Can you Produce a "Hit Song" ?

[DJRock]

Originally Posted by dreamsongs

That's what I meant...

What work did you do on these songs ?

I mostly did editing on tracks 1, 2, 4, 10, and the last track.

[JPM]

I don't think the masses are being deceived. I just think they don't have very good taste. It used to bother me when people listened to what I would consider bad music and thought that if they were just exposed to the good stuff it would be like someone who'd only eaten mcdonald's apple pie their entire lives being handed a piece of grandma's homemade pie from scratch. I was wrong.

My wife and I are music teachers so we often get asked about what we think of this or that and when we've given honest answers to family members or other casual music listeners we end up sounding like we're complete snobs and people quickly take on a, "well if you know so much why aren't YOU making it big?" attitude. They cease trusting in our "expertise" and go back to what they're used to and feel comfortable with. Many people are unable to discern between quality harmonic and melodic structure/voicing and that which is run of the mill, average, cheesy, or boring.

It's useless trying to change most people's taste. I just don't care anymore. And why should I? People can listen to whatever they want to listen to and I should enjoy what I listen to for its intrinsic value and not because I think I'm cool for listening to something simply because it's alternative or non-mainstream. That kind of thinking bugs me even more.

Hit songs that are popular with the masses have their place. School dances, wedding receptions, parties, etc. Music with mass appeal is useful for situations where there are masses present. Plus, as has been said, most people don't care about deep metaphor in their lyrics or the vintage tone of the vocal. They use music differently than musicians and engineers use it for. In day to day life, many people want to be moved. They don't care about artistically pushing the envelope or cool, innovative production. In some ways they may use it for a purpose that is purer than we do which would be what I would call "practical" purposes. Many baroque and classical pieces were used to entertain the aristocracy, worship God, or were pretty much dance music: all practical/functional. Now those same pieces are used for academic studies and intellectual pursuits.

I'm quickly digressing but yes, one can create a hit song and it doesn't have to be very good and that's o.k. It's not unjust that (insert your favorite obscure artist) is not more well known because that's just not how things are. And this is all coming from someone who listens to hardly any mainstream or even big label music. Besides, do you really want the most underground, artistic band/artist you listen to to be blasted over the PA for the drunk masses who could care less about who it is or what it is at the next wedding dance you attend?

JPM

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by Beardhead

Who's gonna hear them if you don't have people to put them all over the place (TV, advertisement etc.).

Claus

But you're missing something. There has been plenty of money in promotion spend on songs that fail. You can't just promote and have a hit. Unless we're talking about movies.

Jack Johnson's records sell millions with very little promotion while Lindsey Lohan sells very little with tons of promotion.

Don't get confused into thinking that just because you're seeing it and hearing it everywhere that it's actually selling.

[JP11]

What difference does it make what "the people" like, or how "dumb" they are. The great artists overcame this "problem" if it is one. Lennon and McCartney were/are geniuses.....their audience was not, nor should they have to be. If an artist chooses to be bad because they think that's what the audience wants, then bad they will be. I don't think an artist like that has a choice anyway. A great artist will connect. Part of the genius of artists like Lennon and McCartney was their ability to make great art appealing to the masses.

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by JP11

What difference does it make what "the people" like, or how "dumb" they are. The great artists overcame this "problem" if it is one. Lennon and McCartney were/are geniuses.....

Well, the Beatles just had good timing. That's the truth. Sure, they were outstanding songwriters but if Lennon/McCartney would've been born in the 60s and started a band in the 80s, things would've looked VERY differently. Just imagine the Beatles starting out today. I can assure you that they wouldnt make the same impact as in the 60s, nowhere close to it.

So, as somebody already pointed out. A hit, or hit band, also has a lot to do with great timing.

[C Heat]

Originally Posted by superclock

I think it's funny that people talk about the songwriters and artists who dominate radio as having little or no talent. The reality is that they have an incredible talent that seems to elude the majority of the musician/producer/songwriter population . . . they can write songs that appeal to huge numbers of people. Whether it's out of jealousy, spite or ignorance, to belittle someone else who has something you don't is a very common psychological tactic for self-preservation. I am a sucker for a good hook anyday, no matter the style of music. And good hooks aren't written by marketing departments.

Well there's a diamond in the rough right there

Can I be your friend?

[dreamsongs]

Originally Posted by Produceher

But you're missing something. There has been plenty of money in promotion spend on songs that fail. You can't just promote and have a hit. Unless we're talking about movies.

