The Most Important Part of Music

[Antisaint]

So everyone has different tastes in music, and everyone has different reasons. But why do you like the music you like? Is it the lyrics? The guitar work? The beats?

For me, the vocals are what make or break a band. I can't stand whiny vocals (MCR, Dashboard Confessionals, etc.), but I'll also be pretty "meh" to a band unless they have gritty vocals (Rise Against, Against Me!). Call me shallow, but no amount of awesome energy or meaningful lyrics can make up for a shitty voice.

[Shagg]

I always like music that is original, but versatile. I don't want to listen to an album and think "This is exactly like The Clash" or think "This one song sounds cool, but the rest of the album sounds exactly the same." If every song is a new, fresh experience for me, and sounds very artistic, then it's great.

[IronWire]

I agree, vocals can make or break a band, but they aren't as important to me as the guitar work and the drumming. The MOST IMPORTANT part of music, however is the 4 elements coming together (vocals, lyrics, guitar, drums). The overall sound is what makes music music, if you break down songs into just one of the four it'll probably suck anyway.

[TheFerret]

I agree, vocals can make or break a band, but they aren't as important to me as the guitar work and the drumming. The MOST IMPORTANT part of music, however is the 4 elements coming together (vocals, lyrics, guitar, drums). The overall sound is what makes music music, if you break down songs into just one of the four it'll probably suck anyway.

That's true. When there is a harmony among the elements, then the band is good. I don't really like bands that have the guitarist overpower the song. Bad lyrics can deter me from a song, but they won't make me stop listening to the band if the sound is good.

[fat-red-chicken]

I find that I generally can't listen to a band unless they have at least 2 of the following:
A harp
A banjo
A harmonica
An accordian
An orchestra
A random object used as an instrument such as a saw/bow and arrow
Pretentious, perhaps, but I have issues with bands that play conventional instruments unless they play them in an unconventional manner or very, very well.

[Britney Spears]

Music to me is all about the rhythm and timing. If a band doesn't have that, they're nowhere. Look at Klaxons or The Fratellis: their music isn't complex at all but their rhythms are astounding. That's why record companies picked them up.

[Cyan]

I tend to look more at the band than the music itself, and see what they represent. If I like their attitude and what they're doing, I usually adopt with the music. For example: I didn't like Mindless Self Indulgence that much when I first heard them, but I read about them, and like them as a band. My interest in supporting them grew, and their music got better to me, because it suddenly had a different meaning.

Sometimes it's more personal, for example: I like Green Day, not because of their music and attitude anymore, but because they are the band that got me into music.

[hoopymo]

Charisma is pretty important too.

[IronWire]

I have to disagree with Britney, good beats have nothing to do with good music, it just makes songs catchy. I think bands they rely too heavily on beats (which is the majority of pop songs these days) are shit, the music isn't good, its shallow and has no true meaning. The fact that record companies pick these bands up is because the large amount of listeners of mainstream music are dunderheads.

[Ox]

It's all in the vocals. A band is nothing without good vocals. They don't need to be good in any technical sense of the word, I just need to dig the singer or the band ain't for me. I love Oasis when Noel sings, but when Liam sings it just doesnt do it for me.

[hoopymo]

It's all in the vocals. A band is nothing without good vocals. They don't need to be good in any technical sense of the word, I just need to dig the singer or the band ain't for me. I love Oasis when Noel sings, but when Liam sings it just doesnt do it for me.


That's what i mean by Charisma really.

[Raxo]

Same with rappers. If a rapper doesn't have a good voice with emotion I won't really listen. There are alot of good rapper I don't listen because they have boring voices or weird crap rapping voices.

[329don]

soul, there has to be an element there beyond them just playing their instruments or singing along or what ever, usually what makes music is being able to close my eyes and really feel what the artist/artists convey. Thats why im not into country or rap i don't feel that what they is true i get thats its just going along with the culture

[javaD]

Charisma, Rythm and style...Those elements make up the band. Also the lyrical content is important.

[Athrogate]

Originality is key. As well as technical skill in composition, and instrumental ability. I also enjoy original sounding vocalists, like Stephen Malkmus, Satomi Matsuzaki, Wayne Coyne, etc...

It can't be boring. Some might call me a hypocrite with some of the bands I listen to, but not all bands have an extremely high degree of originality, I feel all of the bands I like have at least a fair degree of originality.

