10 Songs with Hidden Messages

Hail Santa!

logo
Ultimate Guitar
10 Songs with Hidden Messages
12

Pink Floyd - Empty Spaces

Message: "Congratulations, you've just discovered the secret message. Please send your answer to Old Pink, care of the funny farm, Chalfont."

This hidden message has been interpreted by fans as having two different meanings. One is the foreshadowing of The Wall's character's descent into madness, while others believe it references Syd Barrett's mental breakdown before the song's release.

YouTube preview picture

At The Drive-In - 300 MHz

Message: "Your enamel made no reflection in our mirror, coughing up the coffins, cotton candy coated teeth these pockets were clinching all filled with teeth, amnesia proletariat, in the unlikely event that sarcasm is an unfitting dress, amnesia proletariat, amnesia proletariat, amnesia, coughing up the coffins cotton candy coated teeth, these pockets were clinching, all filled with teeth sharpened on the f**king hides of men."

The fact that this lengthy hidden message is made up of re-cut lines from earlier parts of the song doesn't change the fact that this is the strangest, most disturbing message on this list.

YouTube preview picture

Electric Light Orchestra - Fire On High

Message: "The music is reversible, but time is not. Turn back! Turn back! Turn back! Turn back!"

Electric Light Orchestra might not be the first band you'd turn to when thinking of creepy hidden music, but their various works are littered with bizarre backwards statements.

YouTube preview picture

Darkthrone - As Flittermice As Satan's Spy

Message: "In the name of God, let the churches burn."

Darkthrone's brand of Norwegian heavy metal has no qualms about offending people, as shown in this anti-religious sentiment found near the end of the track.

YouTube preview picture

Weird Al" Yankovic - Nature Trail To Hell

Message: "Satan eats Cheez Whiz."

As someone who makes his career through parodying the music industry, it's no surprise that Weird Al decided to create his own hidden backtrack, in this satire of the Satanic message hysteria.

YouTube preview picture

Tool - Intension

Message: "Listen to your mother. Your father is right. Work hard. Stay in school. Listen to your mother. Your father is right. Listen to your mother. Your father is right."

This seems like quite a nice sentiment initially. As it goes on though, things start to get creepy.

YouTube preview picture

Slayer – Hell Awaits

Message: Join us! Join us!

Slayer was definitely not trying to claim their reverse lyrics were merely a coincidence. In 1985, they released the album “Hell Awaits” and the title track may have a creepy intro, but when it’s played backwards the creepy factor moves to a whole new level as they’re heard chanting, “join us, join us” over and over. Your mom will not be happy you’re listening to this song.

YouTube preview picture

Soundgarden – 665

Message: "Santa, I love you baby/ My Christmas king, Santa, you’re my king/ I love you, Santa baby/ Got what I need" 

Instead of praising Satan in their 1988 track, Chris Cornell and the gang included a bunch of hidden messages about how much they love Santa Claus and how he’s the king of Christmas. Honestly, it’s almost more troubling than the hidden messages about the devil.

YouTube preview picture

The Beatles – Strawberry Fields Forever

Message: "I buried Paul"

There’s a huge conspiracy that Paul McCartney died in a car crash and the band replaced him with a lookalike but left hints and clues in their songs so their fans could discover the truth. The first “clue” was supposedly in “Strawberry Fields Forever” when John Lennon says, “I buried Paul.” Later, John Lennon stated that he said "Cranberry sause" that makes even less sense.

