What do you listen for in a song?

[scottishlad5]

Now come on and be honest what do you listen for in a song.
1. good over all melody
2.hey, this band has been good in the past they have to be good!
3. good lyrics
4. Its got good instrumental leads.

[Onacara]

Now come on and be honest what do you listen for in a song.
1. good over all melody
2.hey, this band has been good in the past they have to be good!
3. good lyrics
4. Its got good instrumental leads.


I like how the post and the poll are in different order :wink:

[EternalThanos86]

I'm a big fan of rHythm.

[Lord Pyre]

Now come on and be honest what do you listen for in a song.
1. good over all melody
2.hey, this band has been good in the past they have to be good!
3. good lyrics
4. Its got good instrumental leads.

None of the above....

It has to have a clear, memorable melody,

(Unless it's polyphonic. That means all of the parts [soprano, bass, etc...] are equally important. Listen to some Baroque stuff like Bach to get a feel for it)

It shouldn't give me a headache,

It should tug at my emotions. I don't care whether it makes me happy, or sad, but if has to do something.

It has to have work put into it. If you just sit down and whip something up in five minutes, I'm not going to respect it as much as if you really pour your time and soul into it.
(Mozart's an exception. The guy was a genius. He didn't write music, as he has said, he just copies down all of the stuff in his head. He could do his stuff casually, but it still meets my other criteria. :p)




Yeah, music's pretty much my life, as I've said before. And if you think I'm extremely picky because of this list, I'm not. Those are usually easy to meet.
But a lot of rock music just doesn't do any of that for me. It all sounds the same to me, so I usually stick with instrumental stuff. Of course, to a lot of you, instrumental stuff probably sounds all the same, so we're even. ;)

[Einar's puppy]

I have two different things I listen for: Interesting verses and decent instrumentals. I really like songs that don't just repeat the same words again and again, and also songs that have good instrumentals. A good example would be the Arctic Monkeys. They have good instrumental parts, and the lyrics are diverse...most of the time. Another great example would be Death Cab for Cutie because they also have pretty good instrumental parts (though it is a totally different Genre from the monkeys) and the songwriting is great.

[johnny139]

Something interesting. I don't care how deep or well written or classic of famous a song is. If I'm not either satisfied or disappointed by the end of a song, than it simply isn't good, as far as I'm concerned.

[Agent Minivann]

I'm going to go with the intangible IT. If it doesn't have IT, then I don't really care for the music.

I would place musicianship second. Not necessarily being the best singer, guitarist, or whatever. Dragonforce has crazy leads. I can't listen to them; I think they suck. There is technical ability, and there is the ability to properly use that technical ability within the song's concept. At the same time there are songs that are very complex as far as music theory, but I can't listen to them. Frank Zappa was a great guitarist, but you don't hear how good he is on many of his songs.

After IT and musicianship, I'll go with good guitar playing (again I'm throwing Dragonforce out here), then good singing. I'll put up with some bad singing if I really dig what else is going on. I like what Rush does everywhere but the vocals.

I'll put lyrics next and rhythm last. Any good song has an identifiable rhythm, but that is such an uninteresting thing to emphasize in music.

[Melwing17]

I don't listen for anything in particular to LIKE a song, but I can tell you one thing for sure-

If a song has horrible lyrics, I can't listen to it no matter how incredible the other components of the song may be.

[Onacara]

I don't listen for anything in particular to LIKE a song, but I can tell you one thing for sure-

If a song has horrible lyrics, I can't listen to it no matter how incredible the other components of the song may be.


Horrible lyrics are a matter of taste also.

Some huge hit songs that many many people like have "horrible" lyrics.

[Jim]

Not to mention the allegedly controversial titles like "If You Seek Amy."

Jim

[atmospro]

I agree with much of what Agent Minivan has said. most rock bands today don't know how to play their instruments properly. Most music gets popular based on Hooks. The catchy parts of songs.

I look first of all at song construction and musician ship. If the band can't play and play with emotion I don't care. Listen to any great blues player, whether it guitar, piano or whatever instrument they always play with great emotion. That doesn't mean every song is sad. If we take Joe Satriani's first album "Surfing with the Aliens" while all instrumental each song evokes a different emotion. That's the difference between being a good technical player and great player.

Next if lyrics are present, I want the song to say something to me. It could be fun it could be serious. Too many songs are nonsense or drippy pointless love songs.

Vocals are important in that the singer needs to be able to sing well and convey the point of the song. Again the ability of the singer to emote is very important. Opera singers do this extremely well even if you can't understand the lyrics.

Too many times I'll here a good song that it well constructed but is lost in poor key and tempo choices that don't fit the content or singer. For example we'll use the song "It's a Sin" by the Pet Shop Boys. The original is flat and subtle in it's portrayal of the songs emotional content. This song was remade by Gamma Ray on the Power Plant album. This version has emotion and power busting out of and it turns a popular yet lack luster song into an infectious powerhouse. Note: Both versions are on Youtube.