For example, The Velvet Underground, probably the most original band of the 20th century, but not very technically skilled. However their originality makes up for it.

[B33]

Musicianship & writing. The Beatles can write but are poor musicians.
Many death metal bands can play but not write.

[Andrey]

Something that sets it apart from other stuff.

I have no two bands that sound alike on my listening list. They all sound original in their own way.

[veveze]

Lyrics are really important to me. I like untainted bands, untainted by media and commercialism. They have to be instrumentally interesting. I really like it when they throw in cool instruments, I'm a harpist so I get happy when I hear something besides a guitar.

[Furanku]

Strange. I hardly ever listen to the vocals. To me, the vocalist just adds the sound of their voice to the sound of the rest of the music. I tend to listen for decent musical ability - most of my favourite bands are very technically gifted. They may have shit singers, but I couldnt care less.

[devilsgunner]

The guitar work is definitely the selling point for the majority of the music I like. That being said, I can't stand a band with a shit vocalist, I find the vocals to be somewhat of an important 'instrument', and if one instrument is shit then generally the whole product sounds shit. I couldn't care less about the lyrics, as long as the vocalist does his/her job in providing an awesome instrument to complement the rest of the instruments.

Drums aren't a big thing for me, but as long as they fit in with everything else then I don't mind.

Guitar is definitely the defining factor, I love it when the an awesome piece of guitar-work makes an otherwise average song into something fucking epic.

[Ziggy St. Valentine]

For me it's mostly the song writing. If the band can write a good tune that gets me into what their trying to achieve then I dig it. If a band can't write a good song, then what's the point in them making music?

[UnderOath]

In my opinion a band needs good vocals, drums and guitar to get me interested, if any one of those fails it sort of messes up the whole sound.

However, the most important thing to me is that a band doesn't churn out single after single that are just catchy and thats it. I like bands like Thrice, Saosin and Underoath that are very creative.

Also, a band like Thrice, that has lyrics which are clearly thought out and meaningful adds something awesome to the music.

[Pelican Man]

The bass.







But seriously, good songwriting. A lot of the stuff I like, no matter what style, is due to how well it's written, and how catchy the riffs are. Though all jokes aside, I do like a couple of bands purely because of the amazing bassist.

[Arielcz]

What is nice is how much emotion and feeling the artist pours on to the music. You can hear a fast guitar solo, but that doesn't make it good. There are some people who play so fast you don't get to appreciate the music. There's others like Jason Becker who can shred really well and you can still feel the music. The lyrics are also important, I can't stand music that talks about love and dance like pop music. There has to be perfect harmony between all of the elements.

[tunacake]

For me it's the overall atmosphere and emotion that's conveyed by all of the elements of the music put together; the impression you get the first time you listen to something. Then you get into the intricacies.

I'm also a sucker for some different instruments. By that I mean, if you're listening to a type of music that's mostly guitar/drums/bass/vocals/maybe a keyboard, when they add some winds or strings or something here and there it gains them a lot of points in my book.

I'm gonna have to agree with some of you about vocals. Bad vocals are so hard to ignore, so if you've got 'em, they better be good.

[Hats of!]

Pretentiousness.

Edit: Why? Yes, please, talk about how intellectual you are, am sick of all those "let's all be idiots"-bands out there. I don't mind a fucking orchestra in a rock song. Trying to eliminate pretentiousness is taking away every chance a band has to experiment. Wouldn't Atom Heart Mother Suite suck if it was a three minute song without a symphonic orchestra?

[nonsense913]

The production values of the instruments.

Which is why listening to Radiohead is like having an orgasm.

[jewishjosh]

Like Ziggy, the tune. Whether carried by the lead singer, the guitar, or some fag making a catchy tune blowing dicks, that's what grabs my attention. I usually don't pay much attention to the lyrics themselves at first, the tune is what matters to me because it usually stands out the most. Likewise, if the singer has a really annoying voice, it's more likely to drive me insane than if someone else in the band is a little off or weak.

[WongSifu]

It's all in the vocals. A band is nothing without good vocals. They don't need to be good in any technical sense of the word, I just need to dig the singer or the band ain't for me. I love Oasis when Noel sings, but when Liam sings it just doesnt do it for me.

