A few of my friends and I got into a debate about whether the lyrics and vocal skills of a band or the instruments are more important. My friends, who play instruments in a band, are content to listen to a guy scream his head off as long as the drums and guitar parts are okay. I, on the other hand, pay a lot more attention to the singer and the lyrics (s)he is singing than to the instruments. My question is: Which is more important to you, the lyrics and vocals or the instruments?
When it’s a Yoko Ono album, the instrumentals. Definitely the instrumentals. PLEASE, dear God, let it be heavy on intrumentals.
Is “both” not an option?
If pressed to pick, I’d say lyrics.
I’m no musician, so it’s harder for me to appreciate an amazing guitar riff than a clever lyric. And I certainly love a good lyricist.
I guess it’s like that old cliche says: “I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like!”
Outside of classical music, I typically find I appreciate music more if it has at least some vocals. For instance, I enjoy electronica like Underworld over more ambient music. If only for the fact that it seems more accessable due to the accompaniment of (albeit limited) vocals.
But… there are certainly plenty of songs that I enjoy for their sheer energy, like early punk, on a gut level. I can appreciate these songs without really being all that impressed by thought provoking lyrics like “gabba gabba hey!”
Boy, the amount of times I’ve had this discussion. And the reason I’ve had this discussion so many times is because I bring it up all the time. And the reason I bring it up all the time is because I’m looking for someone else in this whole world who understands my point of view that the music (not the lyrics) is more important!
No, I don’t actually believe that. The word "importance"has no relevance. The word “taste” certainly does.
I strongly (more strongly than almost anyone I know) prefer the music (harmonies, melodies, rhythms, timbres, etc) to the lyrical content. I am NOT anti-lyrics. When I actually do read good lyrics, they can touch me deeply. For some reason though, they often go right through me. Most people, it seems, just naturally hear the words when they listen to music with text. I don’t. It actually takes me great effort to focus on the lyrics. I’ve had friends say “OK, check out the lyrics in this song, you’ll dig it”, then 2 minutes into it ask “are you listening?” at which point I become aware that I have not heard a single word.
Maybe it’s my ADHD. I am a musician BTW. And I do wish I could appreciate lyrics more. In fact I’ve actually started to in the past couple years much more so. But, the answer for me is undoubtedly - the instruments (including the vocals, regardless of the text).
I’m a big fan of good lyrics, but bad lyrics are a heck of a lot easier to ignore than bad music. A half-decent lyric combined with an amazing piece of music will take on vast amounts of meaning (eg The Sex Pistols, the Misfits). Even if William Blake was Matchbox 20’s lyricist, I still couldn’t stand listening to it, because the music is so lame.
I count the voice as an instrument, though. This applies at all times, but is particularly clear when the singing is in a foreign language, and the sounds of the voice combine with the instrumentation to create something special. For example, someone like Johnny Cash could sing the phone book and it would still sound great.
But don’t just take my word on it, check out what the late great Sterling Morrison has to say on the subject.
HenrySpencer
My opinion is, it’s the song that counts, or at least it should be. The whole, music and lyrics, taken together. I’m a musician who plays several instruments (but mostly drums) as well as sings. The idea is to achieve a balance. There are exceptions, of course, but a good balance between the words and music is what I try to achieve as a songwriter. This of course varies widely from one artist to the next.
I prefer the instrumental parts. Primarily because, as a musician, I feel that it’s a lot harder to create an original and stunning piece of music than it is to sing it. Now, I have a horrible voice…just wasn’t born into it, but I can sing on key. Now, what makes the instrumental part more amazing to me is that most everyone can sing. Not always beautifully, not always on key, but they can sing. I respect outstanding vocalists, but when I watch and listen to an amazing guitarist, or a classical violinist, or a jazz trumpeter, or a huge percussion ensemble, I just am awed. I play percussion, piano, guitar, and a little trumpet, and I can really appreciate how truly difficult it is to be really good. On the other hand, singing is something that everyone just does in their spare time. I must say that good lyrics impress me, and I wish I could write songs with great lyrics, but I love a ton of songs with great music and horrible lyrics, but I don’t love any songs with horrible music and great lyrics. I also have so much more respect for popular artists who write their own music. People who just sing pop music annoy me. The songwriters deserve all the credit for their hits. (Opera and broadway singers are different)
Jman
The instrumentals. If well done, a song can do without lyrics and still be moving. To me, it’s the music behind the lyrics that makes a song special.
Sorry for going out on a limb here, but I loathe lyrics in general. I prefer music that doesn’t have any.
