It's May 05, 2024, 07:21:04 PM
No I'm not 21. That was a few years ago. What would that have to do with this argument?
The reason I said the best rappers lyrically shit on the best rock musicians was in response to a previous post that attacked the lyrical ability of rappers using "brash, snobbish claims." Was this you on a different account? I'm not the one getting all riled up and angry.
If you had an interpretation of the song this whole time then why did you act like you can't understand it? I would argue that illogic himself "sells out" towards the end. Either way it says much more than "You're a sellout, I'm not." Along with revolution it can be applied to many different situations.QuoteI could apply this song to Bush and Obama. Nixon and Carter. Batista and Castro. God and Lucifer.thinking about it, you could also apply 1000 Whispers to various presidents, as well as God and Lucifer. It could be applied to the Who as well.
I could apply this song to Bush and Obama. Nixon and Carter. Batista and Castro. God and Lucifer.
Quote"The barrels of hell understand the logic of death/and ferals undwell to uncover their breasts"Those are just random words, some of them not even words. ferals? undwell? That line doesn't have any meaning. There's a difference between trying to sound complex and actually succeeding in making an actual statement. Even if it had meaning, then that would still be just a line. Can you make an entire song that follows a concept where the lines make sense and is consistent throughout?
"The barrels of hell understand the logic of death/and ferals undwell to uncover their breasts"
When I say illogic is more lyrical I'm approaching this from a hip hop perspective where rhyming ability and use of poetic elements as well as subject matter determine your skills, things that illogic has down pretty well. When an artist is accused of "not being able to rap", its usually because they have a very simple rhyme scheme. If you have a different criteria where simpler language wins out then there's no way we will ever agree what makes the "best lyricist." The reason I chose this specific example is because people usually accuse rap of being too simple, hence this was a counter-argument to those people. But since you are taking the opposite approach I could go back and take a rapper mentioned earlier, Chuck D, who you have even identified as a legend of rock. He has simpler rhymes thus would fit your critieria.
One final comment. Musically isn't lyrically. I never said Illogic was musically better than The Who so I don't know why you are bringing this up. Obviously he took one loop from a more complex instrumental and rapped over it. My only argument was to say that Illogic can write better lyrics than them, but you disagree because you have a different opinion on what makes a song lyrical. However I have a feeling that most of the people on here would agree with me.
edit: actually now that I think about it, the same reason The Who are more musically advanced than Illogic could explain why Illogic is more lyrically advanced. because their production is more complex and varied and incorporates different instruments, while 1000 Whispers uses one loop. Similarly, illogic incorporates more metaphors, internal rhymes and multisyllabic rhymes, making his lyrics more advanced.
Then you should have just clarified that in the beginning.
It's not that I didn't get it. It's that I didn't feel it. And the reason I didn't feel it is because lyrically it's all over the place I couldn't get any sense of emotion coming from the words. It has no structure, and I don't mean in terms of rhythm and rhyme. I mean in content. it's just a bunch of very different examples saying the same thing. And I don't always mind that but it just went to far out of this world.
I've felt for years that too often rappers sacrifice content to appease rhyme structure. Obviously song writers I like do the same, but I just don't find it as bad. In rap random words just get added to fill gaps and that's fine for some songs, but for dark serious songs I'd rather just hear the silence or have it sound less melodic.
Lyrics are very musical. The difference between a lyric and poem is that one is set to music and should accompany that music. Bernie Taupin is an incredible lyricist. So is Cole Porter, and many times they never really say anything and upon simply reading the lyrics like a book you get nothing from them. In Won't Get Fooled Again, you feel the lyrics much more in the song by the way they are written, not just in terms of literature, but in terms of musical composition. They compliment the music in a way that gives you the full meaning the song. Action thought Townsend was bitter because of how the words came across with out music. The song as a package comes across more as a man that's been there done that, seen these so called revolutions, and each time he'll just pick up his guitar and play/just like yesterday. he's not angry. If a real revolution and change comes, that's great, but he's not holding his breath. And the musical performance of Roger Daltrey is also masterful in the way he sings the lyrics and the music that go with them.
This guy can do so much with a guitar that someone like Chuck Berry or Jimi Hendrix could not do
Go back and read the post. I even quoted what I was responding to
see that's where this argument goes towards opinion. What emotion you get out of something depends on the individual and whether they can relate to the topic. To me 1000 Whispers has a gradual progression that is resolved by the end. I enjoy listening to him speak. Though I get emotion out of "Won't Get Fooled Again" as well, there exist people who wouldn't. This is why I said we should be judging it on structure because otherwise it is all about the individual experience and everyone has different tastes.
I would agree with this in general but rap is also a lot more constricting in general. They have to flow to a specific beat in time and make it rhyme whereas a singer has more freedom to improvise. What makes a rap song "sound good" is the rhymes and their flow, while other genres rely on the singers voice and notes to make the song sound good. If a rapper doesn't rhyme in the right place then it won't sound right. I don't blame this on the rappers, I blame it on the confines of the genre. I think its amazing that even with such restrictions they are able to say quite a lot, especially the ones who can utilize complex rhyme schemes and come up with clever metaphors at the same time.
Poetry also contain lyrics. The "voice" of a poem is the lyrical speaker. but there is no music involved. Hence there is a distinction between lyrical and musical.