Jack Johnson's records sell millions with very little promotion while Lindsey Lohan sells very little with tons of promotion.

Don't get confused into thinking that just because you're seeing it and hearing it everywhere that it's actually selling.

This is true but...

It's a numbers game, the more you throw into the wall, the more chance something will stick...

And in this market it seems, a lot is sticking...

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by JP11

What difference does it make what "the people" like, or how "dumb" they are. The great artists overcame this "problem" if it is one. Lennon and McCartney were/are geniuses.....their audience was not, nor should they have to be. If an artist chooses to be bad because they think that's what the audience wants, then bad they will be. I don't think an artist like that has a choice anyway. A great artist will connect. Part of the genius of artists like Lennon and McCartney was their ability to make great art appealing to the masses.

Yeah. But it really was a different time. 20 or 30 years ago fans would love to hear a new record come out and would be patient enuff if the artist took a complete different direction.

Nowadays, if fans want to hear something different they'll just listen to a different band.

BTW - As great as The Beatles were, I think Queen holds the crown (hee hee) for making really intricate music enjoyable for pop fans. Of course, I'm forgetting about classical music.

[JP11]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

I can assure you that they wouldnt make the same impact as in the 60s, nowhere close to it.

I don't think you can assure me that. How can you know? People said the same thing about those very Beatles when every record company at the time turned them down.

[JP11]

Originally Posted by Produceher

Yeah. But it really was a different time.

Things change but not really. The Beatles could very well have been a flash in the pan. It's not the fans or the record cos. or the system who all of sudden said hey, this mop top holding hand stuff isn't good enough, we're all of a sudden smart, could you please record Sgt. Pepper or something with a little more depth.

And I agree about Queen, and many of those artists from that period. They were extremely clever and talented pop artists who wrote brilliant songs that are very easily digested by all us idiots. If My Chemical Romance could write and produce Bohemian Rhapsody, they would, and people would shit their pants and it would be a monster hit. The idiots of today would eat it up the same as the idiots in the 70s did.

Anyway, in a nutshell, my point is, just like the saying about blaming the tools, it's an easy out for an artist to blame the audience or the system or the times.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by JP11

Anyway, in a nutshell, my point is, just like the saying about blaming the tools, it's an easy out for an artist to blame the audience or the system or the times.

I agree. And as a non-artist I don't really have problem with the music that's available. There's soo much more of it. If you only like indie chick folk pop rock, there's tons of it out there. You never have to go outside your genre. There really is great music out there. You just have to look.

I think a lot of people don't like the fact that their favorite isn't everyone's favorite. The same as gear choices. Just get the fortitude to not care what everyone else likes.

And as an Artist you have the choice too. Sell out or pave your own path. It may be harder but it will be more rewarding.

[Jules]

... to sell out?

[Jules]

I have a specially developed talent to fool an A&R department into signing a band via my recordings.

But what they do with it after they sign it - is up to them.

Overall, I have had modest 'radio hits' with these type of signings, but not solid commercial success. Thats a disappointment to me..

The (few) acts I have produced that HAVE had commercial success were already signed and had an established 'status' in the music biz...So I could not 100% claim my production 100% made those acts hit high in the charts...They were all 'on their way to the top' before I got to them...

Although it may sound like 'sour grapes' I regard the careers of pretty much ALL the (new band) acts that got signed via my recordings were totally mis-managed by idiot managers, idiot A&R mooks and if that wasn't enough to ruin their chances - had bad decisions made by the naive acts themselves - totally mess things up....

So in those cases I truly believe that my production was "right" and everyone else was "wrong"

at various stages I dabbled with band management to push forward these atcs, one band got signed to a subsidiary of Universal USA and the other got signed to Beggars Banquet UK and toured with Green Day but both of these acts, although great, kinda got nowhere...Alas there was not enough backbone in the managers that took over from me! tuttt

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by Jules

Although it may sound like 'sour grapes' I regard the careers of pretty much ALL the (new band) acts that got signed via my recordings were totally mis-managed by idiot managers, idiot A&R mooks and if that wasn't enough to ruin their chances - had bad decisions made by the naive acts themselves - totally mess things up....

Dont be so vague Jules, where did they screw up? I'm especially interested in what you think the artists did wrong.

Originally Posted by Jules

one band got signed to a subsidiary of Universal USA

What's their name? Would like to check 'em out.

[Jules]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

Dont be so vague Jules, where did they screw up? I'm especially interested in what you think the artists did wrong.

How can a signed artist mess up their own record deal?

