Skip to content

Bruce Warila: Can Computers Really Analyze Songs For Hit Potential?

(Updated) This guest post comes from consultant and entrepreneur Bruce Warila.  Bruce has studied the technologies and services that measure a song's hit potential. In response to the ASCAP and. Continue reading [https://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2010/11/bruce-warila-can-computers-really-analyze-songs

image from www.istockphoto.com

(Updated) This guest post comes from consultant and entrepreneur Bruce Warila.  Bruce has studied the technologies and services that measure a song's hit potential.

In  response to the ASCAP and HITLAB announcement that basically endorses the  use of algorithms to analyze the hit potential of songs, I thought I  would weigh in on the subject. Proceed with caution…

As  someone that spent the better part of a year evaluating similar  algorithms, technology, services, business models and patents connected  to acoustic analysis and hit potential measurement, I can tell you that  you should proceed with caution when making a purchase or career  decision that involves the utilization of services that sell  computer-based, hit-analysis technology.

It’s fascinating technology, however…

Generally  speaking, the technology is reasonably accurate (my experience: 80%  accurate, and often close enough to my expectations) when it comes to  plotting a song relative to a cluster of preexisting hits and then  rolling the plots into a meaningful score.  However a high score doesn’t  mean you have a hit on your hands, or that “hits” even matter anymore.   Read on…

Here are some pros and cons to consider when evaluating services that use computers and algorithms to evaluate music:

Computer-based hit analyzing technology – the pros…

Targeting.  If  detailed reporting is offered, this technology should show you how  close your song is to clusters of previously recorded hits.  This  information is useful for targeting listeners of similar sounding hit  songs.

Selecting.  You  should also be able to use the information provided to evaluate which  of your songs has the most market potential.  Provided that you believe:  historic success is a reasonable indicator of future potential.

Filtering.  This technology is also useful as a filter.  Even if it only meets  (average) expectations four out of every five tries (80% and then along a  declining slope), in the absence of something better (“better” could be  built), algorithms can definitely cut the size of the haystack down for  someone looking for the needles; especially in a world that creates and  uploads over 1,000,000 recordings a year.

Supplemental information.  For professionals analyzing songs, with the right  reporting/presentation, computerized hit analysis is great (or at least  interesting) supplemental information when paired with market /social  traction data, crowd-sourced vetting data and detailed acoustic  analysis/comparisons.

Computer-based hit analyzing technology – the cons…

Songs that sound like they have been professionally produced or recorded only.  The last time I checked, hit predicting technology was not very useful for evaluating singer/songwriter demos.

Just because it sounds like a hit… There are numerous business and social factors that make a song a hit.  (Read the Song Adoption Formula on Music Think Tank.)  Business execution and promotion weigh heavily  within the hit building formula (if there is such a thing).

Lyrics matter…  The  technology I previously evaluated did not analyze lyrics, although  lyrics as text or as acoustic features can be compared and analyzed by  machines.  Make sure any service you buy can distill out the difference  between lyrics about barking dogs, tuna fish and angry girlfriends.   Your epic song about cracked concrete may sound like a hit, but…

Connected to bullshit… This bullet is not a condemnation of the technology as much as it is a  denunciation of the way I have seen this technology positioned and  pitched to artists in the past.  Listen up.  It doesn’t matter if you  are sitting on the highest scoring song in the history of the earth, you  have more of a chance of propelling yourself to the moon using the  methane from your ass than you have at landing an artist-friendly deal  that guarantees you repeated (more than once), genuine mass-market  exposure.  When anyone sells you exposure (based upon a score or  anything else), go to www.compete.com (it’s accurate enough) and verify the exposure potential of the site,  label or service first; then interview three or four artists that were  previously promised the same thing.

Old paradigm thinking…  Do hits really matter?  When it comes to songs, determining popularity  potential (along a spectrum and within niches) and then matching songs  to taste preferences, and artists to target audiences (through  recommendation), are the technological advancements that should really  matter to the majority of artists (IMHO).

The bottom line..  You can learn something by using/applying this technology wisely,  Just don’t use it for all the wrong reasons.

About Bruce Warila