Music, just music, communicates deeply within ones soul. Words are however the most relevant, most effective, and the most powerful source of communication. Truly great literature can be as moving as great music. A poorly written or poorly conveyed lyric is like poorly written literature Ill take good music any day. The combination of beautiful music and beautiful lyrics can be as moving as the best works of literature and the best composed music combined. When lyrical composition is great, it should convey meaning and feeling as deeply as does music; of course the way in which lyrics are conveyed is as relevant to mood and emotion as or more so, than words alone (we call this music).
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.
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.