Posted on

Uncopyrightable introductions – Part 2, William Shatner obliquely, Martha Stewart to me

 

I found a way to incorporate William Shatner into this post.  You’ll see.  Keep readin’ and a-clickin’.  I really like it.  It’s way off the subject but it brings us to a better place.

I also NEEDED to link to Martha Stewart for reasons that will be obvious.

Yesterday’s post stemmed from a discussion of song introductions and to what extent they might be copyrightable.  And that discussion stemmed from my post the day before in which I claimed that the intro to the following Sandals.com commercial  –

Sandals – Do It All Again

had copied the intro to the Beatles’ song  –

The Beatles – Getting Better

I should add that I feel that Sandals.com consciously, carefully and deliberately copied the intro to Beatles’ Getting Better.  Sandals.com did not accidentally derive this introduction, or independently create their introduction.  Some composer labored over this.

The only reader to comment on this felt that Sandals.com copying of the Beatles was NOT an example of copyright infringement.  I agreed with him.  I posed many questions pertaining to this  –  few were answered.  As Martha Stewart would likely say to me, “it’s a good thing,” as that means I can either

A.  answer them now

B.  answer them later at emichaelmusic.com  or in an article, book or app

C.  answer them later at a conference, law school or university

D.  answer them later under oath at a deposition

E.  answer them at a restaurant/bar

F.  let someone else answer them

G.  not answer them

I’ll likely opt for option B, or B and F.

I am trying to establish that one can copy INTENTIONALLY without infringing copyright.  Sandals.com copied The Beatles and it was not copyright infringement.  I think a statement like “one can copy INTENTIONALLY without infringing copyright” could be controversial.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

And now to continue from yesterday’s topic  –  song introductions that are likely NOT copyrightable.  Here are a few new songs.  You’ll notice that these are Neil Young-loaded.  That’s simply due to where I was looking/listening  –  it is not scientific or anti-Canadian:

Frank Black  –  Tossed

Caetano Veloso  –  Jasper

Neil Young  –  The Old Laughing Lady

Neil Young  –  The Last Trip To Tulsa

Neil Young  –  Mr. Soul

Neil Young  –  Bringin’ Down Dinner

Katy Perry – Teenage Dream

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The seven (7) songs from yesterday:

(Again, these are intros that are NOT very copyrightable.)

The Doors  –  Back Door Man

Isaac Hayes  –  By The Time I Get To Phoenix

 Frank Black  –  Hang On To Your Ego

Katy Perry  –  Circle The Drain

Neil Young  –  Without Rings

Pixies  –  Bone Machine

White Zombie  –  Thunder Kiss ’65 

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

At some point soon, I really want to explore the opposite  –  COPYRIGHTABLE introductions – highly copyrightable introductions.  I’ll tease by offering a highly highly highly copyrightable introduction.  It’s by The Beatles, a band that formed in Liverpool in the 1950’s.  This was early Beatles  –  pre-Ed Sullivan Beatles  – showing off.  One of the things I think they’re saying is:

“We’re darn good.  We can play well.  Can you play this much this fast?”

Here is their earliest Highly COPYRIGHTABLE intro:

Beatles  –  Like Dreamers Do

Posted on

When Is A Musical Introduction Copyrightable? Katy Perry, White Zombie, The Pixies, Neil Young, Isaac Hayes

 

I really liked Frank Reynolds’ post from yesterday.  I hope he doesn’t mind but I’ve reprinted it below.  All I’ve done to change his text is italicize it and BOLD some of it:

“I believe the sandals commercial is like the Black Eyed Peas song that rips off a portion of I’ve Had The Time Of My Life. So, let’s just blame will.i.am for the whole thing.

Great questions posed Dr. H.! It’s definitely not infringement in relation to copyright, and I don’t think they owe Lennon/McCartney (okay, probably just McCartney in this case) anything other than gratitude for coming up with the cool intro idea (which isn’t a copyrightable element). I wouldn’t call it copying, but rather paying homage if they’re even aware that they did it. It’s like the tradition of incorporating other people’s ideas in the blues genre. No one knows who wrote it the first time. I remember a lecture you gave on that, and it shuts up the Zeppelin haters when I use that logic on them. Cheers E. Michael!”