The list is HUGE!

Never write any better or "as good as" songs than the two they were signed for at the start of the deal.
Keep their idiot best friend / parent manager
Fire their best friend / parent manager
Listen to their idiot A&R person
Not listen to their A&R person
Not realize that their A&R person was due to leave the label soon..
Sign to a major when they should have signed to an indie (ie. major label machinery takes SOOOO long to get things done that some 'hipster' acts can discover that their musical style / album is WAY out of date by the time, 2 and a half years from signing, it is finally released. This is a good case for signing to an indie label - who can get a release out far quicker.
Wait too long for a VIP producer (see above)
Accept a producer that wasn't their choice
Allow an unchecked studio budget overspend to occur
Agreeing with the wrong choice for single - radio promotion

Obviously if an act REALLY doesn't want to do something, it wont do it.. But there is SO MUCH manipulation of artists going on it really is an uphill struggle for even the smartest of acts to resist the all the BS. The single biggest mistake acts make is thinking ' Hey, I am not dumb you know, how hard can all this stuff be?' - cause the answer is - VERY HARD / total nightmare - a LOT of the time...and you will simply NOT have enough time, nor be offered the opportunity, to micro manage everything about your career. You have to make some key choices early on re managers, Label's, PR, live concert agents who's job it is to make decisions on your behalf... And roll the dice.. Get any or all of those key personnel choices slightly wrong - and you can be screwed... IMHO.

Here is the catch 22.. if you haven't already experienced it, how can an artist new to it all make wise choices? - The answer is - there is no way to guarantee you will make the right choices and thats why its known as a tough business to crack and why people say you need a certain amount of luck as well as talent / good looks etc..

Here's an analogy for being signed and how your intelligence influences your career... Imagine you are put in front of a factory conveyor belt with M&M chocolates bouncing around on it. You are told to pick up off the conveyor belt as many of the blue colored M&M's as you can as these will contribute to your success. You understand the task and are willing to take it on. Before you start, someone tells you at the last minute, that you have to wear boxing gloves to do this task, you agree (albeit a little annoyed you weren't warned about this at the beginning) so you get going.. you miss a few of the blue M&M's but you are making progress..! Then the people in charge, triple the speed of the conveyor belt and switch the lights off, leaving you stranded there alone.

WELCOME TO THE MUSIC BUSINESS!!!

[dreamsongs]

Nice post Jules, thank God I'm not an artist although I used to be.

The way this would and has affected me to some degree is that I would be really pissed off at a band I have written songs with and collaborated with and then they go and f*ck it all up for themselves and me by making horrible career choices.

It's not as damaging to me obviously except I have regreted all the money I could've made had they put pride and selfishness aside.

There is a talented band I work with now who is well on their way to ruining all the hard work they and I put in. I know the lead singer well so I'm hesitant to disclose further info but they have had serious support from radio and promotion in the area. They reached a high 2 years ago and it's on the way down now. Probably to never rise again.

But like you said, there are so many things that could and will go wrong that it's almost impossible without serious professional guidance.

I would even add another important factor to that list, and that is "song choice". When a band gets precious and hung up on recording certain material that isn't good just because they wrote it, it's a recipe for disaster.

Then we go back to "hit potential material". If you are an artist or a band and someone offers you a song that has hit potential but you didn't write it...TAKE IT !
Don't be a proud idiot...you will get other chances to write but you can't afford to miss the train when it's at your station !

An artist/band affects me the songwriter minimally. I mean, who am I to tell them which direction to go, it's their career. But when the moment comes to record your album and you choose the ones you wrote over the better material that could further your career, well, that just pisses me off...

Nobody has a crystal ball and who's to say it would've made a difference in the end. But if there's one person making all decisions and they're not open and unbiased, it's going to be a tough road...

[Jules]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

What's their name? Would like to check 'em out.

Universal subsidiary signing - was Minibar.. I produced some demos that got a lot of radio play in the UK and was their manager for several months trying to hook em up with a deal in the UK (uphill struggle, at the time everything was Brit Pop . In the end they found one in the US by themselves..(one show at the Viper Room..was all that did it) Great band IMHO, v nice people.

[LARayGun]

So I guess Jose, that you like the MTV? You're buying it after all and you are immune to marketing forces!fuuck

Originally Posted by Jose Mrochek

Like I said earlier, I listen to radio all the time, and watch MTV for hours everyday. How many records I bought this year ?? umm 2 I think. And no, i don´t download free music either.