I would disagree with this statement, but not because I don't think vocals are a core part of music, but because there are plenty of great instrumental bands.

That said, everything that's been mentioned is important. Originality, songwriting/lyrics, technical ability (Though, this one really isn't that important. I mean, look at a lot of great punk bands), creativity, the band members, etc.

[Iiro]

If music manages to bring out emotions it's good. Whether it's agressive or melodramatic etc.

[Tweek]

Pretentiousness.

Edit: Why? Yes, please, talk about how intellectual you are, am sick of all those "let's all be idiots"-bands out there. I don't mind a fucking orchestra in a rock song. Trying to eliminate pretentiousness is taking away every chance a band has to experiment. Wouldn't Atom Heart Mother Suite suck if it was a three minute song without a symphonic orchestra?
I don't think pretentiousness is quite the word you are looking for there.
Grandiose experimentation, perhaps?

[MusicalIdiot]

I like how through history, people favored melody, then harmony, now timbre, now going to rhythm. Anyways, the most important aspect of a piece of music is dependent on its genre for me anyways. Usually for the pop, alternative, and other talentless bands; I look at the harmonies and melodies, and how versatile they are with those aspects seeing as this is all they have going for them. However, I am in awe when it comes to people playing Franz Liszt, Sergei Rachmaninoff, Frederic Chopin, Sigismond Thalberg, etc. because of the skill needed to play those pieces. But as a composer, I think one of the most important things to be able to do is to be able to control mood on a whim despite genre.

[Hats of!]

I don't think pretentiousness is quite the word you are looking for there.
Grandiose experimentation, perhaps?

I wanna use pretentiousness 'cause I don't see it as a bad word.

[Warsaw]

I think it depends on the song, the artist and the way you aproach to music.

[hiono]

I think its everything put together, just like if you ate spaghetti in its seperate parts it would taste horrible.

[draterami]

Ooh, but I love spaghetti sauce by itself! :P

Anyway, for me, the vocals are important. For instance, In Flames - the first couple of albums are good because the vocals are powerful. The growls are actually growls, and there are none of the god-awful clean vocals that have been in the more recent albums. These recent albums are really hampered by the terrible pseudo-growls, which sound like Anders has lost his throat.

However, the singer doesn't actually have to be good. The music of In Flames demands a powerful vocalist to go along with the furious instruments. A band like Disillusion however, on their last album created a very bleak and cold landscape. It wouldn't be anywhere near as effective without the half singing, half speaking baritone vocals.

Another thing I really look for in music, as I hinted at just before, is the atmosphere the music creates. My favourite albums really excel at creating an interesting atmosphere. They demand that they be listened to.

Originality is key too. Sleepytime Gorilla Museum, Nahemah, Opeth (though they have so many imitators now), Arcturus, Anaal Nathrakh, Pain of Salvation, Devin Townsend. All original is some way, shape, or form. And I love 'em.

[asphysciated_emus]

I always thought that the vocals were most important, and the lyrics, but that's because most bands that come to light all have at least passable playing. Drums carry important parts as well, because if the drummer's off the entire band's going to be off.

[VampiricLord99]

I'm surprised how many people think that vocals are the most important. Doesn't anyone like Joe Satriani?

Anyways, a mix between melody and rhythm. Its hard to say which is more important, because they are both 100% necessary. You can't have a song without either, so it seems that this question can't be answered, at least the way I think of it.

[Antisaint]

I'm surprised how many people think that vocals are the most important. Doesn't anyone like Joe Satriani?

It's important because it's so subjective. Vocals are the most unique instrument in most bands (as in few people but the singer can reproduce the sound exactly), and are usually dominant to boot. Vocal styles (like growling and such) are just as diverse as guitar styles, and people will have their preferences. Bands don't have to have vocals, but if they do they better be good.

[veveze]

Just tacking this onto what Antisaint said:

Lots of people play the drums and the guitar and other instruments really well, but voice is the one thing that is truly unique to a band and to a person. Sometimes a band can be fantastic, but if the vocals are shit then the band can be shit. Personally, I can't listen to a horrible voice over nice music-it ruins it for me. It's not necessary that a band has vocals, but when it does they offer a lot to the song. To me, when a band has vocals, that's half the damn song. That's the part people remember for the most part. Not sure I actually went anywhere in trying to prove that point.

