Correct me if I'm wrong, but this last input does rather sound like you're trying to promote the notion that a vocal makes any song "stronger" just because it's a voice in there? If that is what you're getting at then I have to counter with (at least) a couple of examples to the contrary:

"Birdland" (by Weather Report) was originally an instrumental song, which then the Manhattan Transfer quartet bravely attempted to apply lyrics to and perform with vocals - Now, technically skilled as they are as singers, I defy anyone to suggest that their version is in any way better than the original (or even more 'accessible' if you must). Absolutely not!!

"Garden Party" (by Mezzoforte) was also originally 'just' an instrumental. Then a record label that signed them tried to 'remake for the market' that song by having the band create an entirely new segment in where they should squeeze vocals - which then didn't even have lyrics, that's how desperate they clung onto the notion that for 'marketing purposes' (your radio argument?) a song had to have a voice! - It ruined the song of anything that had made it brilliant and just made it bland and boring.
That record company didn't stop there, btw, actually hired them a singer and ordered the band to make songs with vocals that could be on a single to promote overseas, one of which became "This is the night", another bleh of a piece that had nothing of what had made the band brilliant and unique in the first place. In fact, it nearly killed the band as they stopped working together soon after that whole experiment tanked, and didn't pick it up again until years of distancing themselves from that awfulness.

I could go on, trust me, but I think the point is made so I'll spare you wink

Last edited by Icelander; 09/15/20 01:30 PM. Reason: Afterthought
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BBox 2022 Audiophile, Mac Pro Intel, OSX 10.6.8, 800x600 (TV VGA)