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I think an introduction can be copyrightable, i.e., worthy of copyright protection, but with respect to The Beatles, and Sandals, there is no problem.  I agree with Frank  –  from a copyright perspective, the intro of the Beatles’ “Getting Better” has not been infringed by the intro of the Sandals.com commercial.  Here are the songs again:

Sandals – Do It All Again

The Beatles – Getting Better

If we agree that there are introductions that are NOT copyrightable, i.e., do not possess enough originality to be worthy of copyright protection, does it follow that there are introductions that ARE copyrightable?  Copyrightable introductions will be worth pursuing later, but not today.

I thought I would start to listen more carefully and analyze introductions to songs to find the least and most COPYRIGHTABLE introductions, as well as the “in-between” introductions, i.e., introductions that would exhibit some copyrightable elements.  I believe that there is a sliding scale of copyright protection – that some introductions are not copyrightable as musical compositions, some slightly so, some more so, and some extremely so.  The length of the excerpt, both in terms of temporal length as well as number of attacks and/or articulations, as well as its originality would also be factors used in determining how copyright protection should be afforded an introduction.  (That last sentence also applies, of course, to music that follows the introduction.)

My quick take is that there are more introductions that ARE copyrightable than NOT copyrightable.  I need to establish a few guidelines in order to conduct my analysis and report my findings.  Let’s say that we are looking at introductions of more than a few seconds and more than a few notes/attacks/articulations.  (This can get squishy very fast, can’t it?).

I’ve also started down this road  –  1.  delving into the construction and creation of music, and 2.  how copyright is involved in, and relates to, music.  And that brings me to a line from the song, “You Made Me Love You:”

“I didn’t want to do it, I didn’t want to do it”

I am doing a few things here:

1.  I am asserting that copyright is fluid – that some things are protectible and some not, and some lie “in-between,” i.e., they exhibit some copyright worthiness.  This is driving the conversation NEAR the ballpark, but not in the ball park, of defining copyright.  [Oh no.  Not yet I won’t.]

2.  I am starting to use various words and phrases that might be identical in meaning or nearly identical.  For example – “copyrightable” might be the same as, or similar to, “worthy of copyright protection.”  “Copyright-IBLE” might be the same as “copyright-ABLE,” and so on.  But we are not yet ready for too many SYNONYMS.

To paraphrase Documentarian Marty DiBergi, “But enough of my yacking, let’s boogie…to the introductions of various songs.”  All of these introductions represent very little worthiness of copyright protection as musical compositions.  It is important to note that I am not making musical judgments as I feel these songs have great and musical introductions.  [“Musical” can be a highly complimentary adjective.]  But the copyrightability of these introductions is not analogous to their musical merit.

Here are seven (7) intros today.  Maybe we’ll do seven (7) more tomorrow.

(Again, these are intros that are NOT very copyrightable.)

The Doors  –  Back Door Man

Isaac Hayes  –  By The Time I Get To Phoenix

 Frank Black  –  Hang On To Your Ego

Katy Perry  –  Circle The Drain

Neil Young  –  Without Rings

Pixies  –  Bone Machine

White Zombie  –  Thunder Kiss ’65 

Your thoughts?

Posted on

I’ve Had The Time Of My Life & Do I Owe It All To Sandals.com Ripping Off The Beatles?

Yesterday (November 26, 2012) I posted about the Beatles, specifically, intros to Beatles songs.  I ended yesterday’s post with this:

The Beatles amped up the strong, loud and cutting intro with the song, “Getting Better” from Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.  The intro to The Beatles’ Getting Better features strong sforzando guitar and keyboard again but this time, in addition, the strings of the piano are struck with mallets to make it an even more brittle, piercing sound.  Because “Getting Better” has such a distinctive and unique intro, it could be used or imitated for special effect.

I heard (and saw) a commercial a few years ago that I knew immediately was a strong reference to the opening of The Beatles’ Getting Better.  This commercial is still running and can be heard frequently on U. S. television stations, and as of last week, I have finally been able to find it on YouTube.  Do you know the commercial to which I refer?