YouTube preview picture

59 comments sorted by best / new / date

    kevinsolgaard
    Dream Theater - In the Name of God: From 5:51 to 67 there is morse code, very hard to hear, which when translated to English says "eat my ass and balls" lol
    starfire666
    how about this?:
    HugoPan
    I cant hear now here at work, but wasn't this album that had a song that made a guy kill himself?
    ca6jo11
    "The band were the subject of a civil lawsuit alleging their recording was responsible for the suicide attempts of two young men in Reno, Nevada in 1985. The case was eventually dismissed." -wikipedia
    Hungry_Hameds
    Did UG purposely avoid mentioning the "Here's to my sweet Satan" in Stairway?? It's like posting an article on Nirvana drummers  without mentioning Grohl!
    Paperjace
    That's not a secret message, though.  That's just the lyrics played backwards and fans drawing conclusions from gibberish.
    Blew1
    If you play Linkin Park's new album the correct way, you can hear millions of people crying at how awful it is!
    thes50
    The soundtrack to the latest DOOM game had stuff written in the Spectogram.
    skyturnedred
    I don't think that's a hidden message by Darkthrone since the same message is all over their songs.
    beggar__
    I believe "I buried Paul" is not the only message in Beatles' songs. Laugh as you want, but I honestly believe that Paul is dead.
    seven.johnson
    Judging that on almost all his solo music I agree, someone should tell him
    beggar__
    yeah because it's impossible to find a look-alike...
    Jimjambanx
    That also has the same voice, mannerisms, personality, song writing capabilities, singing, and managed to convince the replacement to do it, all without letting anyone know. Last time I checked my classifieds' never featured a "X celebrity look like alike/impersonator looking to replace them in the event that they die and need someone to secretly replace them." ad. But hey, maybe I'm just a sheeple that needs to wake up.   
    pressureproject
    All those points you hit on aren't accurate at all if you look at a detailed investigation of it.  
    Jimjambanx
    Please, enlighten me; because everything I've read on the matter only has far fetched album cover interpretations and mishearing backwards recordings as evidence. It's classic apophenia fueled conspiracy.
    pressureproject
    You've got your own internets....sit back...pop open a cold one...and do some research.  Have fun.
    Humr
    Everytime, every fuckin time someone comes up with some wild theory and says they've got sources to prove it, they just say "find it yourself." If it's so obvious why don't you show what made you think that? You are the one trying to prove that something is a certain way.
    Candlewolf
    But at the same time, the attitude you display demands that any "evidence" provided needs to be in the form of a signed letter by the remaining Beatles confirming the story to be true.  It's a called a coverup for a reason. At the end of the day, if you're not open to the possibility, you'll reject any evidence that doesn't support your view.
    Jimjambanx
    Except that's a load of bullshit and you know it. We want evidence, that's it, we don't care from where or who said it, we just want evidence. Saying "oh you can interpret this album like this" or "when played backwards this part kind of sort of sounds like this" is not evidence, it's wild speculation. I am completely open to the possibility that Paul is dead, I'm open to the possibility that there's an invisible unicorn living on Neptune, but unless someone presents me actual evidence, of which none has been brought to my attention, I have no reason to believe it to be true.
    Candlewolf
    http://hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/FromOthers/P... http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com.au/2010/01/fo... But that's my point. You want it handed to you wrapped up in a nice little bow. Let me know if you actually read them. I'm not holding my breath. 
    Jimjambanx
    Gave them a scan through, don't have time to read the whole thing and since I'm not a forensic scientist most of it would probably be past my level of understanding anyway, but I got the gist of it. Anyway it's interesting, and I won't immediately dismiss it, but I'd want these studies to be peer reviewed and deconstructed by other members of the community before I give it too much weight. A good scientific theory isn't one that has been proven right, but one that hasn't been proven wrong; so until it has gone through critique and discussion it should be taken with a grain of salt.  Not to mention that this is just one couple working on this, and only one of them has experience in forensics. Whenever you have just 1 or 2 people working on a problem it's easy for errors to slip through. Andrew Wiles thought he had a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, but working by himself for 7 years he made an error and didn't notice until someone pointed it out after he made is paper public (though he did go on to correct it). So again, I can't just take what is written at face value, and neither should you (unless you're well versed in this area of science), it has to be weighed against other possibilities and evidence, and devils advocate must be played to really test them.
    Candlewolf
    I am conversant enough in 'science' to know that "peer-review" is code for filtering out anything that doesn't fit into the zeitgeist. If you're gonna let other people decide for you what's true or not, well then what's the point?  I'm not saying "believe this", I'm simply saying that there is evidence out there, if you have a the drive to search for it. I haven't made up my mind yet. The logistics of keeping this thing quiet for 51 years would be immense. It's pretty much going full retard. That said, I have looked at the pictures provided in the above article, plus others, and to my eyes, it does not look like the same person. It's as simple as that. That's the only definite conclusion I can draw. As for your link, I fail to see how he is anymore credible than the Italian couple who undertook their analysis. At least one of them is forensically trained in this area, as you point out. Mr Patterson remarks himself his own observations are "unscientific". This is would be a form of source bias. He supports your viewpoint, ergo, he is a credible source. 
