Talk:Catchiness

Merge

The majority of the content here frames "Catchiness" as the psychological phenomenon of memorable tunes, but none of the references are from scientific sources. The Earworm article is a much better discussion of the topic. Thus I will delete most of the content here and merge anything helpful to the Earworm article, then set up a redirect. Someone may wish to reinstate this page if they wish to discuss catchiness in a sense more general than music and source it from psychological texts. geordie (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Article Evaluation

In terms of organization, the article is concise, clear, and easy to digest. However, it is quite underdeveloped and includes only one section that explores several possible explanations for catchiness. This 'Analysis' section is well-organized and draws from a variety of scholarly and reputable sources to form an understanding of the psychology of 'catchiness'. With this in mind, including other sections that provide more information on catchiness from different angles can improve this article by a large margin. Possible sections include: a section that focuses on the biological and scientific processes that make an 'earworm' possible, a section that details any cures for 'catchiness', or a section detailing the effect of this phenomenon in popular culture and mainstream media. Parouz (talk) 18:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

First part is not the case for me

"The article explains that it has a chorus which is 'melodically easy on the ear, simple enough to stay in your head all day, and is topically appealing to Jepsen’s target pop demographic.' " However, the article can explain this, but what it is explaining in the first instance is something that isn't true - at least isn't true for me. The song is *not* melodically easy on my ear. When I saw 'melodically easy on the ear', I wondered whose ear? It says "the" ear, as if there is only one and admits therefore of only one perception being possible when this is not in fact the case. I do not know whether to amend the article, because it could be that, if something is melodically easy to the vast majority of people's ears, and this song might well be this, because it is hugely popular - the very kind of music it seems that I often detest - then Wikipedia on the basis of most people might see me as a heretic worthy of no contribution into any debate as to whether this is easy on the ear or not. The general consensus is taken to establish the truth and therefore that would be seen as neutral POV, even if it is totally biased from my perspective by putting the perception of the person who wrote that statement as if it is universally true when in fact an alternative perception exists under which it is irritating to the ear (namely my ear). I suspect, as many people would agree with it being easy on the ear, because it no doubt is for lots of people - I can now see that these polished and smooth vocals that are the very irritating thing it seems to myself, that are extremely hooky, are therefore the thing that lots of people remember and has them buying this music.

I seem to like a lot of music including that which charted many years ago and therefore I thought it was pop music due to being in the charts, actually not having broad appeal as seems a lot of it was lower down the chart or else entered one week high and then had a huge drop - showing it never really appealed beyond the fanbase. This seems to have been music that nearly all of it has a raw style that I like, is called rock music by pop music fans, that I thought I was (and indeed like the vast majority of number 1 UK hits 1952-approx. 1997) but to me is pop music and it seems to be the vocal style that is polished and is catchy that is what has lots of people liking it and easy on their ears. It is that very fact that something that irritates me or I otherwise dislike lodges in my head and I can't get rid of it that has me being more and more irritated by songs when I don't like them and has in the past caused me to be temporarily unable to walk properly when a song I dislike is lodged in my head - the only solution I have ever found is to avoid ever hearing them at all, although this is difficult when 'everyone' around you keeps playing the songs and putting the radio on and playing them. On this occasion, I went to YouTube to hear the song, to see if it was easy on the ears, as stated and I found it is that type of vocal that irritates me, as such I ended the video - I managed to last 15 seconds. It is therefore an unlistenable song to me, as I can't manage to get through it and do not to wish to risk this song being in my head for any length of time, yet alone all day, as I just know it will drag me down psychologically into depression rather than myself being happy singing songs that I like and that are sidelined by corporate radio stations as it is now clear very little of the music I like has mass appeal.

I wondered what was meant by "easy on the ear" and therefore I checked a definition of the phrase online. It has come back saying "easy on the ear

informal pleasant to listen to. 'His singing is easy on the ear.' " However, this song by Carly Rae Jepson - I assume it is the pop version (that I have heard a few seconds of whilst the vocal style in it threatened to irritate me) that is being referred to and not some dance remix that will be fine for me to hear and pose me no problem at all - is not pleasant for me to listen to because it is irritating and vocals that irritate me are not pleasant for me to listen to. They are instead unpleasant to listen to or, even, impossible to listen to/impossible to continue to listen to - as proved to be the case here as I switched it off having managed to last 15 seconds into the song - and therefore do not meet the definition of the phrase as given there.

They are said to be "melodically easy..." However, I note the definition that I given online of the word "melody". It is said to mean "a sequence of single notes that is musically satisfying; a tune." However, I did not hear any tune in the song and, as for the notes used, they are *not* musically satisfying to me, instead they are unsatisfying when I do not like the song. Therefore, as whatever sequence of single notes that is in the part of the song that I have heard - and I have no doubt the rest will be in the same vein, because I just know how this sort of song that irritates me is going to progress in the rest of it - is not musically satisfying to me and therefore not within the meaning of the word "melody" as I am reading it there.

The chorus - where is the chorus? I would not even know, due to not hearing it, what the chorus was, but on the basis of this singing style, that is just about the only one that I dislike, used by so many popular artists, the chorus will prove to irritate me, especially if it is catchy. It is not easy on my ear. Extreme metal is easy on my ear instead, as is non-mainstream country (as opposed to pop country where the vocalists seem to hit the precise note that irritates me) and hardcore rave music (that isn't the 90% of hardcore rave music being made today that has that poppy vocal sound to it or else the poppy sound of twenty years ago even if this itself in the commercial stuff, and yet it isn't because it is also not charting, that poses as rave music these days as opposed to the minority 10% that I appear to be listening to and being misled earlier that the scene generally is still good). Also easy on my ear is the sound of a fork being scraped against a glass repeatedly, apparently the second most disliked sound according to research - obviously lots of people have different perception to me on the autism spectrum and also comfortable for me is the sound of nails down an actual chalkboard - I can listen to that, with no problem and without being irritated by it, for at least an hour - I could have lasted much longer and felt I could live with the continual sound of that never removed at all in the rest of my life - but did eventually have to do something else, such as getting food to eat, else I would still be there now on the YouTube video listening to the nails and confirming that they are, indeed, easy on my ear as they cause me no bad reaction at all and are easy, for me, to listen to. aspaa (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Correction: I have been misled. The song is easy on the ear, my ear, when I am listening to at least one of the numerous remixes of the song that exist. On this occasion I have found the Almighty Club Mix on YouTube and I can now understand the song as I can hear what I assume is the actual chorus in it, I am only able to listen to it via another version, and can sing along to and enjoy this version of the song and possibly every version except the pop version. It doesn't irritate me in the dance mixes that doubtless are not the song and even ruin the song for lots of people as the dance version doesn't have mass appeal and likely misses the point of the original song. Which seems good for me as I miss the point of the original anyway due to failing to get context from it and no emotional resonance as I don't hear subtle tones of voice in people's voices that tell nearly everyone else what emotion someone is experiencing and resonates with them. Undoubtedly, the statement that the catchiness spreads by resonating similarly from one mind to the next, if that next mind is mine, is not the case as this does not spread similarly to my mind that works very differently - there is no emotion that resonates to me as I do not get it. The pop version, which would risk being in my head all day unwanted by me and irritating me, and which I have no doubt appeals to its target pop demographic, comes across to me as being twee. It is too nice for me to like it and therefore somewhat unbearable to me it seems. My emotional experiences work in a very different way, usually the complete opposite to lots of people on matters such as this. They are wrong, as the only minds they appear to have thought about are the minds, it seems, of allistic people like likely themselves. aspaa (talk) 21:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)