I might be an odd duck, but I actually rarely hear lyrics in music. My brain just doesn’t process them short of chorus. Sometimes when focusing I hear the words, example if I listen to Hip-Hop while not doing anything else I follow the lyrics completely and truly appreciate the mastery they have over language. But everything else is just Vocals to me. Anyone else have this listening quirk? I think that’s why I stick mostly to electronica because I can listen for an extended period without any lyrics or vocals.
4 Likes
My wife and I think there are two types of people: those who listen music first and those who listen lyrics first. I am music first and she is lyrics first. It’s not that I can’t hear the lyrics, it’s just that I’m too busy focusing on the music. I figure if you can’t put together a proper musical composition, why should I pay attention to what you have to say? And of course she thinks if you don’t have anything interesting to say, why should she pay attention to the music? Both approaches seem perfectly valid to me.
I have three factors that form my theory as to why I am music first. One is that I grew up mostly listening to classical music until I was in my early teens and discovered progressive rock. The other is that I have trouble understanding people when there is a lot of background noise. I’ve always been that way and yes, I’ve had my hearing checked multiple times and it is better than average. Third is that I have trouble memorizing things so it is difficult for me to learn the lyrics without listening to the same piece over and over. So I better want to listen to it a lot to bother.
Aside: I think scrolling lyrics in time with the music is one of the greatest features of music streaming. It really is a game changer for me.
6 Likes
Music is notes and pauses. Poetry is words. They sometimes synergize to produce sublime experiences neither could achieve separately, but I still see them as distinct arts. And their synergy is rarely so much better than just-the-music that I will even notice it happened.
I guess I have far too small a selection of ways I can be impressed by people’s use of language, most of it just sounds like everday linguistic expression + some modicum of effort to make some of the words rhyme (whoop-de-doo). On the flip side though, bad lyrics can easily ruin what could’ve been a good song for me, or at least do comparatively way more damage. 
Frankly I’d rather listen to complete gibberish written only to maximize vocalization than bad lyrics, e.g. what they did with the Adiemus project 30y ago:
P.S.: Hot take: Bob Dylan was not a great musician. Some people just liked his poetry very much, and he happened to be strumming some guitar strings while reciting it. 
2 Likes
(Hot reply) … with a voice like a rusty coffee grinder. Did you know he did a Christmas album? He makes ‘I’ll Be Home For Christmas’ like a threat, not a promise. </snark off>
I know this is rage bait, but it’s inaccurate. Bob Dylan is a fine musician. If you think casually strumming guitar would produce the Rolling Thunder Revue I can’t help you. Dylan is a wordsmith but also a great musician. Any other take is likely made by someone who doesn’t play an instrument themselves.
1 Like
And personally I look for lyrics first sometimes and music first sometimes. If its an artist known for amazing lyricism I might be paying attention to the lyrics first. If it is an electronic artist I may be focusing on the music more closely. If its a Phish or Dead show I’m equally keyed into both the lyrics and the music. Steely Dan? Both music and lyrics. I don’t really confine myself to one way of listening to music over any other.
1 Like
You obviously didn’t hear his voice on albums before the motorcycle accident. As for musicianship, he’s not Segovia, Hendrix, Clapton, or even Santana, but he’s quite competent. Highway 61 Revisited didn’t make itself, and his later work is quite complex.
I never said he was trash, I can go up to ‘fine’ musician no problem, just not ‘great’. 
This is based on his most popular stuff, mind you, I never went purposely digging for his absolute best compositions, but somehow even if he made a few ‘great’ ones I still get the feeling they’re exceptions rather than the rule. </DylanBashing>
Lyrics-based music is a different creative genre than non-lyrical music. Music itself involves rhythm and tone sequences. It has a universal audience. In contrast, lyrics communicate distinct thoughts that make sense only among those who understand a singer’s language and intent. Lyrics function as monologues or poems paired with music.