Anyhow, I think bands need some sort of uniqueness, and whether this is done through vocals or through the types of instruments they use, it has to be done. Because everything is starting to sound the same.

[OoooF4LiFe]

I like when the drums go PSSHHHHHHHHHH.


Seriously though, anything with a good beat keeps my attention. Been drumming for the past 11 or so years. So when I listen to music, I hear the bass and vocals and whatnot... But I'm really just analyzing the beat, technique, and always thinking of something cooler than what I'm listening to.

[Jesterhead]

The guitar is the key instrument. Nothing beats a well played solo. Nothing to do with speed.
If you can feel the guitarist is playing with more than his instrument, that's when the riffs and solos is truly awesome. Meeh, have problems finding "the" word.
Drums means alot too. Amon Amarth and Vader is two bands where the drums are just poor orgasm.
As said bad vocals can fuck up everything. Instrumental songs or bands can be just as good or better than any normal band. But I just can't ignore a fucking annoying voice. I've listened to a couple of bands thinking. Damn the opening riff is damn awsome! And then when the vocals adds to the song, it just fucks up everything.

But the overall feel of the song is what means the most. There's something more than just the song. I can't explain it.
That's also why seeing bands live is alot different. For instance In Flames. My favourite band, played the best concert ever. Best experience of my life, and that added the way I feel with them. They're suddenly alot more awesome, even though I didn't think that was possible! A bad live performance can really screw my relationship to a band.

Also keyboards suck. It becomes boring, Dark Tranquility, Soilwork, Dimmu Borgir. In the long run it's really really boring. Dunno why, but it just is.

[stfu]

Lyrics and a good lead guitar really do it for me.

[miimii]

Hard fast beats with a melody and contrasted with female backing vocals are always a win.

[Haggis McSpud]

They have to be instrumentally interesting. I really like it when they throw in cool instruments, I'm a harpist so I get happy when I hear something besides a guitar.

I agree with this, I was at a Turisas gig the other day, and I was totally gobsmacked by the violinist solo, it sounds sad, but a skilled musician can make any instrument appropriate for a rock gig. I really respect a band when they can experiment with different instruments or styles/ genres of music, it makes it seem as if they're not just in it for the money, but actually take pleasure in the music they create.

Vocals are also really important to me, I know a power metal band called Zonata, they have the greatest guitar riffs I've ever heard, but the singer is so crap that I can never listen to their songs the whole way through, it's quite disappointing when a band has skilled instrumentalists but a rubbish vocalist who holds them all back.

[Tweek]

For me, music needs to have emotion.
It can be absolutely terrible musically, but if it is written from the heart and reflects the anger, happiness or whatever that the artist is feeling, then I will probably like it.

[ilovebrownies]

The most important part of music, is the way it makes you feel. Be it complex, simple, new or old music, as long as it gives you a good feeling you shouldn't care. I know a lot of people who disregard music just because it's from a certain decade, and to me that's what's killing music. Like you see shows on MTV with titles like "Spanking New Music", as if the newer the music is, the better it is.

When I was younger, I would only listen to Metallica an Pantera and such. Today I can listen to ABBA and love it. So it really doesn't boil down to a single instrument so much as the amount of goosebumps a song gives you, or the ability it has to change your mood, or way of thinking.

[Dodger]

I listen mainly to rap, and I consider rap, poetry with music.
So, as with any poem, lyrics are the most important part in any rap.

The horrible rap nowadays completely shits all over hip hop origins, and the music focuses more on how much motherfucking bass you can put in a song as opposed to the cleverness, or depth of the lyrics.

Old School rap, rap the way it was supposed to be made, focuses on the lyrics and it's fucking beautiful. Fuck lil Wayne, and all the other fuckers who killed hip hop.

As for the rock I listen to, I consider harmony, how the vocals and music fits and flows, the most important.

[Pelican Man]

So I take it those of you who said vocals don't like Modest Mouse?

[Antisaint]

So I take it those of you who said vocals don't like Modest Mouse?

I haven't heard much from them, but I like what I've heard.

[CnGy]

but I have issues with bands that play conventional instruments unless they play them in an unconventional manner or very, very well.

That's relative to the times you realize. Those instruments you mentioned are all conventional too. Especially like, well, all of them.

