>what i'm to say is that if you picked up your acoustic
>guitar or sat at th piano and played "hit me baby one more
>time" or "i want it that way" or "i'll never break your
>heart," you'll find that they are actually good songs

they'd be repetitive. flashy production masks repetitive songwriting techniques, which is deliberate. ultra-pop songs need to be sufficiently repetitive to become brands and icons...instead of words and melody.

that's why many of those have condensed verses and a dance-break instead of a bridge or middle eight. need to make room for the next name-brand hook.

i'm not saying they aren't harmonically interesting. the best pop songs usually do quite remarkable things with melody and harmony. but they use them kind of like a derivative artist might paint a dripping clock or make a huge latex bathtub and deflate it. you want people to RECOGNIZE harmonic, melodic, or rhythmic interest. but you don't want to develop it, or the listener would have to keep paying attention.

since the rise of hiphop and it's total penetration of pop, that awesome potential for translation (covers, stripped-down versions, etc.) has kind of disappeared.

alek
____________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What? What?