are your favourite songs?’. They would also be played chord structures while pointing out their preferences.

Once a somewhat large and intricately detailed list of statistics were gathered, off went Sulzer with a group of highly skilled producers and musicians to create his masterpiece.

Now I’ve heard the piece entitled ‘Most Wanted Song’ and if you’re a life long Kenny G fan you will love it. Personally I’d rather go one step further than Van Gough and remove both of my ears than listen to an entire album. I’ve been stuck in enough lifts in my life to realise I don’t enjoy his music. Anyway this is beside the point. What is significant is that it didn’t connect with me, and much more importantly the general public didn’t seem to take to it either. This is strange because according to Sulzer at least 72% of the world’s population must ‘like’ the piece but then again this may be exactly why I don’t like it.

It is important at this stage, before I become completely entrenched in semantics that I point out the fact that I believe liking a song is very different to ‘liking’ a song (taking note of the inverted commas). I would never wish to listen to ‘Most Wanted Song’ more than once because I don’t enjoy it. I do however, believe I understand what Sulzer meant when he claimed 72% of the world’s population must ‘like’ the song.

The piece is inoffensive. Nothing about the track raises the pulse or is easy to connect with. The lyrics are not engaging and are rather cliché and the saxophone solos never stray from basic triads within the chord sequence. It is because of this that I can’t help but ‘like’ the piece. It never strays from the human comfort zone and I believe this is one of the primary parts of truly great music. So in shorter, much simpler terms what I’m trying to point out is that it doesn’t irritate me or cause me stress. I wouldn’t however, set my alarm for 6am on the day of it’s release just so I could take a trip to my local HMV to spend my wages on it.

So now I revisit the same question once again. Why is it certain songs make me want to get up and spend my wages on an entire album? Why is it that a handful of tracks every year do far better than any others despite them often sounding very different? It seems in Sulzer’s case the formula hasn’t worked, but could there be a method? A dead set formula for writing hits? What components make a hit? In this article I intend to find out.

After sitting in the Mick Jagger Centre foyer for around an hour and after several drinks at rather typical Arts Venue prices I’m ushered through to see Ian Drury’s old band ‘The Blockheads’. They’ve been touring the country playing some great venues with a repertoire consisting of some of their old classics and some new bits and pieces they’ve written along the way. It all looks very good and the reviews have been fantastic. This isn’t why I’m here though.

In the late seventies and early eighties ‘The Blockheads’ enjoyed great success with several hit singles. ‘Reasons to be Cheerful Part 3” reached number three in the charts and ‘Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick’ topped the charts, selling just under a million copies. They were the jokers when Britain so desperately needed a sense of humour. Phil Jupitus recalls, “I loved this band like no other from the age of 16. In addition to the gigs and records I lived by, they were the gateway to a deeper exploration of funk, soul, reggae and jazz”.[1]

It is because of this success that I want to talk to the band. At a specific time it seems they had the formula to write truly great pop songs that appealed to a nationwide audience. Although Drury was in essence the driving force all songs were co-written with a lot of the band’s own insight especially Chas Jankel.

Why do you think ‘Rhythm Stick’ and ‘Reasons to be Cheerful’ were such hits?

A lot of it was luck to be honest. We were just doing what we loved and out it came. I think we were tapping into what was going on at the time on a social level. On both occasions people needed cheering up and so that’s what we did.

Ian really seemed to have his finger on the pulse of society. He was a man of the people… The working class people anyway. He felt what they wanted and it came through in our music. During such a serious time what with Thatcherism etc and I think people just needed a break.

So when you wrote ‘Rhythm Stick’ and ‘Reasons to be Cheerful’ did you all sit down and say “right, time to write a hit single”?

Not really. As I said we were just doing what we loved. We’ve always been a steady group of working class blokes so it goes hand in hand really. If we like what we’re playing then so should the rest of Britain. I think a lot of it is about timing.

Timing? So if those records were released today do you think you would see the same success?

Ha! There’s still a lot of Blockhead fans out there but I can’t see it making it in the charts today.

Why is that? With some adaptation do you not think the Blockheads could be a chart-topping band again?

I don’t think so. Reasons being that being a chart-topping band wasn’t what we set out to be. We set out to play our music and enjoy finding our sound. It just so happens that in 79 that fell into place with what the public wanted to listen to.

