2. music
  3. 1245276611

Music or Lyrics?

If you ask any "serious" (indie?) pop musician what's the most important aspect of their songs, I am sure they would most/all say: the lyrics. They spend so much time and effort on the words, and view this as "what they are saying," which is, to their mind, the reason for writing the song in the first place. (There was a piece by Suzanne Vega in the NY Times a couple of months back.)

But as listeners, what do we think?

For me, for most songs, the words are pretty much irrelevant. (In fact, I can't recite the full lyrics to any song, and can't even make them out on lots of the music I listen to.)

Instead, it's three things:

1. The musical hook

2. The *sound* of the voice(s)

3. The sound of the instrumentation.

In short, it's all about the music, and very little about the lyrics.

Or, to put it another way: I could imagine lots of different lyrics to many of the songs I love, and the song remains the same. But change the music? It becomes an entirely different song.

For example: Take any early passionate U2 anthem. Surely they could be written about other topics, while retaining the same music? Isn't it the music that makes the song compelling?

To be sure: With many/most great songs, we do sing along, and the words are part of our experience. But is it really their *meaning* that's important, or rather their *sound* in the context of the music as a whole? ---I think the latter, and the words could have been different and the song just as popular and compelling.

There are, I'm sure, some exceptions to this rule, where the words are absolutely crucial to making the song compelling. But not too many, I don't think.
jimjoyce25

Showing 1 response by jimjoyce25

jimjoyce25 OP
215 posts
 
Maybe I can put the point like this:

Real poetry stands alone: It has no need for instrumental background.

But are there any rock lyrics that rise to this level? I don't know of any. Viewed as poetry, rock lyrics, at best, are third rate, or perhaps fifth rate, poetry. Without the music, no one would read them.

I agree with Mark: Good lyrics can make a good song better, a great song even greater. But the value of a pop song is measured by the music, not the words: Without good or great music, no pop song can be good or great, no matter how good the lyrics. And many pop songs can be good or great even with inconsequential lyrics. (The early Beatles being perhaps the best example.)

I think this even holds true of Dylan: IMO both how compelling his voice is (relatively early Dylan) and the quality of the hooks in his music are under-appreciated. There have been compelling covers of his songs that work primarily on musical levels (Along the Watchtower, Mr Tambourine Man, It Ain't Me Babe). However, IMO no one gets the songs emotionally right the way he does, and that's reflected in his voice.

His lyrics may be among the best in pop music, but they're still not great poetry. But many of the songs are great songs, due to their music and his voice.
More to discover