Isn't it more challenging to make a really great, emotional, instrument track? I'd like to know what you think about that. Personally, I make both vocal and instrumental tracks, and think it is harder to make a great instrumental track, because you have to somehow convey emotions using only sounds. That's harder to understand, especially for people who are not very musical.

 

What doesn't make any sense at all is your analogy with the use of a blonde and redhead because you left out the brunettes. See what I mean? You can't please everyone. Again, if thread doesn't make any sense to you all you have to do is ignore it.

 

For me it is the other way around. When vocals come into play, there is interaction not only with the music, the lyrics do come into play. Now all 3 must be in perfect sync or all the magic is lost. A bad singer or inadequate lyrics can ruin what could have been a great instrumental track if left alone. So I have to work 3 times as much with a vocal piece than with an instrumental track.

 

The only situation where vocal components have to be in a music piece is, if they have an lyrical input. If it has no reasonable lyrical input the piece is completely senseless. Someone who hears pieces with vocals without caring about the lyrical input is uneducated in this particular subject.

There is only one subject where this is the case: The opera. And unfortunately there are not many good librettos (the "lyrical" input).

There are some good librettos (Der Rosenkavalier) but the more relevant components are the music and in the opera more the presentation. But in most cases definetely not the lyric.

If you want lyric there is enough literature.

 

You make an interesting point which I have read and heard on numerous occasions yet in October 2016, the New York Times proclaimed that a committee of Norwegians had “dramatically redefined the boundaries of literature” by offering a Nobel Prize to musician Bob Dylan. https://sites.williams.edu/engl-209-fall16/uncategorized/lyrics-as-literature/

 

I do not care at all for prices, I have to say. In most cases they make not one relevant statement about any technical aspect of the presentated product (be it an artwork or anything). And the reason for that is that they're mostly populistic (there are some exceptions but this would have to be discussed more deeply).

They are not redefining anything with giving a price to anyone in this particular case.
It's mainly laughable if someone tries or even states something like this.

And if it would have redefined anything there would have been a way more intense discussion about this in publicity. But there was no.
We have to be very careful with these actions from those institutions.

Literature is literature and it's pretty clear defined and music is something very different, it's way more interpretable and has nothing to do with literature if someone gives a price to someone else or not.

But this is all not so easy and would have to be pretty deeply discussed and with my english knowledge...

 

Last edited: Mar 25, 2019

I personally think that the Nobel Prize given to Dylan was misguided, and it seems that Dylan feels the same. And I quote the great one himself, "Our songs are alive in the land of the living. But songs are unlike literature. They’re meant to be sung, not read. The words in Shakespeare’s plays were meant to be acted on the stage. Just as lyrics in songs are meant to be sung, not read on a page. And I hope some of you get the chance to listen to these lyrics the way they were intended to be heard: in concert or on record or however people are listening to songs these days. I return once again to Homer, who says, “Sing in me, oh Muse, and through me tell the story.”

 

While Dylan's acute comment, in context, is spot-on, actually it's somewhat misleading... Songs (his own and others) were always performed in Shakespeare's plays and many of the rhyming passages were devised by Shakespeare with sung peformance in mind...

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Music-in-Shakespeares-Plays-1369568/

edit: bizarre typo

 

Last edited: Mar 26, 2019

also without vox it would be pure emotion....one of the greatest beats ever made , for me

totally genre dependend i would say...

but for my taste ppl use vox for the easy way mostly...maybe sort off...
first make beat great then comes vox...few stutters need no prepoduction and the cool random stuff comes from playing around with audio later anyway..

 

Last edited: Mar 26, 2019

what sells more CATS or DOGS ?

 

Come on guys. Why you act like fools? He is simply asking whether you prefer instrumental music or vocal music under the condition that it might be hard for the producer to have a vocalist! He wants to know if he should invest time on making instrumentals and want to measure instrumental music fan base in the community. Again, some fools come and say irrelevant bullshit.
Shout out to OP for creating such good topic.
BTW, I prefer instrumental music.

 

so you kno not all music genres apparently....called blues,rocknroll,rap music etc

and am i wrong when saying : there was lyric which was also sang parrallel with plucked string instrument back in middle age...

 

 

Last edited: Mar 26, 2019

I like the question. I listen to vocal music while I have instrumental music on in the background. I could go into detail, but it's such an extremely subjective thing that explaining it is pointless.

 

This question is very complicated.
I chose Vocal music because they are usually arranged better than instrumental songs.
Instrumental songs "usually" tend to be very messy, to include a lot of improvisation, not to be cohesive, etc., which all contribute to making them less desirable. However, always there is some very good instrumental music, which is very appealing.
On the other side, vocal music tends to be arranged better, have a good amount of repetition, which makes it more perceivable. However, Vocal music can become boring. Personally, I do not pay attention to the lyrics much, and if the music itself does not get my attention I don't like the song.

 

I agree with that hip hop track you posted being a solid dramatic piece. IMO the "phoned in" rhymes really killed an otherwise evocotive beat. Probably just me though, it was a sad day when NY rappers started sounding like bland photocopies from middle murica... I wouldn't say that to his face though..

 

You can have neither.

 

There is a bit more behind lyric then rhymes. I know this is all very simple today. A few rhymes and a new Shakespeare is born and will seen as one. This is not so easy.

My honest opinion is even way sharper, but there is no reason for now to go that deep into this territory.

 

Hi The Pirate,
voice is a fabulous instrument, with so differents timbres, pitch and emotions, personally i love produce covers with differents voices, for shure, text is important, but, in my ears the voice "instrument" is like a guitar, bass, drums, keys, with an exeptional manufactory.
I sang for many years(from 7 years old to 13) in a church, white voice, very impressive experience!
Excuse my for bad english.....

 

Totally agree with you. It is the oldest and most sophisticated instrument. I only wish I could sing. https://aliveeastbay.com/archives/the-voice-the-first-instrument/