    Jimjambanx
    I'm not saying he's more qualified, and the person who I am talking about isn't mr patterson, but the person he is interviewing from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, whom has plenty of experience in forensic science, and his method is very much scientific. I'm not saying "this guy said they're wrong, therefore they are.", I'm just pointing out that in order for a scientific theory to be accepted it needs to be analysed by others, and I'm just pointing out one instance of someone who disagrees.  If you can find people who work in forensics who do agree with the couple, then that would add to its credibility, but this was the only form of review I could find and it just happened to be in dispute of the claim, claiming that the way it was carried out was poor, saying things like: "Also with the eyes, you cannot compare photos of eyes where in one picture the person is looking in a different direction.", "Facial identification and reconstruction is a very complicated process which requires measurements using actual human skeletal remains not photographs... This website has attempted to take photographs and apply scientific principles in forensics that are just not applied that way." and "Ear identification-which they refer to on their website has not been an accepted science. Refer to www.forensic-evidence.com." among many other faults with the study. Whether he is more right than the couple, I don't know, but that's not the point. The point is that you can't just take what someone says at face value when it comes to science, it must be put up against opposing perspectives. Also, if you're going to dispute the very idea of peer reviewing scientific papers, then you're disputing the very foundation of the scientific method, and that I cannot take seriously. A scientific theory must be disprovable, that's what separates science from pseudo-science. By dismissing peer reviews, you're setting up this study to be non-disprovable, no one can disprove it because all that matters is these photos look different to you. And you blame me for source biasing? I'm following the scientific theory, you're following your bias. 
    Jimjambanx
    When someone asserts something to be true, the responsibility lies on them to prove it. I literally just said that I've researched the matter, and all I've found is bullshit album covers and backwards recordings. If you can't give me even one piece of evidence, then it's no wonder people mock your conspiracy.
    beggar__
    Just because YOU think it's not possible doesn't mean it's not possible. But let's end this right now, it was a mistake to express my opinion. As always! I love the internet.
    psoladin
    I dont think its wrong to post your opinion...but if you want to support a theory so bizzare you should at least expect people look down on you...or at least post a legit argument other than just believing
    Jimjambanx
    I never said it's not possible, I just think it's extremely unlikely and far fetched. What is it with conspiracy theorists and getting overly defensive the second someone challenges their belief? Is it a defense mechanism to make up for their lack of evidence? They just go "Fuck you I don't want to argue bye". You're right, you shouldn't express your opinion on the internet if you get this worked up every time you do so.
    beggar__
    I just hate the arrogance. So what that I believe in "crazy" shit? I'm not trying to persuade anyone into believing in it. I just said I believe it.  And we're kinda hijacking this comment section...I'm ok with leaving it be.
    cmvideo
    Oh man.... totally missed opportunity!!  'I'm ok to Let It Be' would have been clever. You sir fail at the internet.
    takuto87
    Come on, guys. We all know that beggar__ is a ghost of John Lennon who tries to fool you. Thats the only reasonable explanation why someone would claim this kind of nonsense. And honestly - Paul has a really significant face. I dont believe there is someone who resembles him so much.
    Jimjambanx
    Why even bother bringing it up if you have absolutely no intention on discussing it? It's not like we're interested in what you believe, so when you bring it up we're left to think that you must have some intention of discussing it. Just like every other conspiracy theorist, is perfectly fine going around spouting their theories to those who don't care, but the seconds anyone questions they retaliate and back out like a fucking coward saying "I don't need to convince you I'm leaving bye". If you can't even back up your theory, then even calling it a theory is too much; it's a hoax.
    jaceebersole1
    I've heard that if you play nickleback backwards, you will hear messages worshipping satin. But even worse, if you play it toward, you hear nickleback. Jk I'm not even a hater but I saw that somewhere and thought it was pretty good
    Mountain Trash
    There is one at the end of Def Lepards "Love Bites" that said "Jesus of Nazareth go to Hell" you have to listen really close at the end, its there. I also heard that if you played "Another One Bites The Dust" backwards you hear "Start to smoke Marijuana" I don't know if that's true or not...anyone ? 
    soapalot
    I thought it sounded more like "time to smoke marijuana" but yes, it's in there.
    Shreddermeister
    What about the intro in Venom's "At league with satan", even when the song is satanic enough played forwards.
    PRSguitars87
    Clearly UG needs to research more about what a "subliminall" message is. It is certainly not reversing words that cant be heard at all
    Wisthler
    I heard a long time ago that Iron Maiden had a secret message in a song that said "Burger King!"