Again it comes back to timing. Obviously the writer has to be musically gifted but after that he just has to ‘feel’ the people. He needs to know what the public needs even before the public do. If he can incorporate that into his music at the right moment then ‘wham’ you’ve got a hit. I think that’s what Ian was so good at.

Gilad: We wouldn’t want to top the charts today. Everything we ever played was authentic. Those songs were made up of pure grooves that came from the heart. Artists these days seem to be accountants as well. They write for money not artistic fulfilment. That isn’t real creativity. The charts are all full of the same kind of thing. Most of the public don’t really listen to music anymore. They make do with what is fed to them.

Do you think there could be a formula? A perfect method of composing that could capture the ear of the masses?

Well they seem to have found it already haven’t they? Most artists in the charts today don’t seem to write their own music. They just go on talent shows and the record labels write songs for them.

It’s all bullshit

Ha! Well that’s our opinion anyway but they all seem to reach number one don’t they? I mean surely that’s the formula. You’re probably talking to the wrong people you want to get on the blower to Simon Cowell!

And so it seems Ian Drury and the Blockheads held the formula at one point but not for long. It now becomes apparent that this formula is an ever-changing process. If timing is so important then surely there can never be one dead set single sound that can never fail? I believe the key is deeper within the music.

Although it seems the sound of the top ten has changed drastically over the last few decades there are however certain structural and harmonic parts that have always stayed the same. Right from early Rock ‘n’ Roll to modern dance music the traditional structure of verse, chorus, verse, chorus has never really changed and from around the sixties onwards a bridge section would often be a welcome addition. Four easy examples would be Elvis Presley’s ‘Jailhouse Rock’, John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’, Live Aid and more recently Take That’s ‘Patience’.

It’s unavoidable that at times you will enjoy music and you won’t quite understand why. Maybe you’re the biggest fan of Oasis the world has ever seen, and you’d never admit it but you can’t quite get enough of Elton John. This is ok. It’s because deep within the music they share the same structures and key changes. Underneath the distorted guitars and antisocial lyrics the skeleton is the same.

David Hepworth, well-known writer for NME recently made a claim on a radio 2 show that little more was needed than a great introduction to rocket up the charts. Brian Wilson of The Beach Boys famously said that the first ten seconds of a song are the most important and many people agree.

Taking a moment to consider your own favourite songs of all time they will most likely all possess an introduction that immediately makes them recognisable. Whether they are your favourites through association or simply an enjoyment of the sound it is in the first few seconds that you feel those initial feelings that make you love the song so much. A few well-known examples of this are ‘Jailhouse Rock’, ‘Crazy’ by Gnarls Barkley and ‘Hey Ya’ by Outkast.

The Beatles were the first real pioneers of using the title of the song as the first words of the introduction. In ‘Help’, ‘Can’t Buy Me Love’ and ‘Hard Days Night’ these first lines are undeniably powerful and encourage a sing along from the first few seconds. Although these songs are evidence that some of Hepworth’s claims are true I believe there is much more involved in created timeless tracks.

Tonal harmony is an intricate yet huge similarity that all chart pop songs share. It is very rare that atonal music will ever climb the charts and the preference of the samples Sulzer used illustrated this. Pop music often finds itself in a rather harmonically ‘safe’ bracket of tonality.

Other than the fairly simple first third and fifth notes used in every triadic chord, popular music composers, both modern and old never needed to stray to far to keep their piece pleasing to the human ear. In more scientific terms; the first, third and fifth notes in each chord emit sound waves that sit quite nicely on top of each other in an almost jigsaw like fashion. Other notes don’t sit quite as nicely and so don’t quite fit. An extreme example of this would be scraping a fork across a china plate or nails on a blackboard.

Although this tonal use of harmony is evident in all present-day pop songs, any writers out there will know the frustrating line “it’s ok but it doesn’t have that certain something” all too well. Just as any non-writers probably won’t remember the first song they heard when they woke up this morning.

The trick to gaining ‘that certain something’ seems to be the ability to find a way, often using some dissonance, to make a composition stand out. To make it immediately recognisable if heard more than once.

