ばか！バカ！　馬鹿ー月！

Like the title states, which of the two do you prefer/pay more attention to in music?

95% of the time, I focus on the sound because I'm a musician, now obviously voices add their own sound that blends in with the music, but I typically judge the sound while incorporating the vocal work but not the actual meanings of the vocals.

That being said. I don't think screamer bands are good, ever. Why? Because I don't like harsh, loud, incomprehensible words thrust at me when I listen to music. Synopsis: Some yelling is OK, especially to convey special meaning or add a sound comparison to regular singing, but constant yelling is a no-no just like any other constant singing, it gets boring! Dynamics are good, stagnant complacency is bad.

Hell, even dynamic yelling is better than the crappy screamer bands I listened to for a couple months about 2 years ago.

Now the other 5% of the time I do listen for lyrics and meaningful phrases in songs. Why? Because when that 5% occurs, it is likely I already know that song very well in terms of its sound both instrumentally and vocally. Also, I usually know the words of the lyrics and want to try and understand the artist's intent better when they chose those words to sing.

Now I have to pose this question since this bugs me: Why are some people so obsessed with the lyrics of a song and not the sound when music is intended to be listened to and not interpreted? If music was intended to be interpreted, it would be called something else entirely; and yet theres this pervasive need for many people to interpret every facet of a singer's verse. I guess what I am asking isn't necessarily the individual's reasoning for obsessing with lyrics, but rather the rationale that a (seemingly) large group of people use to justify their need to understand and interpret lyrics. Should we consider lyrics separate of music because of this discrepancy between the two? Should music with lyrics be called something else, perhaps Music with Verse or Vocal Music or Music with Words? Or should the definition of music being an uninterpreted meaning be changed into a more compromising middle ground?

Are not the lyrics part of the music? Would not the music be an incomplete idea in the ears and heart of the artist without the lyrics? Are lyrics not just another expression or part of an expression of the artist's soul? Are not lyrics without music generally called poems and music without lyrics instrumental music? Who says that music cannot be interpreted? Does not everyone interpret the music so that it becomes like a message from the artist to the listener?

^ You brought up a good point. I always find in music supposedly tries to convey a emotion for the listener to react to. The dilemma from this concept is that do we listen to the "music" or the "lyrics" when listening to the message. Is the same when I work on my art pieces. I used abstract parts to convey a message, is the matter on how abstract or how literal the materials available (I used a bowling ball for one piece but the idea of a bowling wasn't used for my art rather for a different purposes.) are used for my needs. Is a mixed reaction.

A good example is listening anime music. My friend loves to memorize the rhyme, tempo, beat and especially japanese lyrics without even understanding what it says yet he sings to them to from joy. I don't know whether that joy is convey of good music or nostalgia effect from character love but that is a different argument. From my personal experience there are tons of anime music I listened to that I don't understand yet many of them did made me cried, especially those damn piano piece of little girls singing. When i listen a song I don't pay attention to the lyrics I listen to the "music" The funny thing is that when i want to sing a song for my friend I can never do the lyrics only humming it.

The explanation I can give on why people who wants to "analyze" the lyrics is understanding range of emotion swirl within oneself when hearing. When i listen to Viva la Vida it made me cry and I want to know how the lyrics plays in these sorrowful feeling I had. The feeling I had felt I am truly sorry for someone in another part of the world. Sometimes when I have troubles certain rock band like Sum 41 play musics that reflects my high school experience. Songs that makes it sound so angelic like "Dare you to Move" by Switchfoot make me feel "light on my feet". Is the human curiosity of understanding how the magic of music moves us with an attempt to use our limited analytic tools depicting the song that makes us tick.

In the end music with lyrics or no lyrics is not that important but the musicia'sn ability to make listener feel alive.

Personally I pay first more attention to the sound but if I enjoy it I also want to know the lyrics and if I like those then I will end up remembering them so I can accompany the music even if just murmuring to myself.

I think lyrics play an important part though. I have heard songs that I liked the sound but when I read the lyrics they were so stupid it ended up making me dislike the song because everytime I hear it I remember how dumb the lyrics were. It has also happened to me find the sound of a song not anything special then reading the lyrics and ending up liking the song.

Off course I know very little about music, it's very hard for me to distinguish the sounds of each instrument or even know the instruments being used if it's different from what I usually hear so it's most likely because of that.

I do have a certain distaste for musics without lyrics though that doesn't prevent me from enjoying some of them. I do dislike a lot musics that are too repetitive especially on sound. Seriously there is no worse music than those the sound repeats each 5 seconds and the lyrics is stupid, yet the worse is that a lot of people like that kind of music...

ainsoph9 wrote:Are not the lyrics part of the music? Would not the music be an incomplete idea in the ears and heart of the artist without the lyrics? Are lyrics not just another expression or part of an expression of the artist's soul? Are not lyrics without music generally called poems and music without lyrics instrumental music? Who says that music cannot be interpreted? Does not everyone interpret the music so that it becomes like a message from the artist to the listener?

I contend that music has thrived for hundreds of years without lyrics or even any vocals, this goes back to my previous question: Why does "modern" music seem to require lyrics?

Can you say that a piece by Mozart is any less poetic than a song with lyrics? Can we say that a song like Elegy is any less poetic than an ode like Danny Boy?

I am even willing to contend that abuse of lyrics can actually destroy musical value in a song, such as the screaming bands I mentioned earlier or genres that focus entirely on how the lyrics are constructed, such as Rap, perhaps Hip-hop. I disclude genres like opera because these genres rely on the musical quality of their voices and not the lyrics alone to express themselves.