So nobody is going to make me like something I don´t, to the extent of putting some money into it.

And not to even mention the huge flops big record companys have all the time.

About your ¨like a rock¨ analogy, same thing.. I never bought or have any plans to buy a chevy truck. Something either appeals to me or it doesn´t. Pure and simple, the only thing marketing does (which is very important) , is that people are massively aware of the existence of that product. It does not guarantee success in any way.

[uncle duncan]

Originally Posted by dreamsongs

I'm still convinced that if you take a good song (not great but not crap either) you can turn it into a hit song.

You can't produce 'magic'. All else being equal, (promotion - production) the song with the magic is going to be the one that sticks - ala 'Who Let the Dogs Out,' or 'Swing Batta Swing'. You can enhance the magic with production, and you can kill the magic with production. Likewise an artist can make a or break a song by their artist persona. But to say the producer is the one who's going to create the 'magic' where none exists is wishful thinking. It's not an exact science. It's....magic.

[C Heat]

Originally Posted by uncle duncan

It's....magic.

It is magic!

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by uncle duncan

But to say the producer is the one who's going to create the 'magic' where none exists is wishful thinking. It's not an exact science. It's....magic.

So how about "Slave for You" by Britney?

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by Produceher

So how about "Slave for You" by Britney?

It's not just that song, most Pop smashes wouldnt be hits without the tight productions. If you look at acts like Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys or Nsync.. these people wouldnt have been stars without their producers/writers. I'm picking these acts cause one man was responsible for almost all of their successes, Max Martin.

There have been many boy groups or female teen artists, who wanted to make it. The marketing approach was pretty much the same for every act. What made the difference where the people behind these acts, and I'm not talking about the marketing, management or A&R people, it were the producers/writers. Britney or Backstreet Boys without Max Martin would've been just another teen pop act. And I dont think that Max's songs are all that special, what gives them that certain something, were his productions. At the time (late 90s) it was something fresh and innovating.

So, in pop music it's really all about the producer, and I assume it's the same in rap/RnB. Would've Nelly Furtado had such a big record without Timbaland? I dont think so.

[dreamsongs]

Originally Posted by uncle duncan

You can't produce 'magic'. All else being equal, (promotion - production) the song with the magic is going to be the one that sticks - ala 'Who Let the Dogs Out,' or 'Swing Batta Swing'. You can enhance the magic with production, and you can kill the magic with production. Likewise an artist can make a or break a song by their artist persona. But to say the producer is the one who's going to create the 'magic' where none exists is wishful thinking. It's not an exact science. It's....magic.

I can't say I agree with you...

Yes, there are some songs that have magic and there are songs that are hits without possesing magic. That's the difference between "hits" and "standards".

I assume when you say "magic" you're talking about "standards" like "Something" or "My Way" or "Bohemian Rhapsody" or "Satisfaction" or "Hotel California" etc. or any hit song that has had enough lasting power thru the years to make it a "standard". Something that will stand the test of time.

Believe me I haven't heard much "magic" lately on the radio, not even close...but I "have" heard lots of hit songs that have made lots of money.

This is what I'm referring to. Take a pretty good song (not magical) and with the help of great production, turning it into a 'hit".

I still believe this is the way to consistently make money in this business. If I wait around until I write that magical song, I'll starve to death...

[JP11]

Originally Posted by dreamsongs

Believe me I haven't heard much "magic" lately on the radio, not even close...but I "have" heard lots of hit songs that have made lots of money.

This is what I'm referring to. Take a pretty good song (not magical) and with the help of great production, turning it into a 'hit".

Something has to be a hit (and I'm not talking about that old standard). They aren't going to cancel the charts because of the lack of good songs. No good songs this week so there will be no hits! Lets see what comes out next week, or maybe next year!

I think bands and artists of today are kind of lucky in that regard. If you want to be a successful hard rock band, for example, be thankful your competition is Nickelback and Daughtry and not Queen and Led Zeppelin. If you want to be a singer songwriter, be thankful you only have to deal with the likes of John Mayer and James Blunt and not Elton John and David Bowie. Jet/Coldplay vs. Beatles/Stones. Timberlake/Spears vs. Michael Jackson/Prince. And so on....

Now's the time to hit it with mediocrity!!

[dreamsongs]

Originally Posted by JP11

Something has to be a hit (and I'm not talking about that old standard). They aren't going to cancel the charts because of the lack of good songs. No good songs this week so there will be no hits! Lets see what comes out next week, or maybe next year!