Extreme example: Consider the output the famously ironic and morose band, The Smiths. Their black humor is not understood by children, foreign language speakers, and adults who don’t grasp ironic intentions. Many adults routinely miss the humorous intent of emails and text messages, and “going over their heads” is a routine situation. This is why 
and and 
and 
were invented. The Smiths music per se was ordinary pop-rock, often with 12-string guitar flavor:
Burn down the disco
Hang the blessed D.J.
Because the music that they constantly play
IT SAYS NOTHING TO ME ABOUT MY LIFE
Hang the blessed D.J.
Because the music they constantly play
There is a Light that Never Goes Out
And if a double-decker bus
Crashes into us
To die by your side
Is such a heavenly way to die
And if a ten tonne truck
Kills the both of us
To die by your side
Well, the pleasure, the privilege is mine
This band also released non-lyrical instrumentals, such as The Draize Train and Oscillate Wildly. Those are simple music.
The TV show Portlandia used an instrumental version of a song that – to my ears – is terrible with its breathy and aimless original lyrics.
1 Like
Have you ever considered that you likely have an audio processing disorder? I say this because I have it too. I’m the same way. I can only hear lyrics if I focus specifically on them. They disappear as soon as that focus goes away. Do you often say ‘what?’ When someone asks you something even though you heard what they said, but you literally needed a couple of seconds to process what they said? That’s another part of the disorder. It’s a complicated thing. I just recently learned that this was a thing myself. I am waiting on an appointment to see my Dr about this.
4 Likes
𝑳𝒚𝒓𝒊𝒙 𝒂𝒍𝒎𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝒏𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝒎𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒐𝒖𝒔𝒍𝒚, 𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝑰 𝒘𝒂𝒔 𝒂 𝒕𝒆𝒆𝒏𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒓, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒉𝒂𝒑𝒔 𝒖𝒑 𝒕𝒉𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒄𝒐𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒈𝒆, 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝐲 𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒗𝒆𝒓𝐲 𝒊𝒎𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒎𝒆, 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒘𝒂𝒔 back 𝒅𝒖𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒆 ‘60s 𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒎𝒊𝒅 ‘70s, 𝒅𝒖𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒂𝒏 𝒂𝒎𝒂𝒛𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒍𝒚 𝒓𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒊𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒎𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒐𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒃𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒏 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑩𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝑩𝒐𝒚𝒔, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑩𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒍𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒀𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒃𝒊𝒓𝒅𝒔, 𝑨𝒏𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒍𝒔, 𝑱𝒐𝒉𝒏 𝑴𝒂𝒚𝒂𝒍𝒍, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆 𝑱𝒊𝒎𝒊 𝑯𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒓𝒊𝒙. 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒏𝒂𝒎𝒆 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒉𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒔. 𝑺𝒐 𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒔 (𝑴𝒂𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒏𝒖 𝑶𝒓𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒂!) 𝒂𝒍𝒔𝒐 mad 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒑𝒉𝒆𝒏𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒕 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒐𝒅 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝒂 𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒄𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒂𝒍, 𝒔𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒐𝒑𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒊𝒄 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝒊𝒏 𝑾𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒏 𝒉𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚. 𝑩𝒖𝒕 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒏‽ 𝑰❜𝒎 𝒗𝒆𝒓𝐲 𝒎𝒖𝒄𝒉 𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝒂𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒆; 𝒐𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒂 𝒇𝒆𝒘 𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒔 𝒐𝒓 𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒘𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒔 — 𝑩𝒆𝒄𝒌 𝑯𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒏 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒔, 𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒔 𝒘𝒉𝒐 𝒆𝒔𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒅 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒎𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 — 𝒂𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒄𝒕 𝒎𝒆 𝒑𝒐𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒆𝒏𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒕𝒐 𝒑𝒂𝒚 𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒕𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒊𝒓 𝒍𝒚𝒓𝒊𝒙, 𝒎𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒆𝒊𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒈, 𝒐𝒇𝒇 𝒆𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒐𝒓 𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒑𝒊𝒅.
