[HN Gopher] Popular songs are simpler and more repetitive than t...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Popular songs are simpler and more repetitive than they used to be
        
       Author : nradov
       Score  : 38 points
       Date   : 2024-03-30 18:33 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.science.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.science.org)
        
       | dinkblam wrote:
       | thanks for objectively confirming subjective prejudices
        
       | tiptup300 wrote:
       | It seems a lot of vocal older folks will use this as evidence of
       | an inferior future. I believe instead that this is probably
       | moreso evidence that the systems in power that spread music have
       | only grown more efficient both in creating profit as well putting
       | out homogeneous simple music.
        
         | drewcoo wrote:
         | If "more efficient" means fewer, tighter oligopolies, then you
         | and the "vocal older folks" may both be right.
        
       | zachmu wrote:
       | Interesting to think of this as an analog to refinement culture,
       | where instead of endless elaboration and adding complexity, they
       | are stripping away all unnecessary elements to discover the
       | platonic ideal of marketable music.
        
         | ErigmolCt wrote:
         | But refinement culture is all about high quality...
        
           | n4r9 wrote:
           | I'd not heard of refinement culture until now. I Googled it
           | and it appears to be to do with how sports strategies and
           | advertisements are finely tuned to squeeze out the maximum
           | probability of success. Which sounds like "heavily optimizing
           | for a certain metric" is a better description than "high
           | quality", and applies also to pop music.
        
       | raymondh wrote:
       | A lot of classic popular songs also had low information content:
       | 
       | https://happyhollyproject.com/2014/04/27/flowcharts-and-song...
        
       | jl6 wrote:
       | > according to an analysis of more than 350,000 top 40 hits
       | 
       | Wow, that's a lot of "top 40 hits". More than 134 new "hits" per
       | week for the last 50 years! Are these really all "popular" songs?
       | Because that number seems like the analysis must cut well into
       | the long tail too.
        
         | dist-epoch wrote:
         | Probably multiple top 40 charts from multiple countries.
        
       | dist-epoch wrote:
       | Evolution at work.
       | 
       | The music industry is so much more competitive today, in the past
       | very few could afford to make music, now anybody can do it.
       | 
       | There is so much supply now that bad songs die much more quickly
       | and only the fittest survive.
        
         | seattle_spring wrote:
         | The article is about simplistic styles though. There are an
         | enormous amount of "bad" songs that don't seem to die.
        
           | dist-epoch wrote:
           | How can a song which is liked by tens of millions of people
           | be "bad".
        
       | ErigmolCt wrote:
       | Popular songs are addapting to a mainstream modern listener which
       | requires repetitive melodies that are easily memorable
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | So why did the preferences of the mainstream modern listener
         | change?
        
           | AddLightness wrote:
           | Decrease in cultural homogeneity and increase in diversity.
           | Have to keep simplifying to appeal to a broader and broader
           | audience.
        
       | crowcroft wrote:
       | The medium (or in this case the distribution) is the message.
       | 
       | This isn't artist's fault, or 'this generations's' fault. This is
       | an industry being pushed by a few algorithms that control the
       | diffusion of new music to people which are optimising for this
       | kind of thing.
        
       | noduerme wrote:
       | It's also the case that song structures have shifted as recording
       | and songwriting has become more often sampling and copy/paste
       | than capturing an entire live performance. A lot of top 40 songs
       | now couldn't even exist without the digital tools that enabled
       | them. The use of sampled repeated vocals as background lines
       | might skew the results a bit.
        
       | dhosek wrote:
       | A pretty information free article. I would note that looking at
       | the first singles from the Beatles, they were simple repetitive
       | songs (three chords? too complex, let's do two instead!) Add in
       | that their baseline of the 70s also would be the apex of the
       | popularity of progressive rock.
        
       | jddj wrote:
       | Pop music and literature both reached a peak in formulaic-ness
       | just in time for the LLMs to codify it.
       | 
       | Maybe if they push it far enough and hard enough in that
       | direction we'll get some cultural pushback / revival?
        
       | f6v wrote:
       | You can't blame people. Our ancestors probably went into a state
       | of trance with much simpler "music". The brains didn't change all
       | that much since then.
        
       | teddyh wrote:
       | Music Was Better in the Sixties, Man (2012)
       | <https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/music-was-bett...>
        
       | kjkjadksj wrote:
       | This all depends on your era of course. How many 12 bar blues
       | songs are there I wonder, hundreds of thousands perhaps?
        
       | Rury wrote:
       | I'm not sure they make the correct conclusion (ie that people
       | necessarily prefer simpler music when facing options).
       | 
       | I think it's more that... to be popular, you need to fit the
       | tastes of many people, and the best way to do that is by being
       | generic, rather than specialized or niche. So pop music is
       | essentially about finding the common denominators in tastes, and
       | sticking to only those features. Obviously that's going to lead
       | to music which is simpler, more repetitive, and therefore broadly
       | appealing. And it's the music industry which selects for this, as
       | it's the most profitable formula (and the reason for the trend of
       | things getting simpler over time).
        
       | empath-nirvana wrote:
       | Songs are a lot more than their lyrics and there are a great many
       | wonderful and popular songs that have _no lyrics at all_. Lyrical
       | complexity isn't really a good measure of the overall complexity
       | of a song.
       | 
       | Anyway, a lot of this because of the rise of dance music which is
       | often more about rhythm and timbre, and vocals if they exist at
       | all are often background and used more as texture than as the
       | driving force behind the song.
        
       | deldelaney wrote:
       | How soon until AI replaces simple Autotune Kanye? With deep
       | Autotune Kanye.
        
       | c6400sc wrote:
       | _Researchers compiled lyrics to songs from five musical genres
       | (rap, country, pop, R &B, and rock) that were released between
       | 1970 and 2020._
       | 
       | This is an interesting period to sample. The late 60s and early
       | 70s were a high watermark for pop and rock music. Pop music
       | evolved considerably from the 40s (Crooners and jazz-dominant
       | hits), through the 50s and early 60s ("the American Songbook"),
       | to the emergence of psychedelic rock and the cerebral singer-
       | songwriter in the 60s. The increased prominence of genres light
       | rock in the 70s and hair metal in the 80s would drag complexity
       | down.
       | 
       | I think if they took the period 1920-2020, the trend would not be
       | prominent.
        
       | freitzkriesler2 wrote:
       | Glad someone finally quantified what everyone is obviously
       | noticing.
       | 
       | At this juncture, since the entertainment industry can't take
       | risks anymore for new ideas, it's high tine that AI simply
       | displace it entirely.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-30 23:00 UTC)