The song “Daylight” by Matt and Kim makes my ears bleed and my spleen burst. Musically it is atrocious and simple; so simple a monkey could have written it by smashing on a keyboard and making cacophonous screeches. Sometimes a horrible song can be saved by an interesting music video. This is not the case with “Daylight.” Matt and Kim seem to have decided to follow up a horrible song with a music video that makes me want to put my fist through the screen when watching it. Although, this crime against humanity appears to be in disrepair, there might be a few things this group could do to salvage the song, the video and their careers. “Daylight” has gained fame due to its monotonous rhythm which to some is catchy, but I wholeheartedly believe it is a horrible song whose very existence makes humanity a little worse.
Firstly, I would like to state two things to show that I am not blindly attacking a random song with no musical background. One, I listen to all types of music, so I am not biased against the alternative genre with which Matt and Kim identify. Two, I have played the piano and cello for many years, so I can comment on songs musical content with some sort of accuracy. Therefore, let us begin examining this “song.” Right off the bat, “Daylight” begins with a horribly out of tune piano which sets off every not by almost a quarter step (that is a lot for those musical neophytes). I don’t know if this was intentionally done with aftereffects, or they were so lazy they just didn’t want to tune or record correctly. Then the song progresses with odd metallic electronic effects that sound like a robot puking. Finally, the obviously and horribly auto tuned singing voice comes in accompanied by the drums. Then the song doesn’t change the lyrics progress into chaotic undecipherable noises and the piano repeats the same 5 notes. 5 NOTES. That’s it. Very little if any musical thought went into creating this song.
The music video of the song “Daylight” gives me a headache, I have literally taken four ibuprofen just sitting watching it so that I can analyze it. As you begin to watch the video all seems normal. Present are the two members of the group playing their respective instruments and the male is singing. But then your brain begins to process both the music and the visual simultaneously. You realize that the drummer is blatantly off from the music. Your brain tries to process why the singer is being cut short although the lyrics progress. Finally, the singer who is also playing the keyboard begins just hitting random keys. Ultimately, a combination of the repetitive music and the visual disparity makes anyone with a brain want to throw their screen at a wall.
The question now is can this horrible piece be salvaged? Firstly, a few notes should be added to the song. Don’t get me wrong sets of notes can be repeated and produce great music such as in rap. Nevertheless, rap prides itself on the rhythmic shifts in the rapper’s voices. This song is monotone. To improve it, I would add some sort of musical construction. A chorus, verse, bridge or other specks that are not all the same notes and monotonic voice. Furthermore, it is not necessary but more than two instruments can only improve the song. Moreover, the music video could simply be improved by having the band members actually accurately perform their respective parts in a way that doesn’t make them look tone deaf. There are ways to improve this song that are quite elementary.
I don’t apologize if you happen to like this song. It is not lyrically, musically or visually pleasing in any way to me. I don’t find repetitive monotonic music enjoyable. I don’t listen to out of tune and off beat music for the pleasure of it. I would rather listen to white noise because it might have more musical value than “Daylight.” This song could be repaired, I mean even Berlin was rebuilt after World War II. I would add musical components to the design of this song, along with more instrumentation to improve it. Overall, I do not appreciate the song “Daylight.” I would not even call it a piece of art. I would call it a piece of something, but certainly not art.