𝒐𝒅𝒅 𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒌‽ 𝒏𝒐, 𝒋𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒍𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒚. 𝑺𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒑𝒊𝒓𝒆𝒔 𝒂 𝒎𝒖𝒄𝒉 𝒃𝒓𝒐𝒂𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒇𝒆𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈.
Exactly – Rolling Thunder Revue is the best way to refute the claim that Dylan was not a great musician.
I concur with feelings of ❝𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒌𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔❞, 𝑲𝒍𝒖𝒕𝒆 (tense 𝒇𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔, man!), 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒂𝒏 occasional, subjectively 𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒕 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒏 𝒂𝒎𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒍𝒆 - 𝒔𝒖𝒄𝒉 𝒂𝒔 Pulp’s “Common People” 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒍𝒐𝒕𝒔𝒂 Beck Hansen’s lighter fare “Nightmare Hippy Girl”- 𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝒖𝒑 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒔𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒍𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒂𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒇, 𝒘𝒆𝒍𝒍, 𝒂𝒍𝒍-𝒕𝒐𝒐-𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒐𝒏 𝒑𝒆𝒐𝒑𝒍𝒆❜𝒔 𝑳𝒐𝒗𝒆/𝑯𝒂𝒕𝒆/𝑳𝒐𝒔𝒔 𝒕𝒖𝒏𝒆𝒔, 𝒕𝒐 𝒘𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒉 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒆 𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒔 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒅𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒑𝒆𝒅 𝒐𝒃𝒔𝒊𝒅𝒊𝒂𝒏 𝒄𝒂𝒕𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒔, 𝒂𝒔 𝒊𝒕 𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒆.
𝑰 𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒊𝒕 𝒃𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒐 𝒉𝒆𝒂𝒓 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆 Jean Luc Ponty, 𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒍𝒊𝒌𝒆 - 𝒂𝒍𝒍 pop instrumental 𝒂𝒏𝒅, 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆, classical 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆 jazz, 𝒊𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒎𝒐𝒐𝒅 𝒔𝒐 strikes 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒔𝒆 𝒐𝒅𝒅𝒍𝒚 𝒄𝒂𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒊𝒄 𝒕𝒂𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒔.
If I have to choose one or the other, I “prefer” music to lyrics. Music without lyrics isn’t the same, but I still very much enjoy it. Lyrics without music is poetry, which is a completely different form of art.
My preference is for both depending on the genre. Anything not electronic or classical has a bit of an emptiness to it without a vocalist. Some rock and metal artists release instrumental versions of their albums (Haken, for example), and it’s just not the same for me.
Just my $0.02.
1 Like
It’s not the same but for those weirdos like me that like metal but don’t like screaming and cookie monster vocals, it can sometimes be a viable alternative. 
1 Like
For me, it depends entirely on the type of music, the nature of any lyrics and, yes, the voice. At the risk of sounding like an announcement from the Ministry of the Flippin’ Obvious, Opera without lyrics? That said, I’m not much of an opera fan, but a Bach cantata , of Handel’s Messiah (and a vast range of other stuff) … without lyrics? Rick Wakeman’s concept albums are much better (in my opinion) with the lyrics than orchestral versions, but Tubular Bells? Or Acoustic Alchemy? Lyrcs would … detract, from the music.
So, in short, I have no preference for with or without, beyond what the musc requires … which could be either, and in so many different ways.
Oh, and as is often the case, there’s usually an exception or two that prove the rule.
Indeed. After 20 years of exposure, I still don’t “like” harsh/death metal vocals. With that said, listening to An Abstract Illusion’s album Woe, recently released as an all instrumental version, doesn’t have the same effect. On the flip side of the coin, listening to Buried Realm’s instrumental version of The Dormant Darkness is just as enjoyable as the standard version. It’s nice to have options!
Bach’s inventions to Albanez’ Leyenda are just fine without lyrics.
The Itsy Bitsy Spider, or for that matter, Polka Dot Bikini not so much.
No Gilbert without Sullivan.
As you say really depends upon the kind of music.