GK photo wrote:
case in point:

the leonard cohen song, hallelujah. ask ten people if it's an uplifting paean to love, and nine out of ten will say yes.

the beauty is actually knowing what he meant by/with the lyrics.

that, alone, is why that song is a masterpiece. plus, he tosses in some very interesting musical/lyrical elements at the beginning (that i won't bore you with). but it clearly is--for no other reason than the aforementioned lyrical ambiguity--one of the greatest songs ever.

it drips with passionate obsession. something way more timeless than a silly little love song.

Disclaimer: I have been interested in his work (novels, poetry, and music) for years.

Aside from his mastery of words, one thing that has intrigued me is the portability of his music. IIRC musicians from across the spectrum have come together over the years and produced three tribute CDs to Mr. Cohen using his lyrics adapted to their respective musical styles. Not only did each artist/group make their "assigned" song work; they all made it work very well. Quite a feat.

GK photo wrote:
case in point:

the leonard cohen song, hallelujah. ask ten people if it's an uplifting paean to love, and nine out of ten will say yes.

the beauty is actually knowing what he meant by/with the lyrics.

that, alone, is why that song is a masterpiece. plus, he tosses in some very interesting musical/lyrical elements at the beginning (that i won't bore you with). but it clearly is--for no other reason than the aforementioned lyrical ambiguity--one of the greatest songs ever.

it drips with passionate obsession. something way more timeless than a silly little love song.

Sign me "The Baffled King"

GK photo wrote:
case in point:

the leonard cohen song, hallelujah. ask ten people if it's an uplifting paean to love, and nine out of ten will say yes.

the beauty is actually knowing what he meant by/with the lyrics.

that, alone, is why that song is a masterpiece. plus, he tosses in some very interesting musical/lyrical elements at the beginning (that i won't bore you with). but it clearly is--for no other reason than the aforementioned lyrical ambiguity--one of the greatest songs ever.

it drips with passionate obsession. something way more timeless than a silly little love song.

Absolutely. I mean, the coolest thing about it IMHO is that it actually delves into the complex meaning of the Hebrew word itself, which is not always benign. There's no doubt that Cohen is aware of the implications and he uses Biblical references (amongst other things) to explore them.

It's really a song about being humbled ---some might even say abjected--- by love. People are brought down from their thrones (King David), "tied up" and stripped of physical power (Samson, by Delilah), shot down (by "someone who outdrew you"), all implying a seduction ---a temptation--- as the path to defeat.

But more than that, it's a song about songs/poems/hymns and their inspiration, about being overtaken by the spirit, and being spurred ---hell, forced--- to write hymns and songs about it, which Cohen sets up from the get-go when he references a secret chord that David played. The singer could be talking to/about his muse (not a specific person even, but to the general Muse, the spirit of inspiration) as much as he could be talking to a lover... in a sense, about "wrestling" (nudge nudge, wink wink) with the Muse, a struggle that has no definitive winner or loser but often yields great art, which, again, is not always joyous... sometimes, often, it's a cold and lonely Hallelujah, as in the case of the absences of the disdainful Muse (creative/writer's block), which can be far more dreadful ("But now you never show it to me, do you?") than her presence. In the end, only the Lord of Song can judge the depth of the results of these encounters, before whom artists come not in majesty, and with great pride, but humbled and scarred and battle-worn.

And, if we follow that reference (the Lord of Song), it's also a song about divine inspiration, the outcome of which is scripture, which is why it's appropriate that it's a hymn that references scripture, which takes us right back, full-circle, to the word "hallelujah" in its most common context (praise to Yah, which is YHWH, which is God, whom we love... but also dread). 

So, yeah. It really, REALLY is kind of a high-watermark masterpiece.

Managing Light wrote:
I couldn't agree more, GK, especially when we're talking about the golden age of Broadway.  For example, My Fair Lady, whose lyrics were by  Alan Jay Lerner:

the lyricists from the tin pan alley/broadway/american songbook era were the truest form of wordsmiths, ever.

what they could pack into two or three short four line stanzas, plus a two line chorus (and maybe another two line bridge) was awe-inspiring.

lerner
(ira) gershwin
porter
mercer
hart

and it goes on.

GK photo wrote:

the lyricists from the tin pan alley/broadway/american songbook era were the truest form of wordsmiths, ever.

what they could pack into two or three short four line stanzas, plus a two line chorus (and maybe another two line bridge) was awe-inspiring.

lerner
(ira) gershwin
porter
mercer
hart

and it goes on.

Agreed.

DivaEroticus wrote:
Agreed.

i don't know much, but i guarantee (from past posts read) that you and i could sit down for an evening and pick some great music to listen to.

