Catchy Songs

[Pratt Boy]

Went with 'New World Man'.

I always catch myself singing when it is played.

 

Spirit of Radio is a toe-tapper.

[ZYRANNIX]

I think Everyday Glory is quite catchy, nice riff, good beat, nice rhythm, although not in the classic Rush style but its nice to break away once in a while, should've been a single.

[Earthshine]

Out of these, The Spirit Of Radio.

[bootruss]

The wreckers? Bravest Face? Everyday glory?

[Lorraine]

I always thought catchy means toe tapping.

[Lorraine]

By the way, what happened to all these members from a dozen years ago? Did Treeduck chase them all away?

[JohnnyBlaze]

By the way, what happened to all these members from a dozen years ago? Did Treeduck chase them all away?

 

All of those 2005 posts were before duck's time. Mine too.

 

...though I guess the duck could've run them off in another thread the following year when he joined TRF (if those guys were even still around).

Edited May 31, 2017 by JohnnyBlaze

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

[goose]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

[goose]

I always thought catchy means toe tapping.

Earworm.

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

 

I guess the John Williams Star Wars score sorta catchy, but not really. I mean certainly the Imperial March (for example) is a brilliant piece of music that is wonderful to listen to, but as much as I like it, I don't really go around humming the tune. I feel similarly about the classical pieces you noted. Vivaldi's Spring does have a very nice melody that is memorable, but catchy? Is catchy to you just the ability to be memorable? The only sitcom themes I can even remember have lyrics (Three's Company, The Jeffersons)... oh wait, I suppose there is the Simpsons theme, but I wouldn't call it catchy at all.

 

Either way I would say that in the context of ROCK music (of which RUSH are certainly a part of), that lyrics & melody and the combination of the two are an essential component of catchiness. This is why someone like Joe Satriani is, at best, vaguely known by the public. If instrumentals were an important part of popular rock music, he would be huge and many of his songs would be considered catchy. Had RUSH been an exclusively instrumental band none of us would be here right now discussing them, because they would have never gotten past album #4. I look at the instrumentals they produce as more of an indulgence they can take because they have produced enough ROCK music people love (public outside of an insular fan community) that they can do some things (instrumentals for example) simply for their own edification.

 

 

.

Edited May 31, 2017 by diatribein

[goose]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

 

I guess the John Williams Star Wars score sorta catchy, but not really. I mean certainly the Imperial March (for example) is a brilliant piece of music that is wonderful to listen to, but as much as I like it, I don't really go around humming the tune.

I do, all the time. :cheers:

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

 

I guess the John Williams Star Wars score sorta catchy, but not really. I mean certainly the Imperial March (for example) is a brilliant piece of music that is wonderful to listen to, but as much as I like it, I don't really go around humming the tune.

I do, all the time. :cheers:

 

I think you are making my point. Within the domain of classical music (of which film scores should be included) melody is exclusively produced by instrumentation. Therefor what can be considered to be catchy must be derived from instrumentation since it is the only source of melody. Rock music does not follow these conventions. Melody is principally delivered with lyrics by vocal performance. Exceptions are usually like Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da where the melody hook is still in vocal form, but without the lyrics. Instrumentation alone is rarely considered the melody and therefor not really the part of the song normally associated with being catchy. Again, someone like Joe Satriani works melody in the form of guitar into his music, but he is not considered to be an artist that produces catchy music since his style of songwriting falls outside of what constitutes catchy rock music.

 

.

Edited May 31, 2017 by diatribein

[blueschica]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

 

I guess the John Williams Star Wars score sorta catchy, but not really. I mean certainly the Imperial March (for example) is a brilliant piece of music that is wonderful to listen to, but as much as I like it, I don't really go around humming the tune.

I do, all the time. :cheers:

 

I think you are making my point. Within the domain of classical music (of which film scores should be included) melody is exclusively produced by instrumentation. Therefor what can be considered to be catchy must be derived from instrumentation since it is the only source of melody. Rock music does not follow these conventions. Melody is principally delivered with lyrics by vocal performance. Exceptions are usually like Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da where the melody hook is still in vocal form, but without the lyrics. Instrumentation alone is rarely considered the melody and therefor not really the part of the song normally associated with being catchy. Again, someone like Joe Satriani works melody in the form of guitar into his music, but he is not considered to be an artist that produces catchy music since his style of songwriting falls outside of what constitutes catchy rock music.