Finally is it new. I'm so tired of the same old same old content. The song need to speak to me of something I haven't heard before Now that's difficult to define, because it's a very conceptual thing and probably my favorite music is always pushing the limits of what is possible.

[Agent Minivann]

I love me some blues and Joe Satriani.

[Einar's puppy]

I Dragonforce has crazy leads. I can't listen to them; I think they suck.


This is actually quite true. On the album they are amazing. In concert? Not so much. Go on you tube and look up them playing through the fire and the flames. In one of the videos, the guy actually breaks a string. They must miss half of the notes.


Finally is it new. I'm so tired of the same old same old content. The song need to speak to me of something I haven't heard before Now that's difficult to define, because it's a very conceptual thing and probably my favorite music is always pushing the limits of what is possible.


So I'm guessing Mozart is out for you? :p

[Blazemane]

It should tug at my emotions. I don't care whether it makes me happy, or sad, but if has to do something.

It has to have work put into it. If you just sit down and whip something up in five minutes, I'm not going to respect it as much as if you really pour your time and soul into it.

Basically, I feel the same here. But I probably have more lax standards than you.

I'm mainly obsessed with movie soundtracks. Maybe its cheap because the composers already have their story written out and they just need to find the music that matches it, but I mean...

Last of the Mohicans?
Any of the Lord of the Rings movies?
Lion King (I'm far more a fan of Hans Zimmer's instrumental work for this movie than Tim Rice and Elton John's lyrical work. Not that they weren't good, but Hans Zimmer is amazing)?

All soundtracks of musical genius.

I also embrace a lot of alternative rock.

[Einar's puppy]

I also embrace a lot of alternative rock.

:word:

I agree with Pyre a little but when he says it needs to tug at your emotions. Classical music really tugs, but I don't really like it. This obviously shows I don't like the same kind of tug that Pyre is talking about. A good example of this would be "Dream On" by Aerosmith or "Let is be" by the Beatles.

[GreenLanturn]

It all depends on what I'm listening to; which is either Classical (mostly medieval madrigals) or Rock.

In Classical music I listen for cords that line up correctly, proper tone, and obviously a good flowing melody. Basically I love things that are relaxing. I HIGHLY recommend The King's Singers, and one of their (over 100 CDs) Madrigal History Tour; I like the Spanish and German pieces the best. Unfortunatly many of their CDs are difficult to find, but I picked up the a fore mentioned for $5 on amazon.

In rock... well I have no idea what I look for; I tend to listen to things that will keep me pumped while I workout or that will keep me awake when I need to be (doing homework late at night).

I didn't vote.

[Menchy]

I'm mainly obsessed with movie soundtracks.

Before I saw Slumdog Millionaire I thought it was impossible to fall in love with a movie's soundtrack... but as I discovered, it is most certainly not. O...Saya is one of the best songs I've heard in a long long time.

[atmospro]

Finally is it new. I'm so tired of the same old same old content. The song need to speak to me of something I haven't heard before Now that's difficult to define, because it's a very conceptual thing and probably my favorite music is always pushing the limits of what is possible.


So I'm guessing Mozart is out for you? :p

I'm speaking in general terms about new music not, in other words not repeating the past.

Mozart I like but I'm more of a Wagner kind of guy. Wagner would load down the bottom end of his orchestra, with extra bass violins, tubas, kettle drums and most importantly the Octobass. This a double size bass violin that require 2 people to play. One person stands on a stool and fingers the instrument while the other person to play the bow. What this did was create a dark sound that literally shook the rafters of whatever venue the orchestra was playing. He changed the sound of classical music with his orchestration that the audience could literally feel as well as hear. This is done these days with amplification. He also wrote very operatic vocal parts to his compositions. If Wagner were alive today he would be in some progressive metal band.

[whitestuff]

The poll was missing what I would choose. I really love good noises. Whether it be a wall of chunky sound, the timbre of a singer's voice or quirky electronic blips; if it has good noise I'm in. A couple of examples of what I'm talking about is the nifty blips in"Beetles" by Aphex Twin (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af9pGOol7aI) or the chorus of "Sprout and the Bean" by Joanna Newsom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYl0uLrXP7U).

I guess that is why my favourite bands are Radiohead, They Might Be Giants and NIN. They all make great noise.

Not all noises though, as we all know that any noise annoys an oyster... and bad noises like that awful clarinet (?) in "Get Right" by Jennifer Lopez makes me want to stab me ears with a screwdriver. No link for that one. If you dislike yourself enough to choose to harm your ears in such a way you can find it yourself.

[Ugly-Caco]

N.E.R.D. ...these guys are so talented. Not fond of the lyrics part though. Beats, rhythm, blend of styles, freshness, memorable tunes. They can even pull a great song with minimalism.