E H wrote:
Music is numbers, just like words,, in any language. From what little I know/studied and or seen, numbers play huge on if it's a hit or not,, there is even a computer program that will do just that. I am not sure if it takes in that the frequency in the  c note was changed or not. If you can change the music to numbers you may find the hidden message. Hebrew is where the words/numbers are 1.

that's oversimplifying it, in a grand scale. post-pythagoras, music (at least western music) became dependent on the chromatic scale, and all of its possibilities/limitations.

if you play music (even without studying music theory), you will quickly learn that certain repeatable patterns (progressions) always work.

mention the numbers 1-4-5 to a blues musician, and they will instantly know what you are referring to. the same can be applied to a jazz player with the numbers 2-5-1. by splitting the intervals between octaves into 12 slices, pythagoras laid out a blueprint by which all harmonic/en harmonic/dissonant  (and otherwise) scale and chord progressions could be built upon.

trust me...there has been no redefining of the "code" for centuries. some forms of music (non-western) deviate from the blueprint; but if you listen to them closely enough, you see that they all still can fit in the pocket. getting too far outside of it will create tones that he human ear finds offensive. hell, even within that structure, there are plenty of examples where that occurs.

so yes, music--at its core--is just numbers. but like the best usage of "numbers" (architecture, etc) it still is a fluid, non-rigid system that has plenty of room for improvisation. 

but this thread was about lyrics: a fantastic lyric offers music more than a static value. even though melody is what we instantly associate with a musical connection, an incredible lyric can take those pieces of the 12 note pie, and transcend them into the ether.

GK photo wrote:

that's oversimplifying it, in a grand scale. post-pythagoras, music (at least western music) became dependent on the chromatic scale, and all of its possibilities/limitations.

if you play music (even without studying music theory), you will quickly learn that certain repeatable patterns (progressions) always work.

mention the numbers 1-4-5 to a blues musician, and they will instantly know what you are referring to. the same can be applied to a jazz player with the numbers 2-5-1. by splitting the intervals between octaves into 12 slices, pythagoras laid out a blueprint by which all harmonic/en harmonic/dissonant  (and otherwise) scale and chord progressions could be built upon.

trust me...there has been no redefining of the "code" for centuries. some forms of music (non-western) deviate from the blueprint; but if you listen to them closely enough, you see that they all still can fit in the pocket. getting too far outside of it will create tones that he human ear finds offensive. hell, even within that structure, there are plenty of examples where that occurs.

so yes, music--at its core--is just numbers. but like the best usage of "numbers" (architecture, etc) it still is a fluid, non-rigid system that has plenty of room for improvisation. 

but this thread was about lyrics: a fantastic lyric offers music more than a static value. even though melody is what we instantly associate with a musical connection, an incredible lyric can take those pieces of the 12 note pie, and transcend them into the ether.

That is where this computer program comes in it takes everything all music/lyrics finds the logarithm compares that to other number 1 hits and tell you if it will hit or not. Not to be downer, but once you know the hit logarnthm,, I would think transcending them into ether would be childs play and without music, lyrics are but a poem and not song. Personally they have to be one lyrics and music, they both have to be right,, I just think you cant talk about one and not the other, they both carry the same weight.

E H wrote:
That is where this computer program comes in it takes everything all music/lyrics finds the logarithm compares that to other number 1 hits and tell you if it will hit or not.

there are three of four tried and true chord progressions that have been done to death. that's how i learned to play (before i knew anything about music theory). i had heard them all a million times (exaggeration) before, and could easily play the song  (bebop jazz tunes, notwithstanding), chord-wise, on a first run listen. the only difference might be found in the melody line (which is still the only thing that will differentiate any 1/5/6/4--for example progression). 

trust me; you've heard pretty much every chordal progression thousands of times, if you listen to music regularly.

the song mentioned in my op is a very familiar progression. it's been done a billion times. what sets it apart is the lyric. the melody itself is simple, too. he does a very cool thing in the first stanza, where he mentions a chord progression in the lyric, and the chords follow along. but the I-mVI (relative minor) chord progression is about the oldest one known to western music.

i don't think lc plugged his lyrics into a computer, and had it spit out a progression. it's a very well crafted example of songwriting skill.

DivaEroticus wrote:
"In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me as you lick the boots of death borne out of fear."

Ian Anderson - Wind Up

All of his lyrics, really, but this is just...perfect.

Ian Anderson = tremendously underrated and brilliant!!!

I remember the first time I heard Cross-eyed Mary on the radio when I was 12...Jethro Tull fan ever since.

GK photo wrote:

there are three of four tried and true chord progressions that have been done to death. that's how i learned to play (before i knew anything about music theory). i had heard them all a million times (exaggeration) before, and could easily play the song  (bebop jazz tunes, notwithstanding), chord-wise, on a first run listen. the only difference might be found in the melody line (which is still the only thing that will differentiate any 1/5/6/4--for example progression). 

trust me; you've heard pretty much every chordal progression thousands of times, if you listen to music regularly.

the song mentioned in my op is a very familiar progression. it's been done a billion times. what sets it apart is the lyric. the melody itself is simple, too. he does a very cool thing in the first stanza, where he mentions a chord progression in the lyric, and the chords follow along. but the I-mVI (relative minor) chord progression is about the oldest one known to western music.

i don't think lc plugged his lyrics into a computer, and had it spit out a progression. it's a very well crafted example of songwriting skill.

and sometimes it is nice to play,, I dont think they used it in this one either

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10 … =2&theater