Stav's "Mixing With Your Mind" Hit Record Formula

[ghostwriter]

Michael Paul Stavrou in his book "Mixing With Your Mind" claims he discovered the Hit Record Formula. Common denominators that ALL major hits include without exception. Every top 10 hit of every year for the last decade has these same rules applied to each of them, and he claims there are at least 7 ingredients that all of these hits have.

Has anyone broken the secret formula? Has anyone discovered traits that all hit records have in common?

Please let's try and keep on topic. Let's avoid the "I have no interest in writing formulaic music" comments. This is an exercise in the analysis of Top 10 Hits. Not a commentary on trying to copy a formula.

And if this topic doesn't interest you, rather than bashing it, please just find another thread. (I know this last statement is pointless, it's the Internet after all).

[RiF]

The chorus starts at 0:55 to 0:59 into the song.

The vocals are autotuned :-)

[pinkheadedbug]

Eighth note bassline.

[initialsBB]

He made that claim but then didn't say what he discovered? That's annoying. If true, it would be fun to try to figure out though. I would bet that bpms fall within a certain range. I would bet they're all about love on some level. They all probably have a verse, chorus and bridge, a fairly short intro, maybe a four on the floor kick? Maybe certain common rhyme schemes like ABAB. I bet there aren't any in 3/4 time and I wouldn't be surprised if they're all in major keys or if they're all completely diatonic without any borrowed chords.

[ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

I would bet they're all about love on some level.

Beethoven's Fifth Symphony was a hit and was instrumental. So lyrics would have to be excluded from the formula.

[RiF]

Originally Posted by ghostwriter

Beethoven's Fifth Symphony was a hit and was instrumental. So lyrics would have to be excluded from the formula.

I think we talk about the last decade. And I am sure that lyrics/vocals are a must.

[ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by RiF

I think we talk about the last decade. And I am sure that lyrics/vocals are a must.

Not according to Stav's article in the book. He claims every hit song including Beethoven's Fifth Symphony for the last century has 7 traits in common. So, lyrics would be excluded. It would all be musical components. It's an interesting claim and I'm just curious if anyone can back it up with examples.

[initialsBB]

Ah, I just read about more about this on an old thread. It sounds like he's talking exclusively about sonic elements or "psychoacoustic" stuff, not composition?

[pinkheadedbug]

That is a weird book, though, isn't it? He's got his own strange voodoo terms for everything. A bit too mystical and vague for my tastes.

[RiF]

Originally Posted by ghostwriter

Not according to Stav's article in the book. He claims every hit song including Beethoven's Fifth Symphony for the last century has 7 traits in common. So, lyrics would be excluded. It would all be musical components. It's an interesting claim and I'm just curious if anyone can back it up with examples.

Ahhh, OK... I stand corrected.

[ghostwriter]

Here are 3 songs all very different, but all hits. Can you find traits that they all have in common? For example, they all have call and response, counterpoint melody, repetition (an obvious one in all songs). What other traits do you hear?

The Beatles - Let It Be

Beatles- Let It Be - YouTube

Beethoven's Fifth Symphony

Beethoven's 5th Symphony - YouTube

The Archies - Sugar Sugar

Sugar Sugar - The Archies - YouTube

[Kiwi]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

He made that claim but then didn't say what he discovered? That's annoying.

I've met Stav and he is an outstanding gentleman. You don't get to be Chief Mix engineer at AIR studios during the golden years for nothing ...

George Martin endorsed his book, and IIRC it was GM who asked him NOT to publish the secret formula. Makes good sense not to, because can you imagine how boring music would get if this was common knowledge.

It's a fairly rational scientific approach that he took - you need to read his book to understand it.

The advice about comparing A sides with B sides makes a lot of sense. Quite often the same band, same engineer, producer, mixer, mastering ... the same equipment, the same everything ... and yet one song is a hit and another is not. Makes you think.

It's not the lyrics - because occasionaly you can get an instrument hit. But I would say you need a Hook, and that hook can be vocal (with or without meaningful lyrics) or purely a musical hook.

I don't think i've got them all, but I think i've got a few.

[Kiwi]

Originally Posted by ghostwriter

Beethoven's Fifth Symphony was a hit and was instrumental. So lyrics would have to be excluded from the formula.

Beethovens Fifth was also long before the invention of audio recording ... another massive clue as to the contents of that list ...

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

It's a fairly rational scientific approach that he took - you need to read his book to understand it.

Yeah, I'm definitely going to check it out now. It sounds pretty intriguing.

So do you think he's talking about really obvious general stuff like "a hook", repetition, contrast, etc?

[Cegor]

I'm sure some people have cracked the formula, but again their at the top Would love to see what people came up with though

[wwittman]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

... You don't get to be Chief Mix engineer at AIR studios during the golden years for nothing ...

was he?

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

...George Martin endorsed his book, and IIRC it was GM who asked him NOT to publish the secret formula...

I wonder why GM didn't produce more hit records since he knew the secret formula?

[initialsBB]

He didn't want people to know that he had the secret.

[Yeah, right...]

I was gonna say a kick drum on every beat, but I don't think Beethoven's 5th has that, does it...?