Without falling too far into unnecessary detail it quickly became apparent that certain extra notes could be added to certain chords to add suspensions and effects of tension and release. This gave a much rounder listening experience. Once a seventh note is added to the fifth chord of the scale it has a certain pull towards the root chord of the key known as ‘home’; ‘Home’ being the catchy key in which the piece began.

This would enable composers to move into new realms without having to worry about how they could return to their ear pleasing root key. For example, to a happy piece in a major key they could add a sad minor section and have a way of returning to the original theme just by adding the fifth chord with the added seventh note.

Jai Josefs, author of the critically acclaimed ‘Writing Music for Hit Songs’ believes that the inner workings of the perfect song are much simpler but just very well hidden. He believes there are two precious elements that turn a song from simply OK to unforgettable and these are named ‘Contrast’ and ‘Prosody’.[2]

Josefs describes Prosody as ‘The marriage of music and lyric in emotional tone’. Often when watching a film, when something terrible is about to happen to the hero the audience often knows or least get that sinking feeling. This is largely due to the musical companionship with the on-screen actions. The music will have moved from rather nondescript or not there at all, to a dark theme or dissonant set of chords that slowly rise in dynamics.

The lyrical content must match the music in the same way. Famous and great songwriters such as Elton John, Bob Dylan, Babyface and Diane Warrens will consider the emotions they want the listener to feel on a line-by-line basis. When a sad longing for a lost partner needs to be conveyed great writers will use minor chords and descending melodic lines and in the opposite way celebrating a great love will involve rising scales and major chord patterns.

Josefs has named the second element ‘Contrast’. Throughout the article you’ve been reading I have been using contrast. It’s transferable method that is used in many art forms, most notably writing, that involves contrasting material within a piece to give strength to more important sections.

The paragraph you have just read included two short sentences followed by a much longer one. Without the two shorter sentences before the longer one there is a strong possibility you would have skimmed over it and failed to take in the important facts. There is a rhythm within writing that can be broken at anytime and it’s absolutely necessary in conveying the relevant information.

Now think of some of your favourite songs. In each one you will almost certainly have favourite parts. There may also be short sections in which you empathise with the composer and the song connects with you perfectly. This will also be due to contrast. It’s a common fact that people tend to lose interest when something is repeated and so it doesn’t matter how wonderful a hook or chorus maybe, it just will become boring if not combined with contrasting material and used sparingly. It is just one of the many balances that seem to need to be managed carefully to produce a great song.

The inner details of number one singles over the decades could be picked apart forever but in this case I don’t believe there is any need. In all popular music there is something absolutely clear. It may not be a complete or perfect formula but there are certain structures that go hand in hand with hit singles. There are certain chord progressions that go hand in hand with hit singles. There are certain lyrical styles that work and are repeated with unfaltering success. Certain characteristics repeat themselves over decades and I believe it is because the artists themselves have listened extensively to their own influences. Jai Josefs recalls:

“John Smith of Nu Shooz seemed to be a typical, young, long haired, “write-what-you-feel” type. He called me over and said ‘Hey, you teach song writing, take a look at this’. He proceeded to show me a book in which he had musically analyzed every song Stevie Wonder had recorded for verse/ chorus structure, key changes, rhythmic groove, chord progressions, etc”

It is true that not all artists will have studied so obsessively but they will have spent years and months ‘paying their dues’ to the musical greats that came before them. Loving the sound of music and so listening neurotically is the root of a truly great writer. Not all artists will have noted down everything that their hero’s did but they will have subconsciously taken on board little bits of their sound each time they played their record.

A close look at today’s music industry through the eyes of a cynic may well see a chart full of artists writing for no further reason than to gain all of the possessions they see on an MTV dominated by cribs and cars. This perfect formula has almost become a quest and a few labels seem to have found it. A simple song containing Prosody, Contrast a catchy hook and a great intro combined with huge publicity (ideally a reality TV show) seems to do the trick. Just ask Girls Aloud and Shane Ward.

So is there a formula? A series of building blocks and stencils that guarantee a CD destined for the chart shelf? From the evidence I would have to say yes there is. But the end product of the formula, though admittedly is a hit single, will not be played tomorrow. Well…Maybe tomorrow but not in ten years.

Hundreds of years ago there were more composers out there than simply the Mozarts and Beethovens we hear so much about. The reason we don’t hear about them is because over the years music fans and enthusiasts have sifted through what is and isn’t worth listening to and Mozart, Beethoven and a handful of others are what we are left with.