I’ll discuss it tomorrow.  To me, this commercial is the essence of “reference” and “referencing” music, an important practice in contemporary advertising.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Now it’s tomorrow (almost a Ringo-ism).  

The television commercial to which I have been referring is for Sandals.com.  In the commercial, young good-looking people are taking vacations in tropical locations.  (For nanosecond subliminal flashes, one also sees an elderly but healthy looking retired couple who might have escaped from their assisted living penitentiary and are also dancing on the beach.  But they don’t count as we are lead to believe that these Sandals paradises are inhabited only by the young and beautiful.)

A famous song, “(I’ve Had) The Time Of My Life,” recorded by Bill Medley and Jennifer Warnes, that was featured in the finale of the 1987 film, “Dirty Dancing,” serves as the essential song of the commercial.  If one didn’t know better, however, one might assume that the Sandals.com commercial is for a song entitled, “Do It All Again,” or

perhaps a medley/mashup of three (3) songs  –

“Getting Better”

“(I’ve Had) The Time Of My Life”

“Do It All Again”

Listen to the introduction of both songs  –  The Beatles’ “Getting Better,” and the Sandals.com arrangement of “(I’ve Had) The Time Of My Life.”  The forceful, repeated staccato chords.  Do you think they sound the same?  Similar?  Not similar ?  Not even remotely similar?

[PLEASE NOTE:  Today, August 17, 2013, I discovered that the Sandals link below had been removed – it was suddenly “Private.”  As of 11:30 AM Central, I found this new link of the same commercial.]

Sandals – Do It All Again    

Listen especially to the opening fifteen (15) chords.  Here it is again,

or to better fit into this context:

“Do it all again, do it all again.  Do it, do it!”

Sandals – Do It All Again

Listen to the opening eight (8) chords of  The Beatles – Getting Better.   Here it is again:

 The Beatles – Getting Better

Now:

Sandals – Do It All Again

 The Beatles – Getting Better

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Q U E S T I O N S 

Does Sandals sound like The Beatles?

Does Sandals rip off The Beatles?

Does Sandals infringe The Beatles?

Does Sandals sound too much like The Beatles?

Is the Sandals/Beatles issue a copyright problem?

Is the Sandals/Beatles issue a right of publicity problem?

Is the Sandals/Beatles issue an unfair competition problem?

Would a listener/viewer think that The Beatles are associated in any way with Sandals?

Is there a Sandals/Beatles problem?

Should Sandals have to pay The Beatles?

Should the Sandals commercial be no longer broadcast (in order to remedy The Beatles)?

Should Sandals pay The Beatles and stop broadcasting the commercial?

*  *  *  M O R E      Q U E S T I O N S *  *  *

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs common?

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs in commercials common?

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs problematic?

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs in commercials problematic?

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs the same as “copying?”

Is this practice of sounding like/referencing well-known songs in commercials the same as “copying?”

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Instead of The Beatles and/or a famous song, substitute an unknown band signed to a small record label, and an unknown song, in all of the questions above.

Would this change any of the answers?

I have many more questions but this is enough.  As always, I look forward to your response.

Posted on

Talk Amongst Yourselves, Turn Me On, Beatles One Louder, the Buttocks Bowl

This week is beginning perfectly.  It is sunny up here on Wingaersheek Beach in Gloucester.  Thanksgiving was a great one in Massachusetts as we New England Patriots fans owe gratitude to the New York Jets for their comic ineptness on Thanksgiving evening  –  I’m calling it the Butt Bowl  –  and projects of mine are getting completed.  And I’ve been invited to speak about my work in copyright and intellectual property at the Harvard Law School again.  All good things.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

How can you get one’s attention?  Play a Beatles recording.  Play something loud and very noticeable. Maybe the intro to a Beatles song.  If one wants to hear a loud, striking, very original opening of a Beatles song, one that will really hit the ear, there is one song that WILL not do it.  It would be the WORST BEATLES SONG, worst only in terms of making a listener notice.  What is the Beatles song LEAST likely to get one’s attention?  “Eight Days A Week.”  Remember how Eight Days A Week by The Beatles opens?  It can be heard here Eight Days A Week by The Beatles or back in the last sentence.

