Songs that are pretty cool till you listen to the lyrics...

[David Jimerson]

I would also point out that pretty much everyone hates Muzak, even that which is nearly identical to the original song, but without the lyrics.

 

[OldCorpse]

I get what you're saying, but . . . all those people who love the music of songs they don't understand a word of are missing out on a component of a song, whether they know they are or not.

I understand perfectly what you are saying. However, what I'm claiming is that with RARE exceptions, this is an illusion based on how music works. When you understand the words, you only THINK it is why you appreciate the music - in actual fact, you don't increase your appreciation by knowing the words (with rare exceptions), it simply gives you an axis along which to rest your subjective perception of appreciation. If the words were such that you didn't understand their lexical meaning (as happens in a lot of white teenage lack of understanding of hip-hop slang/lyrics) the intensity of your pleasure (if measured by electrodes in your brain) WOULD NOT CHANGE AT ALL. And that's what counts - intense aesthetic appreciation.

The words take a song to a different level. They get you to think about things that the music alone doesn't. As such, they can elevate a song to a greatness it wouldn't otherwise have.

They can also take an otherwise agreeable song and grind it into the dirt.

I guess I respond more to ideas than I do to emotion, so lyrics are very important to me.

Well, I don't think the aesthetic appreciation - or enjoyment of music - is dependent on the "ideas" expressed in the lyrics. Certainly your perception of why you appreciate something might be affected, but not the appreciation itself (except in rare cases). Of course, there are individual differences even here - for you "ideas" are important in a song, for me they are almost 100% irrelevant (no song has ever made me "think" or changed the way I'd vote, or feel about anything etc.)... if I want "ideas", I'll read a philosophical, sociological, political or scientific text - that's not what I look to in music... it's like with Einstein - he played the violin - now, anytime he has an opinion on physics, I'll listen, but when he plays the violin, I tune out the great man... same with musicians - I don't look for "ideas" from them, I look for MUSIC.

Now, when you add emotion TO idea, then you get something that's more than both. Not having the lyrics robs you of that. Part of the "art form" is indeed marrying the spoken ideas with the feeling of the music, and if you don't have both, you don't have the full force of the art.

See the first paragraph of my response - this is an illusion.

Note, too, that you can strike a very meaningful artistic contrast between the words of a song and the feeling of the music. Some of Elvis Costello's strokes of absolute genius involve taking an upbeat, happy tune and telling a story that's morbid and dark, and that exact contrast is what makes the song work so well. If you can't understand the words, or if you don't pay any attention to them, you think it's something very much other than what it is, and you miss the point of the song's existence in the first place.

Yes, but how much of the musical output is of this nature - dependent on such narrow referential contrasts? Not the majority, or even close to it. Again, yes, RARE or minority of cases, but not the vast majority.

Look, maybe it's not that important to you. But I strongly disagree that the lyrics are superfluous to the song in all but rare cases. It simply isn't so. If it were, no one would bother to write words.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I do agree that words are important - for rhythm, for effects you can achieve with your voice etc., i.e. for their musical form. I just don't think that lexical meaning is an important element in the vast majority of songs - that's not where the effect comes from (with rare exceptions). Yes, you can have the illusion that it's crucial to the intensity of aesthetic pleasure, but it simply is not (as any foreigner can prove).

 

[OldCorpse]

I would also point out that pretty much everyone hates Muzak, even that which is nearly identical to the original song, but without the lyrics.

That's not why people hate Muzak - a more fair comparison would be an INSTRUMENTAL version of a song... and those are frequently wildly popular. But your comparison makes me fear greatly that we are talking past each other - I never claimed that you can dispense with the human voice or words - just that the lexical meaning is not the key factor. YES, it's important that the singer sing a song with words (or scat!) - but the exact meaning of his words is not a factor in the vast majority of cases... as this thread illustrates - people were totally fine with lyrics they didn't understand or misunderstood!