So as I leave the Mick Jagger Centre I’m warmed by the great company The Blockheads provided. It was never about finding a hit for them. They played and wrote because they loved it. The songs they composed connected emotionally and spiritually with them and it was a great coincidence that it connected with millions of people in Britain as well. Their loyal fans still travel to see them and they look truly in their element on-stage. Real Showmen.

As my car starts I realise I’m humming ‘Hit Me with Your Rhythm Stick’ and it brings a smile. I’m beginning to appreciate that pieces like these may well be the Moonlight Sonatas of tomorrow.

So the formula’s out there and I think most musicians know it. It’s all pretty simple. However, I now recognise that I feel altogether different about it. It’s the lowest common denominator and most performers have worked too hard at their craft to settle for that.

As I go to pull out of the gates and onto the busy Dartford High Street I realise that there’s the latest boy band on the radio. Hitting the brakes I decide to switch them off before I crash trying to change stations. The formula’s all over the waves but I don’t think I want to hear it, so I slip in the Sgt Peppers album and wait for the next gap in the traffic.

Paddy

[1] Drury, Jim, Ian Drury & The Blockheads: Song by Song, P7, Sanctuary 2003
[2] Josephs, Jai, Writing Music for Hit Songs, P.18 Schirmer Trade Books 1996

P.S If you are interested in reading the Sulzer article entitled 'How many hits' The link is here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,,1943240,00.html

Beginnings...

Right. Where to begin...

After deleting and re-writing this post six or seven times I've found myself completely unable to say anything that may change anybody's life. So if that's what you're looking for, I'm very sorry.

If i'm being completely honest, the only reason I'm writing anything at all is because I am utterly incompetent with HTML and have no idea of any website that will host an image for my profile.

However, now I'm here I can't help but feel like I should 'jot down' a few thoughts. I mean that's what blogging is isn't it?

To begin, there are one or two things I'm not entirely comfortable with. The first would be that I've no idea who i'm actually talking to. I've never been somebody that keeps a diary and any real writing i've ever engaged has been related to school or university. I realise that this is a pretty poor start for a prospective journalist but hey, nobody's perfect.

The above sentence contains two of the main reasons I embarked upon the world of blogging in the first place. As a prospective journalist I must write to push my abilities further. I want to gain a maturity to my writing that will support me once I've finished gaining letters after my name. The kind of maturity that will prevent me using silly clichés in my writing such as 'hey, nobody's perfect'.

I'll also try to halt that immature little habit of disappearing off on tangents...

Back to some of the things I'm not entirely comfortable with.

The second would be that opening my profile on blogger.com is one further, undeniable step towards my entire life revolving around a computer. Aside from the fact that the majority of my social activities have sadly but irrefutably been run by msn messenger from the age of about twelve, more recently I have become one of the six million people that have grown to be completely and utterly addicted to facebook.

The constant tinkering with my profile, photo's and interests combined with the not so productive allegiance to groups such as 'Sheffield United you are rubbish, hence why you went down' and 'The Reading and Leeds festival appreciation group' have led to a drastic reduction in the amount of free time I use to partake in anything productive. The fact that my lunch break at work is disappearing at an alarming rate as I write this is a lone testament to how the internet has an ever tightening grip over my life.

Admittedly that's pretty dramatic but where does it all end? (Cliché, again I know but they're so tempting!)

I'll end fairly abruptly at this stage as I can sense myself about to embark upon a one man debate regarding one of society's current major gripes with all of today's young people. 'Why don't you get off that computer and go and read a book' echoes around my house at an almost hourly rate and I most certainly know that my parents wouldn't have got away with it. Apparently national service was brilliant as well.

The reality is that I'm 21 years old and I've just graduated with a good degree in English and Music. I leave the country to travel in January for around seven months before I return to complete a masters in Journalism. That's as far as my plans go but they're certainly exciting. I believe this blog could well be a fantastic way to document what will be undoubtedly one of the most unsure, daunting yet exhilarating chapters of my life. I won't post that regularly until I leave on my travels and so for now it's just a case of getting to grips with this web page.

The fact that the first two paragraphs of this blog are in a different font to the rest should in itself, show an immediate need for an improvement in my internet-related IT skills.

Paddy