It……………….f  a  d  e  s…..i n……..

shhhhhhh….shh….sh… and now you HEAR IT!

That was an amazing stunt way back in 1964.  It was the first time I had heard a recording that faded in.  Songs fading out were common but this fade-in was really fun and another innovation (of many) by the Beatles.

But the subject of this post is getting someone’s attention loudly and at the opening, and a Beatles song that does both.  I want a song that is LOUD and NOTICEABLE and unlike any other Beatles song and I want the LOUD and NOTICEABLE and UNIQUE to happen immediately.  Right at the opening.

The Beatles’ She’s A Woman is a song that is loud, distinctive and original at the opening.  The song is notable for a few other reasons too.  Structurally it is often a 12-bar blues (0.10-0.42;  0.43-1.14;  1.20-1.52), with an instrumental 6-bar blues (1.53-2.09), and two (2) 2-bar bridges –  the first at 1.15-1.20, the second at 2.09-2.14.  A 2-bar bridge, you say?  And the 2-bar bridge contains the words, “she’s a woman.” !?!  If the 2-bar bridge contains the title, “She’s A Woman,” wouldn’t it be a chorus and not a 2-bar bridge?  In the words of Linda Richman… Talk amongst yourselves.

The opening of “She’s A Woman” features loud piano and guitar in unison playing the same staccato chords.  When the bass and drums enter, it becomes clear that what the guitar and piano had been playing, what seemed like downbeats, were really upbeats!  A very cool deceptive trick.  A deception as to where you count 1, 2, 3 and 4.  If you were dancing at the opening of the song, your dancing had to change a bit as your perception of the beat changed.

The opening chord  –  what one thought was the “tonic” chord, the most important, central chord, hierarchically, to all of the other chords – the “I chord” (pronounced, “One” chord)  –  was really the “V chord” (pronounced, “Five” chord), another fun deception.

I think that “She’s A Woman” was the first time the Beatles hinted at drug use.  Three times in “She’s A Woman”  Paul sings, “turn me on when I get lonely” –  at 0.32, at 1.42 and finally at 2.36.  It was not obvious in 1964-65 that “turn me on” referred to drug use, however.  Some people knew this but “turn me on” was not yet in the public lexicon.

She’s A Woman also contains the worst lyric the Beatles may have ever written –

“My love don’t give me presents.  I know that she’s no peasant.”  

Huh?  “Peasant?”  I wish Paul hadn’t pursued the giving “presents” line as then he wouldn’t need a rhyme, and wouldn’t have to relate that he knows his woman is not a “peasant.”  Of all the things I’ve ever heard ascribed to any woman, “peasant” has never  been one!

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The Beatles amped up the strong, loud and cutting intro with the song, “Getting Better” from Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.  The intro to The Beatles’ Getting Better features strong sforzando guitar and keyboard again but this time, in addition, the strings of the piano are struck with mallets to make it an even more brittle, piercing sound.  Because “Getting Better” has such a distinctive and unique intro, it could be used or imitated for special effect.

I heard (and saw) a commercial a few years ago that I knew immediately was a strong reference to the opening of The Beatles’ Getting Better.  This commercial is still running and can be heard frequently on U. S. television stations, and as of last week, I have finally been able to find it on YouTube.  Do you know the commercial to which I refer?

I’ll discuss it tomorrow.  To me, this commercial is the essence of “reference” and “referencing” music, an important practice in contemporary advertising.

 

Posted on

Being Thankful on Thanksgiving, Thursday, November 22, 2012, from Louis Armstrong to Hank Williams

 H A P P Y      T H A N K S G I V I N G  

I thought to celebrate this wonderful day of Thanksgiving, I’d compile music with lyrics that express thanks in various ways.

I would like to have included at least one more  – Bach – Now Thank We All Our God.  Even though I have great recordings of Now Thank We All Our God, I couldn’t find one I liked as much on YouTube.