[NESTrecording]

well. my opinion, and i'm only 250 pages into MWYM right now, but...

i believe that the 3 songs you posted, just for example....all 3 have direct hooks, and opposing hooks..

it's hard to say that beethoven's 5th is a hit song. maybe when walter murphy did the disco version. haha. totally kidding.

they are all so rememberable, but you're right, it's hard to tell exactly why they do it to us. but God Bless them all for doing whatever it is it's doing to us!

[pinkheadedbug]

God Bless Stav, but his book is so full of woo -- 'flames' and 'hardness' and 'ghosts' and that bonkers chapter about gravity -- that I suspect his seven things about hit records are just as indefinable. 'They sound purple', that kind of thing.

[Beat Poet]

Doesn't Rivers Cuomo have some sort of hidden formula or book, which he just won't divulge?

[highvoltage]

I think one of the 7 must be that the melody can be sang or whistled very easily for everyone

[baskervils]

I liked Stav's description of the sound wave coming from the speaker like a flame. Place your speakers in relation to the optimal position between the flames.

The best advice I've read about composing a hit song came from a little Beatles book called "Help".

The claim was, written from a layman's point of view, that the Beatles formula (95% of the time) was to write in steps, where each step was "higher" than the previous step building tension and reaching a climax. This isn't completely precise in musical terms, but if you listen to the songs, it's absolutely correct.

[ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by beatflux

I think I've nailed a few of them...

Hit Rule #1: Everyone wants to climax

Listen to all of those tracks, then ask yourself:

Where is the most musical activity? What part of the song is the most intense? The climax always comes at the end.

Logically, the apex of the song has to come at the end. With a climax for a song to build toward, it will have something to build toward.

Most songs commit the sin of not having a climax, leaving the listeners with an empty feeling as the song begins to come to a close.

Listen to Party Rock Anthem, and then listen to I'm Sexy and I Know it. Party Rock Anthem has a huge climax at the end...the other song does not and neither do any of the other songs on that album.

Even tho 1812 is ****ing long compared to any other pop song out there, it still has a massively epic climax at the end.

Hit Rule #2: Everybody needs periods of rest

Every song needs a balance of low and high intensity moments. Having an overabundance of low or high moments means that the track won't have any kind of movement. Pop tracks typically move from a low point in the verse, to a higher points in the chorus, then an even higher point in the bridge.

The generally rule of thumb is that the beginning is the least intense, while the end is the most intense.

If there isn't a shift in energy while the song moves along, a track will sound lifeless.

Whoever said that Stan left a clue that you could compose with these rules is partially right. Listen to Fur Elise, and on the first "verse" section the song modulates so that it uses pitches that are higher in the register than compared to the first section of the song.

I'll post more later on.

Thank for your post, this is the exactly the type of discussion I was hoping for.

I'll add another.
The highest note in every hit song is in the chorus.

[Hardtoe]

Beatflux - Having read and absorbed Stav's book in the deepest recesses of my mind, I would say that your focus on the energy of the track is of critical importance and right on the money.

I would also argue that a great groove is at the top of the list (Stav goes on about "gravity" and how good mixes defy gravity and make you float or some such talk) which is also about the energy.

Another important element is the final freq balance of the mix, and how sonic density increases as you get to the payoff - the actual sound of the song itself makes it a hit as we react to all the pleasurable waves of freq hitting our brains via the ear. Again about the energy of the track.

Notice a pattern?

[ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by Hardtoe

Beatflux - Having read and absorbed Stav's book in the deepest recesses of my mind, I would say that your focus on the energy of the track is of critical importance and right on the money.

I would also argue that a great groove is at the top of the list (Stav goes on about "gravity" and how good mixes defy gravity and make you float or some such talk) which is also about the energy.

Another important element is the final freq balance of the mix, and how sonic density increases as you get to the payoff - the actual sound of the song itself makes it a hit as we react to all the pleasurable waves of freq hitting our brains via the ear. Again about the energy of the track.

Notice a pattern?

[drakem]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

I've met Stav and he is an outstanding gentleman. You don't get to be Chief Mix engineer at AIR studios during the golden years for nothing ...

George Martin endorsed his book, and IIRC it was GM who asked him NOT to publish the secret formula. Makes good sense not to, because can you imagine how boring music would get if this was common knowledge.

It's a fairly rational scientific approach that he took - you need to read his book to understand it.

The advice about comparing A sides with B sides makes a lot of sense. Quite often the same band, same engineer, producer, mixer, mastering ... the same equipment, the same everything ... and yet one song is a hit and another is not. Makes you think.

It's not the lyrics - because occasionaly you can get an instrument hit. But I would say you need a Hook, and that hook can be vocal (with or without meaningful lyrics) or purely a musical hook.

I don't think i've got them all, but I think i've got a few.

[ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by Kiwi

I don't think i've got them all, but I think i've got a few.

Please share.

[ghostwriter]

Repeating patterns with note changes is a major one.

Start of Beethoven's Fifth:
Da, Da, Da, Da,
Da, Da, Da, Da

Sugar,
Honey, Honey

Let it be, Let it be, Let it be, Let it be