My two penn'orth is mostly to agree with most of the previous contributions.

A song consists of words and a tune. Anything that doesn't have both of those components isn't a song. Anything that does have both but with either component being unclear is a song of sorts but (to my taste) not a very good one.

One reason why I try to avoid the canned music(?) that is inflicted on us in many public and semi-public places is that it tends to have just a few words, repeated umpteen times. Yes, some folk songs have repetition, but rarely to that extent. Those that do have a very large amount of repetition I find almost as unappealing as the pop ones.

Some singers who accompany themselves devote too much brainpower to the accompaniment and too little to the words, with the result that they mumble some of the words, especially at the beginnings of lines. Some who have others to accompany them seem to work on the basis that more is better, so one singer's voice has to compete with half a dozen intruments.

And don't get me started on percussion.

Richard