Writing Hooks

[nowaysj]

If something sounds good there is a reason for it and it can be replicated if the reason is found.

I'm with you really, and I'm not trying to dis you or anything like that. Thank you sincerely for your posts up there, very helpful. But the above statement is largely false. You can analyze a good hook, you can analyze a hundred good hooks. That analysis can lead to an understanding of why those hooks work. BUT, that knowledge will not enable you to write a good hook.

In my opinion at least.

By your theory, you could analyze a wide assortment of good hooks, and then just crank out the hooks from there. You could make a hundred a day. In a year you could copyright the next millenia's good hooks!

And then moving onto to the dubstep specific issues, how is music theory going to explain why a one/two note bassline works, when it is really the texture and space that is forming the hook?

[madmeesh]

If something sounds good there is a reason for it and it can be replicated if the reason is found.

I'm with you really, and I'm not trying to dis you or anything like that. Thank you sincerely for your posts up there, very helpful. But the above statement is largely false. You can analyze a good hook, you can analyze a hundred good hooks. That analysis can lead to an understanding of why those hooks work. BUT, that knowledge will not enable you to write a good hook.

In my opinion at least.

By your theory, you could analyze a wide assortment of good hooks, and then just crank out the hooks from there. You could make a hundred a day. In a year you could copyright the next millenia's good hooks!

And then moving onto to the dubstep specific issues, how is music theory going to explain why a one/two note bassline works, when it is really the texture and space that is forming the hook?

Oh man. This! Analysis does not equal abillity to compose.

And then the best dubstep hooks are, like nowaysj says, often beyond the scope of music theory, or more specifically, "beneath" it. Nice, tight 1 or 2 (I like a good 3 myself) note basslines are often what give a dubstep tune its power, and this comes from proper bass weight, texture, and spacing it out to achieve a rhythmic hook.

[Sharmaji]

hooks are essentially what you go away humming to yourself. in dubstep, that's not necesarrily the melody. it can be the bassline, or something more abstract.

I think of something like geiom's "shocks on the rocks" and i hum the digi-bongo bit up top to myself.

that open-endedness of what the hook is in dubstep-- some melding of rhythm/sound/space-- was/is/will continue to be the ESSENCE of it. the congas in "the goat stare"... the chords in "humber", etc.

[deadly_habit]

listen to influences and keep it simple and catchy

just dug this one out for influence and how a tune should be now
&


old influences and tunes are great

seems unrelated but this was influence for pusherman one on shift vinyl somehow made bassline based off this tune

[kaiori breathe]

I'm with you really, and I'm not trying to dis you or anything like that. Thank you sincerely for your posts up there, very helpful. But the above statement is largely false. You can analyze a good hook, you can analyze a hundred good hooks. That analysis can lead to an understanding of why those hooks work. BUT, that knowledge will not enable you to write a good hook.

I'll cite an example to try to prove my point here (not trying to argue or anything, just trying to back up what I'm saying in the hopes of maybe making people believe me on this one because I really do feel what I'm saying is quite true):

There's a part of a hook in a song called overkill by men at work. It's really simple: 5 different notes in total - all descending, the reason it works is because it creates suspense. Let's take the notes C,B,G,E, C,B,G,D. (I don't think this is in the same key as the men at work one, but it's the same pattern and the same intervals are used) So first off we have the C,B,G,E sequence. So we have the E note in our head. Then what happens is the C,B,G,D kicks in and you get to the D where there's a degree of suspense created because it feels like either we should have landed on E or at the very least the D should move up to that E. But it doesn't and we're stuck on it, subliminally we want it to resolve by moving up to the E. So it keeps our attention. Plus it's only really 5 notes in total so it's very catchy. As an added bonus it's direction is obvious so it feels like we're going somewhere even if we don't fully get where we want to be. The key to a good hook is something memorable, the key to a great hook is not giving the listener exactly what they want.

Let's look at a Spice Girls hook (cheesy example, but I don't care the spice girls are fucking kick ass no matter what you people say) I think this is from 'when two become one' :

B C G G E D (Again this may not be in the same key as the spice girls one but it's the same pattern and it's the same intervals that are used) Why does this one work? Ok well, once again, we have a clear direction, we move up, then down, but not so far down as to reach the same point we started at, so over all we're going up. The direction is clear. The hook is memorable again because there isn't really a whole lot to remember it's only 5 notes in total, again. There's also something interesting in this melody. Going from B to C is a fairy small interval, but going from C to G is quite a leap. So there's a very nice unexpected turn in this melody. The leap is safe because the melody doesn't really establish itself (2 notes isn't enough to establish itself, especially at the speed they're played) till it hits the G. So rather than sounding strange or jarring it sounds quite nice, as if the first two notes were just leading us gently towards that G where we could kick back and chill.

