[ilikemonkeys]

I'm looking for a technical definition.

Someone asked me if you call and instrumental a "song" and i said no, because a song is defined as something with words......and I wrong?

any insight?

BILL

 

[iancraig10]

I'd say you were right.

An old question ... cantata - sung, sonata - played.

Something I don't like - Classical music = orchestral music. Technically, classical music comes from the Haydn/Mozart era but so many people think that classical is an orchestra playing something other than film soundtracks.

 

[gratefulshrink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilikemonkeys I'm looking for a technical definition. Someone asked me if you call and instrumental a "song" and i said no, because a song is defined as something with words......and I wrong? any insight? BILL

I'd also say you were right, technically speaking, but usage in English probably allows for the word "song" even if there are no words. But then again, birdsongs have no words (unless you think of them as scat or whistles).

Otherwise, IMHO:

For Jazz: a "composition"

For Folk/Rock: a "tune" ??

 

[Hell_Gopher]

Pieces? Tracks? Numbers? Tunes, yes. Could be movements, concertos, pavans, galliards, fancies, ditties...

 

[asmox]

from the viewpoint of a dictionary, you are right.

personally, i don't think semantics are that big of a deal in this case. i largely prefer instrumental music, and i'm of the opinion that instrumental music in the hands of the proper musicians can sing volumes above what any sung lyric can.

i generally use one of two epithets.. song or track.

 

[britishbane]

An instrumental?

 

[asmox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by britishbane An instrumental?

 

[Beach123456]

Ive always used instrumental or track.

 

[ojnihs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beach123456 Ive always used instrumental or track.

Ditto

 

[Dusty Chalk]

I use "piece" or "track" if I want to refer to a song or an instrumental interchangeably.

Yeah. It's like the same thing with a person or a group. How do you refer to both of these in the same sentence? I (try to) always use the plural: I.E., "Who are your favourite artists?"

 

[The Actual]

I have no trouble calling it a song, but to confer more information might use "instrumental" when first describing something to someone.

Also: I use track and song interchangeably.

 

[terrymx]

dictionary defined song as adaptive for singing.

technically a song without singing is instrumental. technically it also based on different genre. rock instrumental can be a solo, a recording of ambients is an ambient recording. up to this point its becoming very acceptable already just to call them songs when refering to a specific track in an album. unless its for a final exam or you're going to get killed for using the term song to mean instrumental. if i have to think this intellect about such little thing i will have to kill myself too.

 

[Jahn]

a dub.

 

[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beach123456 Ive always used instrumental or track.

that doesn't sound quite right to me.
'instrumental' - yes. no singing there.

but 'track' encompasses both singing / not singing (and whistling, talking, humming, machine hammering, white noise, whatever). of course you can say "listen to this track", but it can't be used to differentiate - the person spoken to won't know whether there's singing or not.

 

[Edwood]

Another vote for "Instrumental".

On the other hand, no instruments and purely vocals is usually called "Acapella."

-Ed