Wouldn't that make him more skilled at the guitar? Whereas Chuck Berry would have more classic songs and have a much greater influence. If translated to rap, it would be like comparing 2pac to AZ. One is mainstream and appeals to more people, but imo that doesn't make him better. It makes him more influential. (I know I'm going to get hate for this because Pac is considered a god here)
I have to reply to your comment that it is the feeling that makes an instrumental better. Granted most of rap is sampled, but there's also a lot of original compositions as well. What makes them not as good as rock songs? They are popular, they have people vibing to them. I wouldn't dream of calling them as good as classic rock instrumentals, but you can't really argue that point based on feeling alone. Isn't the whole reason people are hating on mainstream rap right now because it is "feel good" music and not enough deep content? Even sampling, if you think about the whole concept of the break-beat (taking the most "feel good" part of a song and looping it).
I'm not sure what you think I was getting at. My comment on the feeling of the singer making the song better by adding to it properly or my comment that an instrumental with emotion is better than one with out.
As said above I didn't just mean more complex instrumental. The Who song has a feeling that 1000 Whispers doesn't. And my example of metal was what I wanted to use to show you that.
I think most of your response speaks for itself. I don't think I have to reply to most of that. ExceptQuoteI'm not sure what you think I was getting at. My comment on the feeling of the singer making the song better by adding to it properly or my comment that an instrumental with emotion is better than one with out.I quote you:QuoteAs said above I didn't just mean more complex instrumental. The Who song has a feeling that 1000 Whispers doesn't. And my example of metal was what I wanted to use to show you that.You can't claim the Who song has more feeling that 1000 Whispers. Its your opinion. Illogic writing more complex lyrics is fact. And of course it takes more skill to write more complex lyrics. I'm not even gonna argue with you on that point. If you want to go against the grain on that one be my guest, but I'm not going to be the one to argue that point with you. Peace and regards.
Of course it takes more skill to write more complex lyrics because its harder to do. What kind of moron would think otherwise? Why in the world do you think they call it "complex lyrics"? What do you think "complex" means? Of course its harder to say something using a metaphor than it is to simply say it. Of course its harder to rhyme than it is to not, the more complex the rhyme the harder it is. As I said before, I'm not going to argue with you on that point further because its just common sense.
Quote from: rapsodie on June 16, 2009, 10:41:43 PMOf course it takes more skill to write more complex lyrics because its harder to do. What kind of moron would think otherwise? Why in the world do you think they call it "complex lyrics"? What do you think "complex" means? Of course its harder to say something using a metaphor than it is to simply say it. Of course its harder to rhyme than it is to not, the more complex the rhyme the harder it is. As I said before, I'm not going to argue with you on that point further because its just common sense.You just don't get it. It's not always the words themselves on the surface but what's behind them. If you were writing dialogue or a conversation in a novel or film you can write the most powerful words in art and do it with out rhyming and with out a large vocabulary. That's what many music artist are able to do with their lyrics. To take a simple line and make it mean somenthing to a million different people is harder than making a complex line meaning something. Just like with my Chuck Berry impression. It is harder to compose Johnny B Good than it is to compose.Then I got Mary pregnantand man that was all she wroteAnd for my nineteenth birthday I got a union card and a wedding coatWe went down to the courthouseand the judge put it all to restNo wedding day smiles no walk down the aisleNo flowers no wedding dressYou grew up where young girls they grow up fastYou took what you were handed and left behind what was askedbut what they asked baby wasn't rightyou didn't have to live that life,I was gonna be your Romeo you were gonna be my JulietThese days you don't wait on Romeo'syou wait on that welfare checkand on all the pretty things that you can't ever haveand on all the promisesThese two verses, from different songs. No complicated rhyme structures, no big words, but harder to write than a lot of songs because they come with wisdom attatched to them. The whole concept of "less is more" wasn't just made up by idiots who couldn't use rhyming dictionaries.One day you'll see what I mean. You may always love and appreciate Illogic and you may always think that complicated is very hard, but you'll see that very simple can also be very hard. Whether you beilieve it's harder is another thing but I predict that you will one day appreciate it.
Quote from: Shallow on June 17, 2009, 09:16:51 AMQuote from: rapsodie on June 16, 2009, 10:41:43 PMOf course it takes more skill to write more complex lyrics because its harder to do. What kind of moron would think otherwise? Why in the world do you think they call it "complex lyrics"? What do you think "complex" means? Of course its harder to say something using a metaphor than it is to simply say it. Of course its harder to rhyme than it is to not, the more complex the rhyme the harder it is. As I said before, I'm not going to argue with you on that point further because its just common sense.You just don't get it. It's not always the words themselves on the surface but what's behind them. If you were writing dialogue or a conversation in a novel or film you can write the most powerful words in art and do it with out rhyming and with out a large vocabulary. That's what many music artist are able to do with their lyrics. To take a simple line and make it mean somenthing to a million different people is harder than making a complex line meaning something. Just like with my Chuck Berry impression. It is harder to compose Johnny B Good than it is to compose.Then I got Mary pregnantand man that was all she wroteAnd for my nineteenth birthday I got a union card and a wedding coatWe went down to the courthouseand the judge put it all to restNo wedding day smiles no walk down the aisleNo flowers no wedding dressYou grew up where young girls they grow up fastYou took what you were handed and left behind what was askedbut what they asked baby wasn't rightyou didn't have to live that life,I was gonna be your Romeo you were gonna be my JulietThese days you don't wait on Romeo'syou wait on that welfare checkand on all the pretty things that you can't ever haveand on all the promisesThese two verses, from different songs. No complicated rhyme structures, no big words, but harder to write than a lot of songs because they come with wisdom attatched to them. The whole concept of "less is more" wasn't just made up by idiots who couldn't use rhyming dictionaries.One day you'll see what I mean. You may always love and appreciate Illogic and you may always think that complicated is very hard, but you'll see that very simple can also be very hard. Whether you beilieve it's harder is another thing but I predict that you will one day appreciate it. i think a good/cool example is ernest hemmingway's 6 word short story, "For sale: baby shoes, never used"