I could go through a few more but it's late.

So how do we use this information?

Ok, well we've established that hooks are about direction, possible unexpected turns, giving the listener almost what he/she wants but never quite exactly what he/she wants and possibly creating or releasing suspense. So maybe we should try utilizing that knowledge?

With this in mind I've thrown a short hook together in under five minutes using fruity loops (bear in mind I did this in 5 minutes so it's not amazing. I'm not trying to say I'm the lord mayor of all things hooky. I'm just trying to show that looking at other peoples hooks and analyzing them and trying to replicate what's going on can really help your own writing. I've said it before in this thread, everything in music works or creates an emotion or a feeling for a reason. If you look deep enough you'll find that reason and you'll be able to replicate it.)

http://rapidshare.com/files/374093931/5 ... k.wav.html < This is it (it's a small file only like 1000kb or something. 4 bars and it's pretty simple and it's purely based on the ideas I described in those two examples.

If I were to do some variations on this and extend it a little and do a bit of work on the sounds then it would serve as a nice little chilled chorus. This little 4 bar melody is pure theory and mechanics. So please, please, can people stop telling what is and isn't possible with theory now that I've essentially proved that everything can be reduced to a simple system of analysis,understanding and replication?

EDIT: Also, I should mention you might not like the melodic style but that's how I write. So sorry for not providing the FILLLTHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! That you know and love.

By your theory, you could analyze a wide assortment of good hooks, and then just crank out the hooks from there. You could make a hundred a day. In a year you could copyright the next millenia's good hooks!

You could. Many people make a living this way; writing pop songs.

And then moving onto to the dubstep specific issues, how is music theory going to explain why a one/two note bassline works, when it is really the texture and space that is forming the hook?

Like I said before I couldn't explain why it works with regards to theory without hearing it, I could only take a bit of a random guessing stab at it. If I heard the track I might be able to explain why it sounds good from a theoretical point of view but without hearing it I can only guess.

Also just so everyone knows I'm not trying to get at anybody here, I'm just trying to back up my previous statements when they're being questioned with some examples and evidence. So sorry in advance if this riles anybody up, although I don't know why it would.

Everything I've said in this thread is true. So you guys can believe me if you want really, it's up to you, you can struggle to write a hook and maybe one in ten times hit it on the mark, or you can take the time to look at other people's hooks, and try to understand why they work so well, and spend some time trying to recreate that until you have it down and maybe get it right 7/10 times then you can come back and tell me which way worked out better for you... It's up to you guys really, I just tried to give some advice I thought might help. I think if you give what I've said a go you'll see results though.

(Once again, I'm not proclaiming myself to be lord mayor of all things hooky, I'm just saying you'll see results.)

[nowaysj]

http://rapidshare.com/files/374093931/5 ... k.wav.html

I don't think there is a hook here, I am sorry. It is almost actively passive, blending into a miasma of melodic mush.

By your theory, you could analyze a wide assortment of good hooks, and then just crank out the hooks from there. You could make a hundred a day. In a year you could copyright the next millenia's good hooks!

You could. Many people make a living this way; writing pop songs.

Yeah people write pop songs, and occasionally they create a real hook. But how many in a lifetime? Few. Given all the money that was at stake in the pop game a couple of decades ago, if you could have just sat down and written an unending barrage of quality hooks (Beatles don't count ), it would have been done. The fact that it hasn't been done, is pretty fair proof that it can't be done.

[kaiori breathe]

I don't think there is a hook here, I am sorry. It is almost actively passive, blending into a miasma of melodic mush.

This is getting ridiculous I actually just think you're trolling now. But I'll throw out a response anyway.

First off, it was thrown together in about 5 minutes, I was just using it as a simple example. Sorry if you wanted me to produce pure gold in that limited amount of time

Equally I already explained I write differently from most of you. Hooks to me aren't just one melody line. A hook for me is an amalgamation of several instruments all working together. So sorry if it doesn't consign to your idea of a hook, for me it is, and if I took the time to clean it up I could probably do something with it. But clearly you've missed the point of the exercise. It wasn't about writing fucking gold in 5 minutes, it was about creating a simple usable hook in 5 minutes based on what I'd learned from two others. Which I did.

Whether or not you think it's useable or not isn't really the point, since it's stylistically not what you'd write or listen to anyway. The point is that for me, it is a hook that could be used given a little time and work.

Yeah people write pop songs, and occasionally they create a real hook. But how many in a lifetime? Few. Given all the money that was at stake in the pop game a couple of decades ago, if you could have just sat down and written an unending barrage of quality hooks (Beatles don't count ), it would have been done. The fact that it hasn't been done, is pretty fair proof that it can't be done.