I think bands and artists of today are kind of lucky in that regard. If you want to be a successful hard rock band, for example, be thankful your competition is Nickelback and Daughtry and not Queen and Led Zeppelin. If you want to be a singer songwriter, be thankful you only have to deal with the likes of John Mayer and James Blunt and not Elton John and David Bowie. Jet/Coldplay vs. Beatles/Stones. Timberlake/Spears vs. Michael Jackson/Prince. And so on....

Now's the time to hit it with mediocrity!!

Well said...

I'll take '70s music over what we have today anyday...

[blackcom]

Make shure the artist looks like a pornstar -> instant hit


........dfegad

[JP11]

Originally Posted by brisvegas

So.... if it's that easy today....

I don't think anyone ever said it's "that easy". After 8 or 9 pages on this thread, I'm pretty sure it's been established there's more to a hit than just the song, now and in the past.

You're sort of twisting the point of that comparison. It's never easy, but who would you rather go up against? The Beatles in their prime, or Jet? Queen or Daughtry?

There have always been crap hits, and it's never easy, but it seems clear the standard for what is a "big hit" has gone down, and a person with mediocre songs but good looks and good connections and good productions probably has a better chance than someone with better songs but not the other stuff. I think the song and songwriter used to be more important and more respected. Now it's just another little tool, almost like an ad or a jingle, a necessary evil for a pop star practically.

[uncle duncan]

Originally Posted by dreamsongs

I can't say I agree with you...

And I can't say I agree with you either. Look! We agree on something.

A magic song: 'Don't Know Why I Didn't Come' Norah Jones. I think it would have been almost impossible to kill that song with bad production, and I don't think production made it a hit.
Early Cheryl Crow - sloppy production, magic songs
Snow Patrol - the song about how he's lying on his bed
Sixpence the richer - 'Kiss Me'
The Way (the road that they walk on is paved in gold)
Sk8ter Boy (did I spell it right?)
These are all songs that made it, regardless of production tricks. These are the songs I'm talking about. (Sorry for being so out of date, but Brittany Spears pop music makes me want to puke, and I try not to listen to it. Even the latest Avril Lavigne makes me want to puke.)
I'll be the first to agree that production is on par with songwriting and artist performance and promotion in getting a hit, but it's a combination of all these elements coming together. Producing forgettable shlock, while profitable, does not, in my mind, equal producing hit songs, even though they may show up on the charts for a short while.
I produce forgettable shlock on a local scale, and I enjoy the challenge of making forgettable shlock memorable, but I recognize the limitations of the songs I have to work with, and I don't pretend to transcend them with my production skills. It would be like putting cardboard wings on a car - it may look like a plane, but it's never gonna fly.

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by JP11

I don't think anyone ever said it's "that easy". After 8 or 9 pages on this thread, I'm pretty sure it's been established there's more to a hit than just the song, now and in the past.

You're sort of twisting the point of that comparison. It's never easy, but who would you rather go up against? The Beatles in their prime, or Jet? Queen or Daughtry?

There have always been crap hits, and it's never easy, but it seems clear the standard for what is a "big hit" has gone down, and a person with mediocre songs but good looks and good connections and good productions probably has a better chance than someone with better songs but not the other stuff. I think the song and songwriter used to be more important and more respected. Now it's just another little tool, almost like an ad or a jingle, a necessary evil for a pop star practically.

I dont like the assumptions you're making. Who knows what will happen with Daughtry? Maybe he will still be around 15 years from now, and go on to score numerous #1 hits. When you're talking about Queen or The Beatles, you're talking about acts from the past. It's easy to compare Daughtry, and artist who just released one album and has been around for (what) 2 years (?), to acts that had a decade and numerous albums to establish themselves.

Nobody knows what's gonna happen in the future or what current acts will go on to accomplish in their careers. The people always dictated what's successful. That was the case in the 60s, 80s and is still today. Some of our current artists WILL become icons, just like The Beatles or Queen.

Modern music isnt worse or better than it was 4 decades ago. It's just different. A different sound and a different approach to how you produce/record it.

But the bottom line hasnt changed. What people respond to are still emotions. You can have the best production in the world, but unless you connect with your audience on an emotional level, they aint gonna buy your music or tell their friends about it.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

Some of our current artists WILL become icons, just like The Beatles or Queen.

Modern music isnt worse or better than it was 4 decades ago. It's just different. A different sound and a different approach to how you produce/record it.

Then name some. Because I can't think of any.

(and you can't say U2 because they were around when I was in Kindergarden)