For the record, I’m pretty cynical and can’t seem to find meaning or sincerity in really dumb poetry. If I do like the lyrics, they’re usually by gifted, clever writers like Frank Zappa or Nina Hagen.
So, in other words, the music matters to me.
Surely it depends on the music! In Jazz, the emphasis is on the music, in folk, it’s the lyrics. (OK, generalisations there, but you get the drift. You can subdivide - eg in jazz, Charlie Parker tracks are all about the music, and even when he’s playing with Sarah Vaughan, the actual lyrics aren’t as important. However, listen to Ella Fitzgerald singing the Cole Porter songbook, and as amazing as the music is, the lyrics become very important, and the overall effect would lose a lot with lesser lyrics (or a lesser singer for that matter)
I like an even mix of vocals and music unless one particular part is really strong. Sometimes the vocals need to be in front while others the music should lead. I do some amateur type stuff, running sound boards and all, and it really depends on what is being played, the context, (church vs. a heavy metal concert), and the relative strength of the band members. I’m often guilty of letting rhythm instruments ‘lead’ (or at least be more ‘out front’) because those musicians are the best. Similarly if I have a great vocalist I set them out front. A side note is its not always about highlighting the good, but rather disguising the bad or weakness in a band. I can take great lyrics with good vocals (Megadeth, Virgin Steele or Black Sabbath), great vocals with decent lyrics (Theatre of Tragedy) or preferably great lyrics and vocals (Iron Maiden). Sometimes the music takes the lead over the vocals (Slayer or Megadeth). NEVER should IMAGE be a part of the deal (Cradle of Filth, Poison, etc…)!
Well I take a little different view from what I’ve seen. I don’t need the lyrics to be great, but the damn vocalist HAS to be fairly clear. I can’t stand the “cookie monster” vocals that some bands have. There are bands that sound good but the vocals kill it. Iced Earth is one of those bands. This is why I love bands like Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Helloween, Golden Earring, Gamma Ray. I’ve heard lots of bands that sound good but the vocals kill it. The only band that kinda strays from the vocalist sounding good would be Motorhead, but even then I can understand him at least and he’s not growling.
Now that I think about it the vocals ARE an instrament so I guess it would have to insturaments for me cause I can put up with some stupid lyrics if the music is good.
As has been pointed out, it depends a lot on the style of music being listened to. When it comes to my tastes, I think the lyrics and music are usually equal in importance.
Sometimes it doesn’t matter, as with early REM, where the lyrics are largely non-intelligble, used instead as part of the overall sound. But if the lyrics are intelligible, then they should avoid being banal and inane.
I remember when the band Bush first enjoyed widespread popularity. I saw the video for Everything Zen on MTV, and thought the guitar work was quite catchy. Then I listened a bit to what the singer was saying. That did it for that tune. Stream of conciousness and dadaistic words can work to great affect, (witness Homer’s “I just ate 3 mushrooms” thread for an excellent example), yet rarely do.
As far as the schlockmeisters such as Celine Dion, et al, I fail to even see the point. While it’s not essential for an artist to take what they’re saying too seriously, when the artist in question is so removed from what they’re singing, the result conjures up the sheen of pure commodity, something which rarely appeals to me in music. Sincerity counts for a lot, whether the artist is being dead serious or just having the audience on. Someone who’s sole purpose for performing is to ship units and be famous and wealthy will rarely grace my CD player.
And I don’t always understand what a particular artist may be trying to say, but again, sincerity and honesty in their attempt to say it goes an awful long way.
Conversely, I’ve heard releases which had great lyrics coupled with what I considered to be boring or facile music. While I may appreciate those releases on an intellectual level, they too will rarely spend much time in the CD player. The music I enjoy most usually engages on levels both intellectual and visceral.
Are we talking about the same Matthew Barlow here, I thought Something Wicked was a masterpiece. I mean he’s not Geoff Tate but he’s not exactly Chris Barnes either or are you saying he just doesn’t fit?
I’m saying to me he just doesn’t fit. For me that is. I tried listening to Something Wicked a while ago and did’t like it then. Then a few months ago I decided to try again and got the “best of” CD and listened to that for a few days and just didn’t like the way the vocals came out.
The same thing happend with the new singer in Priest, I just don’t like the way he sings, he starts out clear and then starts growling. That type of stuff just doesn’t do it for me. I also don’t like Fear Factory, Pantara and other bands like that.
Like I said before the lyrics don’t have to be the greatest, but if the vocalist doesn’t fit then the vocals stick out to much for me and I don’t like that. If Bruce Dickinson started growling I don’t think I’d like that much either.