[/quote]

You are aware that there are plenty of people who write pop songs essentially as a career?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Warren < Her entire career has pretty much been built around writing great fucking hooks. You don't get that many by applying some idiotic hap hazard hit and miss attitude, you get that many by learning how they work and recreating it. I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong, and for somebody without a working theory knowledge to try to argue what is or isn't possible with theory is kind of preposterous.

The problem here I think is that you're misunderstanding me, I didn't say every hook you write will be fucking gold right off the bat, I said there's a system and rules for writing them and if you follow the rules you'll write better hooks and if you analyze what's happening in other hooks you'll be able to recreate the feeling that are created by them.

[kejk]

I'm staying out of this, but Kaiori, that 5 minute hook sample you posted was amazing!

You should totally be my teacher!







While I re-read my post, it sounds semi sarcastic, but I'm serious

[nowaysj]

Whether or not you think it's useable or not isn't really the point, since it's stylistically not what you'd write or listen to anyway.

It is the point. You analyzed two hooks and attempted to generate a third based upon the first two. But the third fails as a hook. A hook is a small bit of music that is nearly instantly apprehendable and memorable in the musical mind. What you wrote simply isn't. I will never struggle to get that line out of my head, quite the opposite, I'd struggle to recall it.

I'm not attempting to diminish you personally, musically, intellectually, or in any way, so please don't be offended.

[kaiori breathe]

It is the point. You analyzed two hooks and attempted to generate a third based upon the first two.

And I did that, I used what was learnt from the first two, I used the same ideas, every part of the piece I wrote, moves up in some way or another. There are some notes that resolve there are some that don't. And I used the same step and a leap idea from the spice girls hook. So I succeeded in analyzing, understanding and applying. What? You wanted hook gold in 5 minutes?

But the third fails as a hook. A hook is a small bit of music that is nearly instantly apprehendable and memorable in the musical mind. What you wrote simply isn't. I will never struggle to get that line out of my head, quite the opposite, I'd struggle to recall it.

1., it's not in a musical context, if I developed this into a full song it would be easier to remember due to the repetition.

2., I made it in 5 minutes, like ive said before time and time again, at no point have I claimed to be a master of writing hooks, so for something I threw together in five minutes it's not half bad. I'd obviously spend much more time on it and make it a lot better, but I was trying to do something quickly to show that it's easy to get the basics down really quickly if you have looked at other hooks that you enjoy and made an effort to understand and apply what's been learnt.

3., It's not the point. As I've said before stylistically it's not what you're into, I don't like death metal so somebody could write the greatest death metal hook of all time and I'm probably going to turn my nose up at it. A hook doesn't need to make every person that listens to it hum it, just your intended audience and I wouldn't consider you or a lot of the people on this forum as my intended audience since I don't write anything that you guys would really like, there are exceptions I guess, but for the most part I don't fit in here stylistically. You could write the greatest dubstep hook in the world and somebody who's music appreciation doesn't go much beyond happy hardcore will never appreciate it. All I'm really saying here is that for the style I write in that hook is valid and usable and wouldn't be considered shit or a failure by the people who would usually listen to the style that I write in.

I'm not attempting to diminish you personally, musically, intellectually, or in any way, so please don't be offended.

I'm not offended and I get you're just trying to state your views. I just think your objections are little too petty and picky. And I don't think they're based on knowledge, rather on what you want to believe. I don't think you have the right to take some of the stances you have, with regards to what is or isn't achievable with theory, without actually knowing the theory.

Anyway, I don't really care at this point whether you believe me or not when I say all techniques in music follow formulas. I've pointed out that there are plenty of people who build careers essentially out of writing hooks and you've tried to shoot me down. I've tried to show quickly that you can get a basic hook written a lot faster with theory and analysis and that there are tricks to writing them and you've tried to shoot me down.

I figure if you want to believe music comes from some magical realm in the soul you can but you're doing yourself a great disservice and you should take the time to learn the theory rather than just dismissing what it can or can't do without actually knowing.

[nowaysj]

I was attempting to engage in a discussion about hooks, but I'm tired of your insecure/immature insults. Peace out.

[kaiori breathe]

I was attempting to engage in a discussion about hooks, but I'm tired of your insecure/immature insults. Peace out.

I wasn't trying to insult you. I'm sorry if you feel that way.

[stompzi]

I'm just saying that good music cannot be reduced to theory, just like biology cannot be reduced to physics. There's a magic there. Even songs that formally are very simple like Night can be very interesting on other levels. And often times in dance music, the simpler the better!

Lots of things feel like magic - doesn't mean they aren't rooted in logic.

He never said the theory had to be complex..