Are vocals the most important part of a song?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ido1957
  • Start date Start date
In Opera.. Yes they are most certainly the most important part..

But in all other genre's I believe every instrument and performance is the most important part of any song because if one part sucks it pretty much all sucks..

-Paul
 
i find adding lyrics to a completed instrumental just makes it feel a lot more real like a proper song, but that's just me.
 
Songs have words, songs have melodies... but the really great ones invoke an emotion in the listener. These are the ones that people want to hear over and over again.

The real music is within the individual... and musicians use songs as a tool to express emotion and invoke emotion in others.

In my mind, it's really as easy as that.
 
Robo 5-0 said:
Songs have words, songs have melodies... but the really great ones invoke an emotion in the listener. These are the ones that people want to hear over and over again.
Click to expand...

I get that as much from instrumentals as songs with vocals. In some ways an instrumental has to rely more on strong melody and invocation of emotion precisely because there are no words.
 
Robo 5-0 said:
Songs have words, songs have melodies... but the really great ones invoke an emotion in the listener. These are the ones that people want to hear over and over again.
The real music is within the individual... and musicians use songs as a tool to express emotion and invoke emotion in others.

In my mind, it's really as easy as that.
Click to expand...

Really? I just wrote a song with the following. I bet this invokes an emotion.

So I awoke with a yawn
And puked on the lawn
A perty good day me thinks

My breath stinks
And so does my soul
Oh yeah even tho there aint no soul
Mine stinks
------------
Since the thread is about vocals, I can tell you, the vocals are killer. But that wouldn't matter to you - you only need an emotional invocation.
Would you want to hear this over and over again?
Or did I misunderstand?

---------
If you care to hear
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=804166&content=songinfo&songID=8886627
 
Last edited:
grimtraveller said:
Erm, Slick fella ?
I dig the song. Unforgettable riff, the vocal really is killer. I even like some of the lyrics and the talking.
Click to expand...

Thanks gimtraveller – glad you got my point.
Free association writing.
A technique I use quite a bit.
I walk, then I write and I never second guess myself.
In this case I just happened to have recorded the riff the night before.
So with the written, I added the vocal.
I wrote a lot more words but only these ones fit the short piece of music.
And I guess this may help prove that lyrics don't mean shit.:)
 
ido1957 said:
Well, are they?
Click to expand...

depends on if the vocals are carrying the melody.

for example, a bob dylan song would be nothing without the vocals because his vocals are usually the key, they carry the melody, the emotion of the song.

on the other hand, listen to a pixies or a my bloody valentine song, and the vocals are deep set in the instrumentation, they carry some melody and are an important factor but the melody is really carried by the instruments, usually the guitars, rather than the vocals.

or, listen to jessia by the allman brothers, or pipeline by the chantays. no lyrics but still effective songs just because the melodies are so awesome. two of the most important instrumentals ever (in my mind) because they prove on a large scale that rock songs can kick ass without a vocalist.

it is all very subjective really, but I would decide where you want the brunt of your melody to lie and then focus on that.
 
I've always gravitated towards the vocals in a song first. But I am a singer first and a guitarist second so for me its a natural preference. A great vocal can help shore up weak lyrics so again its the voice first. However VERY close second are the lyrics. Great vocal, great lyrics, great melody = great song no matter how the song was recorded.
 
What in fuck's name does "most important part of a song" mean?

What's the most important part of a car? Would you drive a car that had only that part?

Am I the only one that's noticed that talking about music is almost always stupid? That's why I stopped buying music magazines in the 80's. Music just doesn't translate into words.
 
dintymoore said:
What in fuck's name does "most important part of a song" mean?

What's the most important part of a car? Would you drive a car that had only that part?

Am I the only one that's noticed that talking about music is almost always stupid? That's why I stopped buying music magazines in the 80's. Music just doesn't translate into words.
Click to expand...
I guess the OP was meaning "the part of the song that initially draws you". Few people are initially drawn by the bass or keyboards. In my experience, most folk I've ever known are drawn initially by the the melody (for that, read vocals) or the beat (for that read drums). That makes for important. Later, you may notice the other bits. Maybe years later.

Maybe you are the only one that's "noticed that talking about music is almost always stupid" - I certainly haven't. I love talking about it, arguing about it, discovering and learning about it......Maybe I'm just nosey but I love hearing what other people have to say on various topics.

As for the most important part of a car, that's easy.
It's the heater ! :D
 
dintymoore said:
What in fuck's name does "most important part of a song" mean?

What's the most important part of a car? Would you drive a car that had only that part?

Am I the only one that's noticed that talking about music is almost always stupid? That's why I stopped buying music magazines in the 80's. Music just doesn't translate into words.
Click to expand...

I'm leaving it up to the reader to decide the meaning of the question.
 
nzausrec said:
Vocals are the most human element of the song - the singing usually expresses the most emotion. Take out Karen Carpenter from one of her songs and you are left with nothing more than a kariokial ting-a-ling.
On the other hand some instrumentals are more expressive and draw out more of an emotional response than the vocalist. The lyrical bass in Rick Astley's version of 'Vincent' is an example of that.
Some people prefer Edge's guitar than Bono's voice, likewise they prefer the melodic twangs of Marr than the sometimes nasalish shouts of Morrissey.

What makes the job harder for home recordists is that they may have to strive to be expressive not just in one instrument but be fully versatile from percussion to voice to lead melodies. That's the tough one.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

When you listen to Edge on interviews, he says his only function is to create a sound canvas that supports the vocals. So obviously HE thinks the vocals are the most important part of a song.

But then again, for most blues songs, vocals are little more than filler to get to the guitar solo.

So for my money, it depends on the genre. But there can be little doubt that vocals are vital to some styles. The Beatles didn't have 35 No. 1 hits because they were great instrumentalists (they weren't). They were who they were because of great melodies and phenomenal lyrics ... which combine to make killer vocals.
 
The most import part of a song (or music) is the feel.

The vocals can suck and people can still like it.
The recording can suck and people can still like it.

But if the feel sucks, people won't like it.
 
I don't have the time or the inclination to read all 80some pages of this discussion. So what I have to say may have been said already.

My take is this ....

What is the most important part of a soup? or a pizza? I don't believe that any one ingredient is more important than another. If a listener can't hear or understand the words to a song, they'll likely not listen. But if the guitar is recorded poorly, they'll likely not listen. My point is. Even the "supporting" ingredients need to be top quality.
 
Critics opine...

nate_dennis said:
I don't have the time or the inclination to read all 80some pages of this discussion.
Click to expand...

Make the time but not until you can find the inclination ! :D

nate_dennis said:
I don't believe that any one ingredient is more important than another. If a listener can't hear or understand the words to a song, they'll likely not listen. But if the guitar is recorded poorly, they'll likely not listen. My point is. Even the "supporting" ingredients need to be top quality.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but on the other hand, final mixes often leave out parts that were recorded for the song so some parts are deemed by someone to be more important than others. Loads of songs have had poorly recorded elements, but a stellar vocal has won the day. I'm not arguing it either way, incidentally, but there will always be divided opinion on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top