It depends; if I'm listening lightly, then I'll mostly catch the lyrics--they're easier to focus on.

If I'm seriously listening, I'll just count lyrics as one "stream" if you will--I enjoy trying to hold each part as separate in my head, try and devote my full attention to each instrument separately.

(And I do disagree that a piece by Mozart is less poetic than a song with lyrics. Mozart is cold, mechanical, and heartless. Breathtakingly beautiful, but like snow--cold and dead.
If I'm looking for poetic, I'd go more for romantic composers.)

Rectifier wrote:

ainsoph9 wrote:Are not the lyrics part of the music? Would not the music be an incomplete idea in the ears and heart of the artist without the lyrics? Are lyrics not just another expression or part of an expression of the artist's soul? Are not lyrics without music generally called poems and music without lyrics instrumental music? Who says that music cannot be interpreted? Does not everyone interpret the music so that it becomes like a message from the artist to the listener?

I contend that music has thrived for hundreds of years without lyrics or even any vocals, this goes back to my previous question: Why does "modern" music seem to require lyrics?

Can you say that a piece by Mozart is any less poetic than a song with lyrics? Can we say that a song like Elegy is any less poetic than an ode like Danny Boy?

I am even willing to contend that abuse of lyrics can actually destroy musical value in a song, such as the screaming bands I mentioned earlier or genres that focus entirely on how the lyrics are constructed, such as Rap, perhaps Hip-hop. I disclude genres like opera because these genres rely on the musical quality of their voices and not the lyrics alone to express themselves.

Unfortunately, people have a harder time internalizing music without lyrics. The bottom line is that lyrical music (Nanoha $) sells more in general because the average listener does not really want to invest the time and energy to engage the music. With the invention of the iPod and mp3 and the like, music is no longer a special experience but a convenient way to have "background noise." Ironically enough, many of the same people who parade the digitalization of music around like a banner often are the same people who sing along with the lyrics brainlessly. This is not to say that anyone here is one of those people. Rather, the problem is that the perception of music has shifted from art to money machine. Lyrics have become part of that money machine.

Beware the talking cat wrote:And I do disagree that a piece by Mozart is less poetic than a song with lyrics. Mozart is cold, mechanical, and heartless. Breathtakingly beautiful, but like snow--cold and dead. If I'm looking for poetic, I'd go more for romantic composers.

You don't have to like Mozart, I was just using him as an example.

Ainsoph, I do agree with your point, but I think the reason people see music this way has partly to do with how the music industry, is an industry. If music stayed as an art practiced by few like it did from the 17th to the 19th centuries, then perhaps it would not be this way. I think that paradoxically, however, the popularizing effect those centuries had on culture continued until finally music became a permanent fixture of daily life and eventually something that I dislike.

Rectifier wrote:

Beware the talking cat wrote:And I do disagree that a piece by Mozart is less poetic than a song with lyrics. Mozart is cold, mechanical, and heartless. Breathtakingly beautiful, but like snow--cold and dead. If I'm looking for poetic, I'd go more for romantic composers.

You don't have to like Mozart, I was just using him as an example.

Ainsoph, I do agree with your point, but I think the reason people see music this way has partly to do with how the music industry, is an industry. If music stayed as an art practiced by few like it did from the 17th to the 19th centuries, then perhaps it would not be this way. I think that paradoxically, however, the popularizing effect those centuries had on culture continued until finally music became a permanent fixture of daily life and eventually something that I dislike.

On the contrary, I love Mozart.

Most modern music I just can't stand. We've come rather full circle with westen music--ever notice that rap tends to have only voice and a baseline? With the voice more speaking than singing? Kind of like Gregorian Chant/Organum?
Indeed, I would argue that modern Rap/Hiphop is most closely related to the first true form of Western Art music.

Rectifier wrote:

Beware the talking cat wrote:And I do disagree that a piece by Mozart is less poetic than a song with lyrics. Mozart is cold, mechanical, and heartless. Breathtakingly beautiful, but like snow--cold and dead. If I'm looking for poetic, I'd go more for romantic composers.

You don't have to like Mozart, I was just using him as an example.

Ainsoph, I do agree with your point, but I think the reason people see music this way has partly to do with how the music industry, is an industry. If music stayed as an art practiced by few like it did from the 17th to the 19th centuries, then perhaps it would not be this way. I think that paradoxically, however, the popularizing effect those centuries had on culture continued until finally music became a permanent fixture of daily life and eventually something that I dislike.

Agreed. However, hopefully some music exists out there that is more to the palette. The machine does not necessarily dictate people's lives. Rather, if one cannot beat the industry, join it (i.e., start a band and play an instrument, even if it is the spoons).

Beware the talking cat wrote:Indeed, I would argue that modern Rap/Hiphop is most closely related to the first true form of Western Art music.

But its based on African tribal music, it's only "western" because the descendants of slaves invented it!

Rectifier wrote:

Beware the talking cat wrote:Indeed, I would argue that modern Rap/Hiphop is most closely related to the first true form of Western Art music.

But its based on African tribal music, it's only "western" because the descendants of slaves invented it!

point being this is an example which I loathed. Hip-Hop and RB is the genre I hate the most. Why? because their lyrics has nothing but woman and sex.

And this is different from so many other genres how?

There's the distinction that I made earlier that Rap and Hip-hop abuse lyrics in their sound balance and that's what makes those genres so terrible.

in my case it think it's around 90-95% sound and 5-10% lyrics, since I don't always think that lyrics are necessary, but at the same time it might also add something extra to music