caroselambra~ Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Lyrics versus music I suppose lyrics play an important part in some kinds of music. Political activist stuff and love songs etc. I am of the opinion they take second stage in Zeppelin songs and are nowhere near as important as the music. I can hardly hear the words to some of them - Carouselambra, In the Evening, Custard Pie , I’m sure there are more - and wouldn’t have a clue what was being sung/sang if I hadn't read them! “I saw a lion he was standing alone with a tadpole in a jar” “Darlene ooooh ooooh Darlene yeah yeah Darlene oh etc” huh? Zeppelin lyrics don’t have much effect on the finished product and aren’t crucial to the overall sound. They could actually be changed to something else and it wouldn’t matter. Maybe that says more about me than anything else There are some Zeppelin songs that have good lyrics , but it is the music that really takes centre stage. Robert could be singing about cookies for all I care! “dontcha want, dontcha wanta cookie coookie cookie” What does everyone else think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodhran Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Information is not knowledge Knowledge is not wisdom Wisdom is not truth Truth is not beauty Beauty is not love Love is not music Music is the best (FZ) then, obviously, good lyrics are welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Plant's lyrics coupled with the music of Page and Jones usually give me a healthy dose of visual mental imagery. Two quickies:Immigrant Song,I see myself levitating over vast pieces of land and water,surveying what is below me.I'm in charge;very positive feeling. In The Light is a song which,if I'm in a bummed or shitty mood,gives me a positive outlook.The negative situation is only temporary,a better outcome will follow. There are many more.This is why I've always gotten in to Led Zeppelin.The songs feed your mind lyrically and musically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glicine Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Well, for me, the "vs" thing just doesn't make sense. A good song is mostly a beautiful combination of lyrics and music. Sometimes I got the feeling when I listened to Zeppelin, music was like the wind under the wings of lyrics. And I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroselambra~ Posted November 17, 2008 Author Share Posted November 17, 2008 Well, for me, the "vs" thing just doesn't make sense. A good song is mostly a beautiful combination of lyrics and music. Sometimes I got the feeling when I listened to Zeppelin, music was like the wind under the wings of lyrics. And I love it. A song can be great with good music and terrible lyrics BUT I find it hard to accept it works the other way round - is the point I was trying to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glicine Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 A song can be great with good music and terrible lyrics BUT I find it hard to accept it works the other way round - is the point I was trying to make. Yeah, you made your point and I made mine. So agree to disagree then? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroselambra~ Posted November 17, 2008 Author Share Posted November 17, 2008 I have absolutely no problem with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 A song can be great with good music and terrible lyrics BUT I find it hard to accept it works the other way round - is the point I was trying to make. Most of my attention is on the instruments, even during the singing parts. Lyrics don't make the song for me - it's all been said before, or it doesn't make a lick of sense. Every song could be about biscuits and gravy, for all I care... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonzo1026 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Most of my attention is on the instruments, even during the singing parts. Lyrics don't make the song for me - it's all been said before, or it doesn't make a lick of sense. Every song could be about biscuits and gravy, for all I care... Well,lets take Kashmir.Now can you honestly picture lyrics describing the attributes of biscuits and gravy and cookies being put to that killer music? I certainly respect your opinion,but sometimes when I "hear" Kashmir,I'm literally parched and figuratively sunburned.Another mental picture is painted for me to explore. That to me,is the power of Plant as a lyricist.Not each song mind you,but enough that I never get bored listening to Led Zeppelin. But...Plant's lyrics click for me because of Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones. SteveAJones hit the bullseye sometime back,"the alchemy of the four". Hell,I could live without a tour.New studio work by the four is what I'm most hungry for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquamarine Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 A song can be great with good music and terrible lyrics BUT I find it hard to accept it works the other way round - is the point I was trying to make. Well, many of Dylan's songs, for instance, have rather uninteresting and repetitive melodies but fascinating lyrics, about which many people have written whole books. Some of Zeppelin's songs just have adapted traditional lyrics, or conventional rock lyrics--but some, like Kashmir, as just mentioned, or Achilles, or Thank You, have brilliantly written evocative lyrics, for me. Then there's Stairway . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninelives Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I think in Zep, for example, the lyrics are an integral part of the whole feel and imagery of the song. But I can't really do a vs. thing with music because there are too many variables for me that go into it. Some music I listen to because the actual instrumentals are so fascinating and lyrics take more of a back seat. But other artists the opposite could be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzyGT Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Well, many of Dylan's songs, for instance, have rather uninteresting and repetitive melodies but fascinating lyrics, about which many people have written whole books. You're spot on. Dylan's lyrics are what everyone pays attention to. They are also conveyed by his mellow folk singing style, but the man's basically a poet with a harmonica and guitar. It also depends on the music genre. If we are talking about "general rock music", we can say that both the lyrics and the music are equally important; in some cases you'll find that the instrumental part overwhelms the lyrics, due to the versatility of the instruments. In Led Zeppelin's case -a blues based rock band-, it is rather ironic that their most popular hits are driven by the strong bass of JPJ, the thunderous drums of Bonzo, and the innovation of Jimmy. When blues, generally speaking, relies on the lyrics context rather than the instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock Action Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 The music. Oh...and that's "cocaine", not "cookie". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Regardless of the content, once the lyrics have been vocalised they become part of the music. It's called the melody, or if you prefer, the tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil's Haircut Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Words with no accompanying music or sung are just words, a poem if you will. You must have music or sing for the words to become a song/lyrics. Music stands alone and doesn't need lyrics to be that. The music is by far the most important element to me, the singing is part of this but doesn't have to have words. I have little tolerance for people who don't like "music" without lyrics. They don't seem to be able to hear the story within just the music, they must be told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virginia Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Well,lets take Kashmir.Now can you honestly picture lyrics describing the attributes of biscuits and gravy and cookies being put to that killer music? I certainly respect your opinion,but sometimes when I "hear" Kashmir,I'm literally parched and figuratively sunburned.Another mental picture is painted for me to explore. That to me,is the power of Plant as a lyricist.Not each song mind you,but enough that I never get bored listening to Led Zeppelin. But...Plant's lyrics click for me because of Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones. SteveAJones hit the bullseye sometime back,"the alchemy of the four". Hell,I could live without a tour.New studio work by the four is what I'm most hungry for. For me it's primarily the music and the way Robert uses his voice as an instrument; the wails, range, etc. more so than the lyrics, but then again there are some songs with stunning lyrics like Kashmir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroselambra~ Posted November 18, 2008 Author Share Posted November 18, 2008 The music. Oh...and that's "cocaine", not "cookie". thanks, but I know! It was my poor attempt at humour and how some lyrics are often missheard; thus rendering them meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroselambra~ Posted November 18, 2008 Author Share Posted November 18, 2008 Regardless of the content, once the lyrics have been vocalised they become part of the music. that's obvious, but does it matter if the words are about cocaine or cookies - is the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie29 Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 that's obvious, but does it matter if the words are about cocaine or cookies - is the point Yes and no. I enjoy instrumentals as much as songs with vocals, sometimes more. If you can get hold of Kashmir as performed by The London Symphony Orchestra listen to the melody played by the string section, it adds a whole new dimension to the piece. Rock and roll is all about simplicity and repetitiveness and banal lyrics. Rock music is about complexity in both composition, storytelling and technique and that is what sets Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd apart from most other bands. The fact that people misinterpret the words to songs has more to do with the singing style of the vocalists rather than the words themselves. You said somewhere that you could write lyrics to their songs. So could I given that we both have the luxury of the music already written for us, it's hardly a stretch. Would they be better? I doubt it. As a songwriter myself I have composed songs by singing along to chord progressions on my acoustic guitar, playing around pre-written lyrics and by just jamming and improvising with my mates. I am not by any means comparing myself to them but some of Zeps best material came from the studio or their live improvisations. The Rover is a case in point as they first played (part of) it, at the '72 Sydney concert. I would hope that we could tell the difference between cocaine and cookies, the latter going up your nose would really make you eyes water! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 some lyrics are often missheard; thus rendering them meaningless. Not just meaningless, if the voice is considered to be an instrument. Then it becomes like a botched note, or interrupted rhythm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarmy Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Regardless of the content, once the lyrics have been vocalised they become part of the music. It's called the melody, or if you prefer, the tune. That depends on how you listen to music. If you think that that important time to pay attention is during the chorus, then you might be a lyric-melody person. If you listen for the guitar, drum, or base parts for instance, then I think each one of those could be your melody. I think that with other bands, the lyrics are the focal point. Led Zeppelin forces you to think of a tune in more than just what that guy is saying or how he is saying it. You tend to notice the fullness of it all, and not just the lyrical melody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zepyep Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Hi all, Not just meaningless, if the voice is considered to be an instrument. Then it becomes like a botched note, or interrupted rhythm. IMHO,it is,even if you don't like opera,that is an instrument.Go to one and listen.They maybe audio-enhanced now,but not in the old days.You had to sing above a 100-piece orchestra. There are some great lyrics and singer out there.On most Zep songs I want to hear Robert's words.The four together,....magic. KB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmie ray Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Hi all, IMHO,it is,even if you don't like opera,that is an instrument.Go to one and listen.They maybe audio-enhanced now,but not in the old days.You had to sing above a 100-piece orchestra. There are some great lyrics and singer out there.On most Zep songs I want to hear Robert's words.The four together,....magic. KB Opera would be a prime example of voice as instrument, and I'm sure there would be gasps from the audience if the words were unintelligible or the notes not hit correctly. Most pop music is also focused on the vocals, or unfortunately - the singer's looks. The closest style that I would listen to where the vocals are critical would be soul - Marvin Gaye, for example. But blues based rock? C'mon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zepfreak Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 As some others have said, I think it depends on the song. Take Pearl Jam's "Yellow Ledbetter", for instance. The words are barely intelligible, but they are used as an instrument. Conversely, AC/DC's "Big Balls" is all about the words, not the music. The music in "Babe, I'm Gonna Leave You" could stand alone with any lyrics, but would it be nearly as good? "Thank You" could stand alone as a poem, but it wouldn't be the same with different music. In songs like "Immigrant Song", the lyrics create a visual in my head. With different lyrics, my view of the song would be totally different. In "The Rover', the way that Robert sings is more important than what he is singing (to me anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.