 

[SPZ]

That's not why people hate Muzak - a more fair comparison would be an INSTRUMENTAL version of a song... and those are frequently wildly popular. But your comparison makes me fear greatly that we are talking past each other - I never claimed that you can dispense with the human voice or words - just that the lexical meaning is not the key factor. YES, it's important that the singer sing a song with words (or scat!) - but the exact meaning of his words is not a factor in the vast majority of cases... as this thread illustrates - people were totally fine with lyrics they didn't understand or misunderstood!

Good point!

As for musics with lame lyrics... I loved "Take On Me, by Aha... However, never really understood the high note part. "I'll be gone, In a day or two!". Not very lyrical... But still enjoyable song. That electric organ part at the beginning is timeless.

"Billie Jean". Fantastic tune, but its lyrics, about a guy, a playboy who doesn't want any responsability, is actually hilarious, since Michael Jackson almost "cries"in certain notes... Add to that a crappy video (I can't understand why so many people love this video!) and its a very unique mixture of Entertainment!

EDIT- And a certain Ronan Keating song, that really has helped me in lots of situations with girls. I can actually tell them to shut up, and they feel I'm being romantic! "You say it best, when you say nothing at all!"

 

[David Jimerson]

I understand perfectly what you are saying. However, what I'm claiming is that with RARE exceptions, this is an illusion based on how music works. When you understand the words, you only THINK it is why you appreciate the music - in actual fact, you don't increase your appreciation by knowing the words (with rare exceptions), it simply gives you an axis along which to rest your subjective perception of appreciation. If the words were such that you didn't understand their lexical meaning (as happens in a lot of white teenage lack of understanding of hip-hop slang/lyrics) the intensity of your pleasure (if measured by electrodes in your brain) WOULD NOT CHANGE AT ALL. And that's what counts - intense aesthetic appreciation.

If that is the case, then how can lyrics diminish a song?

I don't look for "ideas" from them, I look for MUSIC.

OK, that's what it is for YOU.

See the first paragraph of my response - this is an illusion.

I assure you wholeheartedly that it very much is not.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. I do agree that words are important - for rhythm, for effects you can achieve with your voice etc., i.e. for their musical form. I just don't think that lexical meaning is an important element in the vast majority of songs - that's not where the effect comes from (with rare exceptions). Yes, you can have the illusion that it's crucial to the intensity of aesthetic pleasure, but it simply is not (as any foreigner can prove).

There are quite a few songs to which I would not pay the slightest bit of attention if not for the lyrics. And the radio is full of tons of vapid crap I don't have any interest in.

And interestingly, over the past 10-15 years, there have been numerous songs which are copies of older songs but with reworked lyrics, usually inferior in most respects, and I can't stand them, even though I do like the originals.

So again, I accept that for YOU, lyrics are mostly irrelevant. But I don't accept it's a universal rule with only rare exception.

 

[OldCorpse]

Hey, good discussion. However, without getting into huge texts with tons of references, we'll never settle anything... already we're repeating ourselves somewhat, so I'm gonna bow out at this time - gotta run anyway. Maybe if this thread is still alive, I'll come back another day. Thanks for the thoughtful responses everyone... now maybe the thread can get back to the original topic

 

[Mattykins]

Haha, what have I created?

Actually I am pretty proud of myself for coming up with a good topic.

 

[slimjimmed]

I feel pretty safe saying that the majority of people who listen to music would say lyrics are not empty vessels devoid of meaning. I think the majority of songwriters would say the same thing.

When I write a song I sometime do mouth words as I play along, and they are sometime tonal or rhythmic gibberish. But the idea of actually using the gibberish on a recording or performance instead of drafting meaningful lyrics at the final stage would make music so much less interesting and so much less distinctive.

 

[slimjimmed]

I am interested to know what kind of music you listen to Old Corpse? What are your favorite cd's, records, or whatever?