Here is my Thanksgiving wish:

Music from these artists (arranged alphabetically):

Louis Armstrong

Led Zeppelin

Bob Marley

Me’Shell Ndegéocello

Sam & Dave

Hank Williams

The six (6) THANKFUL recordings (arranged in the listening order I prefer):

Thanks A Million  –  Louis Armstrong

Thank You Lord  –  Bob Marley

Thank You  –  Led Zeppelin

I Thank You  –  Sam & Dave

Thank God  –  Hank Williams

Thankful  –  Me’Shell Ndegéocello

Excerpts of lyrics from these six (6) songs (corresponding to the listening order above):

“Thanks a million, a million thanks to you, for every thing that love could bring you brought me”

“Thank you, Lord, for what you’ve done for me.  Thank you, Lord, for what you’re doing now.”

“And so today, my world it smiles, your hand in mine, we walk the miles, thanks to you it will be done, for you to me are the only one”

“You didn’t have to love me like you did, but you did, and I thank you”

“Thank God for every flower and each tree, thank God for all the mountains and the sea, thank God for giving life to you and me, wherever you may be, thank God”

“So much suffering for fancy cars, big houses, everything, I lose my faith sometimes, I lose my faith sometimes, yeah, just want to be happy and thankful”

 H A P P Y      T H A N K S G I V I N G

 

 

Posted on

Love Street, A Century of Women on Top, TimeHop, Mikasa

I had a great time at Prof. Maggie Lange’s class yesterday and want to thank Maggie and her students at Berklee.  I’ve already been emailed and thanked by a few of them.  I’m quite humbled as I suspect I benefitted more from interactions with them.  Their questions were extremely insightful and their enthusiasm the entire two hours inspired me.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I just became a TimeHop person.  It’s an app that will recapture what you did, photos you took, Facebook and Twitter posts, Foursquare checks-in, etc. on this day one, two or three years ago.  Wicked cool!  It confirms what a great and blessed life I lead, and the wonderful times I’ve had with my Mom and friends.

Three years ago today I wrote –

“With today’s copyright laws, most great composers – Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Stravinsky, Ives, etc. – would be as criminal as Girl Talk, Negativland, the Evolution Control Committee or anyone who finds creative preexisting elements and uses them.”

I still agree.  I’m even more fervent about that.

Two years ago today I began the day at Smith College.  (I always loved Smith College and especially their centenary t-shirts – A Century of Women On Top,” Beavis & Butthead implications intended on my part.) I had spoken at the Independent Music Conference and also became Mayor of the Hampshire Council of Governments, a rare and fantastic fusion of idealism, hippiedom and government.  (It is odd to read those three nouns in one sentence.  That is my description only.  Even though I was the Foursquare Mayor, please don’t discredit them!)

Later that morning I drove to see my Mom who was living in Marlborough, Massachusetts.  I had a coo-woo with her and she had her “Dewars on the rocks with a lemon twist” using the Mikasa crystal martini glasses I bought for her.  And I discovered that day that the Mikasa glasses sounded a sonically gorgeous “A 440” when struck.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I wanted to post one (1) song today.  I wanted it to have the word, “love,” in its title and be a song I own and love.  I seached for “Love” (searching for love in the exact right place) in my iTunes and found 2,860 songs.  If played back-to-back, they would last 7 days.  Wow – 7 days of peace and love!  Sounds great!  These songs with the word, “LOVE,” in their title take up 16.88 Gb of my iMac.  If only NASA could have had 16.88 Gb for Apollo 13.

The “LOVE” song that hit me just right is….

L O V E    S T R E E T    

by    The Doors

And because Jim Morrison was the lyricist (I think?), the lyrics were original, atypical and memorable.  Phrases such as –

“lazy diamonds, studded flunkies”  – this was how I learned the word, “flunky.”  I asked my parents what a “flunky” was.  They laughed, explained it to me, and then used that word to encourage me as a student for the next few years!

In terms of music theory/composition/structure, “Love Street” is an excellent song to study:

A minor, G Major, G minor, F Major

which is then transposed to

B minor, A Major, A minor, G Major

which then leads it perfectly back to the first four chords beginning on A minor.  (G minor to F Major is essentially a transposition of A minor to G Major.)

When I first heard Bob Dylan’s “Lay Lady Lay,” I caught the fact that both songs work on the same idea of transposing a simple motive (in Dylan:  A Major, C# minor becomes G Major, B minor – walking down the guitar neck), in both cases, a series of simple Major and minor chords.  Enough music theory.  There’s a beautiful beach outside waiting for me!

