I like both but at times find instrumental music more.. uh, "dietetic." Ya, know, low-cal, easy on the brain, less earworm afterecho, etc. I listen to synthwave a lot, for instance, bc it's not too saturated with phat distorted rhythm guitar chuka-chukas, but more slick akin to hi-tech AOR. Not much envy there, though, since by default, most of my life I've listened to music non-native to me, most English in vocals, although, even today, and perhaps because of my lack of comprehension back then, as a child, even now I'm unconsciously oblivious to the vocals and message. Whereas the people I hear, even INFPs tend to lean towards the message, the heartwrenching, tearjerking story told, instead of the overall quality of the sound production, instruments, composition, harmonies, ze hook!, etc. One INFP girl asked if I knew, aside the exotic stuff I referenced first, some more, ehem, "mainstream" bands, something more familiar of today. I said "U2," pffh, I could even tell anything more modern, maybe Snow Patrol... like who cares? Listen to some djent at times, some instrumental ones as well. I don't how people can be so shallow to turn away from the music itself and focus only on the poetry of lyrics. There has to be some blindness to it since the songs they reference have autotuned vocals, very simple musical compositions, everything electronically laid down rather than manually played to show some real talent, some funkyness (Extreme), playfulness, variation. How can they take that lyrical message seriously if the singer has obviously sold his soul to the musical industry and perhaps she doesn't even have any talent for music. I'd rather empathize with their message if encountered it in a poetry anthology. But yet again, perhaps the way that was composed in the lyrics had also been very naive to begin with, having scarce rhetorical figures, or over the top grand poetic images.