[Ox]

So I take it those of you who said vocals don't like Modest Mouse?

It's all in the vocals. A band is nothing without good vocals. They don't need to be good in any technical sense of the word, I just need to dig the singer or the band ain't for me. I love Oasis when Noel sings, but when Liam sings it just doesnt do it for me.

I love Modest Mouse.

[Pelican Man]

I love Modest Mouse.

I love you.

Also I didn't read your post. And I shall continue not reading posts like the hooligan I am.

[BassBastard]

The most important part of music is cohesion.

The Rhythm section provides this. Drums, Bass and Rhythm guitar in a standard rock band provide this. In Big Band, it is Drums, Bass, low brass, low sax and Piano. Without this, it is an unlistenable mess. Even Pink Floyd back before Dark Side when Sid was having animal calls shouted from member to member had bongos keeping the rhythm.

Everything else is window dressing.

[javaD]

Pasion and style! You must have pasion in order to attract the people and transmit the message and you need style to keep the people from listening to your stuff.

[Laurence]

Ah, definitely lyrics for me. There has to be at least some level of lyrical consistency from song to song on an album or even just one song by itself. That having been said, I am still as susceptible as anyone to a catchy song with god-awful lyrics, but when I'm talking about music I adore, the lyrics are most important. A song can be incredibly upbeat but have depressing-as-fuck lyrics, or vice-versa (see: Radiohead).

When it comes to vocals, they are almost as important but not quite - as far as I am concerned, I can deal with average vocals if the voice suits the lyrics or delivers them in the right way (see: Neutral Milk Hotel, Los Campesinos!).

As far as instrumentation is concerned, whatever sounds good suits. I started this post intending to say that is was only lyrics but I have to admit now that it is really a combination of lyrics and vocal delivery.

[eightiesbaby80]

I believe the lyrics and the vocals are the most important part of music. The voice doesn't have to be that great, it just has to be able to catch a lot of people's ears

[Bayview05]

My two factors for how good music is:

1. I really like songs that are funky. The better the chance of you dancing or fucking to it, the better it is. Even if someone doesn't like that style to a song, if it can make them absentmindedly move to it, it's good.

2. Diversity on an album: I don't like listening to Let There Be Rock and thinking "Wow, this song is 40 minutes long." Instead, I like it when a song has a unique beat, structure, tone, vocal track, etc. from any other song on an album. If it does not sound like anything else, kudos.

Also I think rhythm guitar is a huge factor. A lead guitar could go into a ten minute long incredible solo, but if the rhythm guitar is lacking, then the song is no good.

[deicide]

I think that the drums are very important. If I tried to listen to something like Vital Remains without drums then it would probably sound terrible. It changes for a lot of things though. For jazz, it sounds strange without a keyboard/piano and reggae doesn't sound that good without a loud bass.

[skowron]

it's all about the lyrics.

[Ikin]

Beat- I've always liked songs with a strong beat to them, something to tap my foot to.
Emotion - It's usually emotion that draws me to a particular song or band. Most bands I don't like don't sound like they play and sing with emotion
Ambition - A lot of fans don't like when a band changes their sound. but personally, I applaud artist's attempts to expand their range and experiment with their sound. Listening to four albums that sound exactly the same gets boring.

[koots]

Lyrics are the most important part. I can's stand songs where you have no clue what the words are. How do you sing along to 'grooannn woooof aaaarrrrrhhhhggg'.

Then there has to be a good beat, sucks when a lyrical masterpiece is put with shite.

[SealPunter]

i see it as the abilities of the musicians. I don't want some fucking faggot who just sings, I want a fucker who can sing and play guitar. Skill is everything.

[Samuraininja333]

Musical ability on Guitar, Bass, Keyboard (optional), Drums, and Vocals.
I can't stand a shitty band who focuses every song on the singers ability (Coldplay)

I cannot stand bands that need to look like the style of music.

[hoopymo]

I listen mainly to rap, and I consider rap, poetry with music.


I consider this poetry with music, literally

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wr_i3Y9_c4

But back on topic, those who say lyrics, you can't enjoy some daft punk songs then or great gig in the sky by pink floyd?

[Laurence]

The title of the thread is 'Most Important'. It doesn't mean that that person is restricted to listening to only music with lyrics.