 

.

 

????? I don't disagree that lyrics can be a large part of what make a song catchy (or an ear worm, ask me why I still know "Splish Splash" or "Witch Doctor") but I do think that when the term "melody" is used, it is assumed you are referring to an arrangement of musical notes. I think. If it's a set of words that make up a lyric, maybe "phrase" is what is needed? I dunno.

[JohnnyBlaze]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Beethoven's 5th? Vivaldi's Spring? The music from Star Wars? Countless sitcom theme songs?

 

I guess the John Williams Star Wars score sorta catchy, but not really. I mean certainly the Imperial March (for example) is a brilliant piece of music that is wonderful to listen to, but as much as I like it, I don't really go around humming the tune.

I do, all the time. :cheers:

 

I think you are making my point. Within the domain of classical music (of which film scores should be included) melody is exclusively produced by instrumentation. Therefor what can be considered to be catchy must be derived from instrumentation since it is the only source of melody. Rock music does not follow these conventions. Melody is principally delivered with lyrics by vocal performance. Exceptions are usually like Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da where the melody hook is still in vocal form, but without the lyrics. Instrumentation alone is rarely considered the melody and therefor not really the part of the song normally associated with being catchy. Again, someone like Joe Satriani works melody in the form of guitar into his music, but he is not considered to be an artist that produces catchy music since his style of songwriting falls outside of what constitutes catchy rock music.

 

.

 

Your post isn't catchy that's for sure. :P

 

Goose already said he found some tunes without vocals catchy. So do I. So do millions of others. Rarely this, principally delivered that. Music isn't some sterile formula...not to me anyway. There's nothing to debate here.

 

Specifically Satriani...I used to hum Surfing with the Alien through much of the late 80s. I didn't know that it wasn't supposed to be hummed. :P

Edited May 31, 2017 by JohnnyBlaze

[ReRushed]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions. I tend to hate the word "filler" that is bandied about so loosely on this board, but if I would use that word for anything it would be to describe ALL of the instrumentals on the various RUSH albums. The only thing they do for me is take up space that would otherwise be reserved for a complete song with lyrics and vocals.

Edited June 1, 2017 by diatribein

[goose]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Muzak is based on the whole idea of vocals-free, easy listening melodies.

[ReRushed]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Muzak is based on the whole idea of vocals-free, easy listening melodies.

 

I hardly think that invoking the merits of MUZAK should elicit any points with anyone that actually likes music!

 

This must be the first time in history when I have made a point that is in agreement with Ted Nugent!!!

Edited June 1, 2017 by diatribein

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

 

That is fine, but the definition of the word CATCHY in regards to ROCK MUSIC (not classical, not jazz, not other forms of primarily instrumental music) is almost exclusively used to describe the VOCAL MELODY. I'm not making this shit up. Ask anyone who is not specifically a RUSH fan, but just generally likes rock music to list you the 10 songs they find to be most catchy and they will list you a bunch of songs with vocal melodies. That is kind of what rock music, and especially popular rock music, is all about.

 

.

Edited June 1, 2017 by diatribein

[ReRushed]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

 

That is fine, but by the definition of the word CATCHY in regards to ROCK MUSIC (not classical, not jazz, no other forms of primarily instrumental music) is almost exclusively used to describe the VOCAL MELODY. I'm not making this shit up. Ask anyone who is not specifically a RUSH fan, but just generally likes rock music to list you the 10 songs they find to be most catchy and they will list you a bunch of songs with vocal melodies. That is kind of what rock music, and especially popular rock music, is all about.

Nope. Riffs and licks are very catchy. All the way back to Chuck Berry. Rhythm and groove are incredibly catchy. Expand and accept!

