Options
What makes a great song. Melody or Voice?
Personally for me I've always thought that what makes a great song is the melody. Every band or singer that I've ever liked is because I like the tunes of the songs they sing. Not because they've written songs with great powerful or deep and meaningful lyrics or because the singer has a great voice.
I asked two of the people I worked with for their opinions and one agreed with me and the other said for him it's all about the lyrics.
I said to him haven't you ever heard a song with a great catchy tune without taking much notice of the lyrics and he said no because the song is based around the lyrics.
Someone could be singing a song with great powerful lyrics to a really boring "in one ear and out the other" tune.
Look at The Smiths. Everyone raves about them but in the 80's they had 16 singles in a 4 year period between '83 and '87 and only two were top 10 hits, both only reaching No.10 because melody wise their songs were not what you'd call catchy. They were a bit boring.
Yet you take a band like Abba who's songs were far more melodic. In the first four years of their career they had 12 singles (LESS than the Smiths) yet out of that 12 they had 10 top 10 hits, 7 of which got to number 1. I'm not saying that just because songs do well in the charts means they're great. What I'm saying is that songs with great melodies tend to be more successful than songs with great lyrics.
I was in town today and someone was playing a violin. He was playing Yellow Submarine which has got a melody that everyone knows which means that everyone could stand there and enjoy it or at least appreciate it simply because of the melody. If he was standing there playing a Smiths song I doubt he'd have half the people watching he did.
To me melody is far more attractive in a song than lyrics.
What do you guys think. Are you melody people or lyric/voice people. If you're a lyric person can you at least appreciate why melodic songs are on the whole more popular.
I asked two of the people I worked with for their opinions and one agreed with me and the other said for him it's all about the lyrics.
I said to him haven't you ever heard a song with a great catchy tune without taking much notice of the lyrics and he said no because the song is based around the lyrics.
Someone could be singing a song with great powerful lyrics to a really boring "in one ear and out the other" tune.
Look at The Smiths. Everyone raves about them but in the 80's they had 16 singles in a 4 year period between '83 and '87 and only two were top 10 hits, both only reaching No.10 because melody wise their songs were not what you'd call catchy. They were a bit boring.
Yet you take a band like Abba who's songs were far more melodic. In the first four years of their career they had 12 singles (LESS than the Smiths) yet out of that 12 they had 10 top 10 hits, 7 of which got to number 1. I'm not saying that just because songs do well in the charts means they're great. What I'm saying is that songs with great melodies tend to be more successful than songs with great lyrics.
I was in town today and someone was playing a violin. He was playing Yellow Submarine which has got a melody that everyone knows which means that everyone could stand there and enjoy it or at least appreciate it simply because of the melody. If he was standing there playing a Smiths song I doubt he'd have half the people watching he did.
To me melody is far more attractive in a song than lyrics.
What do you guys think. Are you melody people or lyric/voice people. If you're a lyric person can you at least appreciate why melodic songs are on the whole more popular.
0
Comments
I couldn't agree more - melody for me too!
I don't hugely care about lyrics (which is probably why I listen to some foreign language music) although I have come to appreciate some of my favourite artists lyrics. I'm also getting a bit tired of judges on The X Factor going on about "really connecting to the song/lyrics" as if that suddenly makes said singer really credible and cool. I just want them to sing the song well, regardless of their vocal skill.
(Not that I'm bothered by singers being credible or cool btw - I love pop music! I just find the whole "connecting to the song" part on The X Factor a bit cringey. Just get on the stage, sing the song well and have a good time OK?)
I also don't believe that a singer has to have the greatest voice in the world for a song to be good either, in fact my favourite singer wouldn't especially described as having an amazing voice. I enjoy a lot of the melodies, arrangements and instrumentals of her songs (only a handful of which she has composed herself)
I find it odd that a lot of people bang on about lyrics and writing their own etc, when I can't imagine that lyrics are the first or sole reason for listening to a song. Obviously, I'm biased because I prefer melody.
It also bothers me when a lot of rent-a-rappers are featured on pop songs as I'd like to hear the instrumental instead of filling every gap in the song with a rapper.
So melody all the way!
Well put. It's rare to get all of those but the best songs do have great melodies and lyrics.
'Bittersweet Symphony', 'The Times they are a-Changing', 'I Still haven't found what I'm looking for', 'Brown-Eyed Girl', 'Stairway to Heaven' etc, etc,....
Using The Smiths as an example of a band lacking in melodies is really dumb. They may not have been overt, but compared to the vast majority of comparable acts, they had melodies in spades.
But great lyrics without a tune is just poetry. And we all know how horrible that is: right, kids?
You might want to read some Joy Division, Bob Dylan, Lou Reed, Leonard Cohen, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen, Tracy Chapman, Townes Van Zandt, Mary Chapin Carpenter lyrics to hear the mistake you are making.
(((The Smiths)))
^ this
That would be because the lyrics are cack too
Aww....and you were doing so well up till then too.
Agreed.
Both are important.
I used to enjoy many songs only for their melodies, mostly because I couldn't understand the lyrics. Things have changed when I started to learn English. Now I'm unable to appreciate many of the songs I have enjoyed back then simply because of the cringe-worthy lyrics. And I started to like many artists who maybe don't write the catchiest melodies, but have a brilliant way with words. Melodies are not less important to me now, it's just that weak or cheesy lyrics can easily destroy the song for me.
I used them as an example because a lot of people rave on about the Smiths about how great the lyrics were and about Morrissey's voice etc. Yet out of 16 singles they only had two top 10 hits in four years.
I then mentioned Abba (who some people say are cheesy and look down their noses at them) who had far more success chart wise in the first four years of their career. They've got the 2nd biggest selling album ever in the UK (Gold). Now if The Smiths are so revered in the music world why didn't they sell more singles or albums with the public and why did Abba sell so many. The reason why is because the melodies. Take a song like "Chiquitita". Nobody gives a toss who or what Chiquitita is, they'll buy the record because it's got a good tune. Melody will always win over lyrics. It will always be what makes it remembered in years to come. When it comes down to it lyrics are not what sells records.
The Smiths were mainly about an artistic vision...and not one that's likely to appeal across the board. You don't get bands who make that their priority anymore. Abba were an uncomplicated pop with a couple of great songwriters
Number of top 10's means nowt.