I hope your pre-Thanksgiving Day is going well.  Don’t shop but if you have to, Market Basket is great and run so smoothly!  I was in and out of the store very quickly.  I expect the food shopping/hunting/digging on Wingaersheek Beach to be typically simple and direct today.

Posted on

Copyright From A – Z, Crime Before Thanksgiving, my 19th Annual Berklee Lecture, Inna & The Farlanders

I always love the Tuesday before Thanksgiving because for the past 19 years I have spoken to students at the Berklee College of Music in Boston.  It has been an annual tradition, and a great honor, for me since 1993.  The second part of the tradition is our Thanksgiving Fish dinner at Legal Seafood in the Prudential Center, across the street from the Berklee classroom.  (The Prudential Center is posted as today’s photograph.  Finally, a post photo that relates precisely and without need for interpretation or metaphor-loading.)

In order to get to Boston, I’ll have to deport myself from Gloucester to Boston.  (I just wanted to use that “deport myself” phrase.)

At some points today, I’ll select some topics for my two-hour presentation.  I’ll choose from these questions and issues and more:

Can One Copy A Bass Line?

Can One Copy A Chord Progression?

Can One Copy A Guitar Solo?

How To Break The Law/How To Get Away With Crime (Crime?  “Fair Use” or The Perfect Crime ?)

What Is Fair Use?

Fair Use Done Right/Wrong

What Is Satire?

What Is Parody?

What Is Right of Publicity?

Can One Sample?

What Is A Mashup And When Are Mashups Legal/Illegal?

Publishing Done Right

Publishing Done Wrong

Co-Writing

Co-Habitating

I will play music from North America, South America, the Caribbean, The European Union, Asia, Africa, Australia-Oceania, and The Middle East.  Even if the Middle East is part of Asia, Africa and Europe, I consider it its own place/continent.  And I’m really thrilled that the CIA agrees with me!

I also consider the Caribbean NOT part of North or South America – it’s too much its own world/continent and shouldn’t be subsumed within NA, SA or The Americas.  The CIA disagrees.

I refuse to play music from Atlantis.  I’ve been boycotting it for awhile.  I have not ruled out music from Antarctica or Arctica (why isn’t it called A – R – C – T – I – C – A?).  Both poles speak to me.  Enough geography talk.

I’ll play music by

Louis Armstrong

Beastie Boys

George Clinton

Miles Davis

Evolution Control Committee

Foo Fighters

Ghostface Killah

Jimi Hendrix

Inna & The Farlanders

George Jones

Albert King

Led Zeppelin

Bob Marley

Nirvana

Roy Orbison

Steve Perry

Queen

Rolling Stones

Stravinsky

They Might Be Giants

Keith Urban

Vivaldi

Hank Williams

Xscape

Neil Young

Frank Zappa

Inna & The Farlanders  –  I assume that few of you will have Inna & The Farlanders’ The Dream Of Endless Nights album, so I included a link to a performance of “Ivan” from that album.  The studio version is better – get this album!

I could work the phrase, “A – Z,” into the title of this presentation, couldn’t I?  (Now I will.)  And discussing the music of “XSCAPE,” rather than “XENAKIS,” shows just how much of a stretch one (1) of these twenty-six (26) names was!

My questions for you  –

Do you have suggestions for adding topics?

Do you have suggestions for eliminating topics?

Should I write about these topics here at emichaelmusic.com or simply include them in today’s long talk?

Does the “How To Break The Law/How To Get Away With Crime” topic annoy anyone?

I hope your Thanksgiving preparations/travels are going very well.  I’ll have a special Thanksgiving post.

Posted on

How NOT To Write A Hit Song (Pt. 3/3), Ernő Rubik, Bob Dylan, Iannis Xenakis, Whitfield & Strong

 


 

How NOT To Write A Hit Song  –  Part 3  –  The end of this discussion.

The song I’ve been discussing over the previous two posts:

The Temptations – Papa Was A Rollin’ Stone

 

1.  Make it 7 minutes long.

This song last 7 minutes, a very long time for a hit single in 1972.  (There were a few earlier long hit songs  –  Bob Dylan – Like A Rolling Stone, The Doors – Light My Fire, The Beatles – Hey Jude, etc.)