 

[Batutta]

The Beatles wrote several "nonsense" songs like Ob-La-Di, where the lyrics mean nothing...And I love Manfred Mann's version of Blinded By The Light, where Bruce Springsteen's lyrics were transformed into gibberish but the song is still great...Wrapped up like a douche!!!

 

[wabbit]

Back on topic:

"Alone Again, Naturally"

Growing up I never really listened to the lyrics, thought it was just about some break-up or something and the tune had a nice bitter-sweet feel to it in such a pleasant key.

Years later I finally paid attention to the lyrics. I had no clue I was singing about killing myself.

It is actually a much more impressive song now that I listen to the lyrics but it is entirely misleading in it's dark subject matter contrasted against such pleasant melody.

Cheers

 

[Hawk Teflon]

I always liked the feel of "Brick" by Ben Folds Five. I found out later it was a song about taking his girlfriend to get an abortion. I'm not an advocate for abortion, but knowning that makes the song more real to me. Knowing backgounds to songs is really key for me.

 

[JConnors]

Look, maybe it's not that important to you. But I strongly disagree that the lyrics are superfluous to the song in all but rare cases. It simply isn't so. If it were, no one would bother to write words.

I agree.

I always liked the feel of "Brick" by Ben Folds Five. I found out later it was a song about taking his girlfriend to get an abortion. I'm not an advocate for abortion, but knowning that makes the song more real to me. Knowing backgounds to songs is really key for me.

Yeah me too. I've got a Live Ben Folds album where he tells the story behind it. Brings the song to another level. On the same album he tells this story how this guy he went to high school with, did some acid at a party and ended up climbing a tree and stayed there the entire night, the next morning he camb down from the tree and decided to devote his life to Jesus and ended becoming a minister - Here's the song - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5sX1mqPpQE (sorry for anime video, only good version I could find on youtube)

 

[OldCorpse]

This thread still going ?!

OK, then a response to a couple of points - first, the "foreigners are missing a DIMENSION of the song by not understanding the lyrics". That's true, but irrelevant to their ability to enjoy the song just as much.

An illustration of the issue: back when MTV exploded into something absolutely humongous, you had a whole generation of kids who really listened to music that was almost always connected to a video in high rotation. This connection of song + music video was so strong, that as a musician your career could be made or killed by being on MTV ("Video killed the radio star") - as if one could not enjoy music without the visuals. Those kids would be shocked to hear that you listened to music without seeing a single video, and still enjoyed it - the argument would be "if you don't see the video - which is after all part of the artistic package - you are MISSING A DIMENSION of the song". Thankfully, that era has somewhat passed.

Now, the reality is that - yes, you are missing a dimension of the song by not seeing the video, but it is irrelevant to the intensity of your enjoyment of the song... you can enjoy the song just as much with your eyes closed!

Of course there will be rare exceptions - perhaps you need to see Britney Spears videos in order to be a fan (I don't know, I'm not a fan), or maybe you need to see the KISS in their makeup and outfits otherwise you can't enjoy them (again, don't know, I'm not a fan). And what about the artist who is singing about wealth and money, but in the video he is dressed in rags sitting in a dumpster, shooting up - hey, he's making an ironic contrast, and without seeing the video (that extra dimension), you'd be missing the point (as David argued in an Elvis Costello song). But that's just the point - those are RARE cases. In the vast majority of cases, you don't need the video at all - that dimension is irrelevant to the intensity of your enjoyment of music.

Same with the lexical meaning of lyrics - yes, a dimension, but irrelevant to the intensity of enjoyment of the song.

Real life example: I'm a Bowie fanatic, and I really enjoy the song "Heroes". The lyrics are sung in English - I absolutely love that song. Now, Bowie did a cover in German - I don't speak German, consequently, I don't understand the lyrics there (and no, I don't translate in my head!), but I love the German version as well - just as much, I love the vowels, the consonants the stresses of the words... all without a clue as to the lexical meaning. Here's my point - I listen to both versions, and I ENJOY BOTH EQUALLY. This is like a perfect experiment - same music, same performer - in one case I understand the lexical meaning of the lyrics, in the other I don't... AND I ENJOY THEM EQUALLY. A perfect example of why I don't buy that a foreigner gets an "inferior" experience of a song by not understanding the lyrics.