[diatribein]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

 

That is fine, but by the definition of the word CATCHY in regards to ROCK MUSIC (not classical, not jazz, no other forms of primarily instrumental music) is almost exclusively used to describe the VOCAL MELODY. I'm not making this shit up. Ask anyone who is not specifically a RUSH fan, but just generally likes rock music to list you the 10 songs they find to be most catchy and they will list you a bunch of songs with vocal melodies. That is kind of what rock music, and especially popular rock music, is all about.

Nope. Riffs and licks are very catchy. All the way back to Chuck Berry. Rhythm and groove are incredibly catchy. Expand and accept!

 

I am certainly not going to accept something ridiculous just because you think it is right. Go ahead and ask your not RUSH fan friends to list you what they think are catchy rock songs and see how many instrumentals they mention. My bet is zero. Maybe you should accept the fact your idea of what is catchy fails at identifying what most people enjoy in rock music.

 

Oh and I listen to Iron Maiden who have plenty of large instrumentals parts within songs, but I know that Rime Of The Ancient Mariner isn't catchy, while Run To The Hills is. That is not to say which song I like better as a composition (Rime), it has to do with understanding the conventions of catchy rock music.

Edited June 1, 2017 by diatribein

[ReRushed]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

 

That is fine, but by the definition of the word CATCHY in regards to ROCK MUSIC (not classical, not jazz, no other forms of primarily instrumental music) is almost exclusively used to describe the VOCAL MELODY. I'm not making this shit up. Ask anyone who is not specifically a RUSH fan, but just generally likes rock music to list you the 10 songs they find to be most catchy and they will list you a bunch of songs with vocal melodies. That is kind of what rock music, and especially popular rock music, is all about.

Nope. Riffs and licks are very catchy. All the way back to Chuck Berry. Rhythm and groove are incredibly catchy. Expand and accept!

 

I am certainly not going to accept something ridiculous just because you think it is right. Go ahead and ask your not RUSH fan friends to list you what they think are catchy rock songs and see how many instrumentals they mention. My bet is zero. Maybe you should accept the fact your idea of what is catchy fails at identifying what most people enjoy in rock music.

 

Oh and I listen to Iron Maiden who have plenty of large instrumentals parts within songs, but I know that Rime Of The Ancient Mariner isn't catchy, while Run To The Hills is. That is not to say which song I like better as a composition (Rime), it has to do with understanding the conventions of catchy rock music.

Seriously?

[goose]

I don't understand how instrumentals can be considered catchy. There is nothing to sing along to. Melody is an integral part of catchiness for me.

Dude, listen with your ears. Instrumentals are usually very melodic. Jeez.

 

Instrumentals are boring and put me to sleep. My ears don't work as well when sleeping. Sorry.

 

No, but honestly I think instrumentals are a waste of time in rock music. They are fine as a classical piece or a score for a film/show, but I have no use for them otherwise. There is never a point in my life when I actively want to put on an instrumental to listen to it. I love RUSH, but like none of their entirely instrumental compositions.

Okay. The fact remains that a melody can be played on any instrument. It don't need words.

 

That is fine, but by the definition of the word CATCHY in regards to ROCK MUSIC (not classical, not jazz, no other forms of primarily instrumental music) is almost exclusively used to describe the VOCAL MELODY. I'm not making this shit up. Ask anyone who is not specifically a RUSH fan, but just generally likes rock music to list you the 10 songs they find to be most catchy and they will list you a bunch of songs with vocal melodies. That is kind of what rock music, and especially popular rock music, is all about.

Nope. Riffs and licks are very catchy. All the way back to Chuck Berry. Rhythm and groove are incredibly catchy. Expand and accept!

 

I am certainly not going to accept something ridiculous just because you think it is right. Go ahead and ask your not RUSH fan friends to list you what they think are catchy rock songs and see how many instrumentals they mention. My bet is zero. Maybe you should accept the fact your idea of what is catchy fails at identifying what most people enjoy in rock music.

 

Oh and I listen to Iron Maiden who have plenty of large instrumentals parts within songs, but I know that Rime Of The Ancient Mariner isn't catchy, while Run To The Hills is. That is not to say which song I like better as a composition (Rime), it has to do with understanding the conventions of catchy rock music.

I often have the second section of this Maiden song going through my head, Catchy as hell...