The other issue: why do musicians work so hard on the lyrics if the lexical meaning is not that important in most cases? Must mean that the meaning of the lyrics is important!

You are putting the horse before the cart!

Let us forget for the moment, that often what the musician is doing is making sure that the lyrics scan, that they have rhythm etc., and all kinds of reasons that have to do with technical vocal performance. That's only one reason why the musician works "hard" on the lyrics. There is however another much more important reason: the lyrics are just a tool to get the performer to give a good vocal! If he writes stuff that makes him twist in pain, to reach that special emotional pitch - whatever it may be - then that's what he'll do! If you as the LISTENER don't have a clue about the meaning of the words, that's irrelevant, as long as the PERFORMER makes his voice do a number on your emotions - because you are listening to his emotions, not the lexical meaning of the lyrics - people respond to the emotion in the voice (that's how foreigners can enjoy songs!), not the word meaning.

In fact, this is easily seen in the history of lyric writing - there are tons of songwriters who write about private pain in totally obscure way so that you have no clue as to what they mean, but boy you can HEAR their emotion - and that's what counts. He's writing for himself - not for you.

No doubt, some write thinking that they are "communicating" with the audience, but that's just a delusion - fact is, they write so that they can "amp" themselves, and if you get amped it's because of his performance, not because of the meaning of his words (with RARE exceptions).

As to what I listen to? Ha! Where do I start? It would be pretty pointless to give my "favorite" CDs as one poster here requested.... I have over 5000 CDs, and I listen to music every chance I get. I listen to a ton of world and ethnic music (especially from India - don't understand a word!), ton of jazz, ton of rock, pop, hip-hop, trip-hop, electronic, modern classical, ambient, and on and on. It's easier to say what I don't listen to: country & western, heavy metal, teen-pop (boybands, spears etc.), most of top 40 etc. And no, I don't feel the slightest need to know what "The Girl from Ipanema" is about

 

[David Jimerson]

Dude, you keep repeating the same thing.

I fully well accept that it's what you take out of music. I simply reject it's a universal thing, and I bloody well laugh at loud at the idea that the importance I place on the lyrics of a song is an "illusion."

 

[pfista]

Haha. This same thing happened to me with mr. bungle's squeeze me macaroni. My friend and I always liked the song but were never really sure what it was about. Then we looked up the lyrics. But I should have known better anyways since mr. bungle has always been weird.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BUZgx1GtzHY

 

[adkimery]

Some songs have meaningful lyrics, some songs have meaningless lyrics, and most songs fall somewhere in between. Some people care a lot about the meaning of a song, some people don't care at all about the meaning of a song and most people fall somewhere in between.

Why have 6 pages been written about this?


-A

 

[Daryl Auguste]

Saying lyrics aren't important is silly, but for the most part they are meant to convey something even if that something is as light hearted as dancing.

Personally, the type of song I'm listening to determines how closely I listen to the lyrics. I heard alot of electronica, where the main focus is the instruments (Ratatat, Justice, etc) and I don't really listen to the lyrics, the artist hardly seems to deem them important, they serve as a kind of catchy filler.

There is music that I listen to very intently, because the artist is really telling a story. Music, just like all mediums of entertainment can probably be divided into different types. There is the fun summer song you hear blasting on your radio, similar to the hollywood blockbuster. Then there are the less popular songs (usually some type of rock) that you listen to and feel a connection to, through lyrics. These are like movies with more substance, made to entertain, but also to make you think.

I dunno, that might be a really bad analogy.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Lola- The Kinks!!!!!!!

It's not like it's hard to understand what the song means, but I never listened to it until the 20th time I heard it, and I was like, "oh snap".