2.  Use 5 different singers.

This song is by The Temptations and all five sing lead vocals at different times.

3.  Make sure that no singing is heard for the first 2 minutes of the song.

The song builds a fantastic groove  – the first two minutes introduce bass guitar, drums (especially hi hat), orchestral strings and the shimmering use of tremolo, wah-wah guitar, trumpet, harps and handclaps.  I did shave off a few seconds – the first vocal is heard at 1.55, almost 2.00, when “it was the 3rd of September,” the opening words are sung.

4.  Make sure the bass  guitar only plays 3 different pitches (for all 7 minutes).

The three pitches in the bass are:  A-flat, B-flat and D-flat.  In numbers these pitches can be labelled, b7, 1, b3

5.  Make sure that the entire bass guitar melody is 6 notes long.

The bass guitar melody is:

“b7-1, b3-b3-b7-1”

6.  Make sure that this 6-note bass guitar melody is played once and then repeated 51 times.

That 6-note melody is repeated 51 times.  It is never varied in any manner.  To use a cliche, it “anchors” the song.

7.  Make sure that there are no chords (and, therefore, no chord changes) in the entire song.

It is very unusual for a hit song, or any pop song, to have only chord.  [How’s this for a zen-ish statement – if there is only one chord, there are no chords.  “Talk amongst yourselves.”]  Eliminating chord changes makes other aspects of the music more noticeable and important. 

8.  Make sure that the principal solo instrument in the song is an instrument that is not a preferred one – it should be an instrument that the audience for this song does not especially like.

The first instrument to have melodic prominence, and the first solo, is the trumpet.  In pop and soul and R & B (“Papa Was A Rolling Stone” can be categorized as those three styles), trumpet is not the most common and most expected melody/solo instrument. 

9.  Make sure that this song has appeal to U. S. and international audiences.

International audiences in 1972-73 liked and loved this song.  American soul/pop/R & B styles are “big” overseas.

10.  Make sure that the subject matter of the lyrics is about a person who has no redeeming qualities.

The song is about a man who has abandoned his own wife and  children, failed at most things he has done, and probably fathered three more children with another woman (who might have been his wife).  He was always too busy “chasing women and drinking.”

11.  Make sure that this is not a love song.

As stated above, this is not a love song.  It’s a sad song in which children are asking their Mom about the Father they never knew.

A few other aspects of this song that I love:

The arrangement featuring extremely original orchestral string writing including very fast melodic outbursts in unison strings.  This orchestral arrangement screams PAUL RISER (Motown’s best-known arranger) to me.  I’m 99.3421% certain that Paul Riser is the arranger of PWARS.

The very deep vocal, “And Mama,” at 3.37.  For the rest of my life, I would imitate this and frequently say, in as deep a voice as this, “Hey Mama,” to my Mother, who would always smile and laugh at this.

The great little “natural 6” inflection on the syllable, “drink,” between 5.20-5.22.  This short passage still is one of my favorite examples of the Dorian mode.

To repeat, one final time, from previous posts  –

Do you think the eleven (11) constructs/stipulations are good advice for a songwriter?  For a composer?  (What’s the difference between a songwriter and a composer?  This is a question to be explored in future posts.)

Could you write a a great piece of music following these eleven (11) points?

If you wrote a song that followed these exact eleven (11) stipulations, would you be infringing copyright?  That’s an enormous question and one that could lead to debate, certainty, uncertainty, anxiety, anger or confusion.  Of that, I am certain.  If you’d like, please start off that discussion below.  I promise I can add to whatever discussion begins.  🙂

I expect that an attorney in the future will ask me this specific question at a deposition.  (Rather than answer this question now, I’ll leave it in this post just to annoy an attorney or two.  I have also inserted a few statements in previous posts to see if attorneys or their paralegals are paying attention. This includes a factual omission I’m almost certain they’ll never catch  –  smile smile!)

Posted on

How NOT To Write Great Music – Part 2


Before I delve into How NOT To Write A Hit Song – Part 2, I wonder – did you notice that today’s photo above is as colorful as yesterday’s photo?  That was intentional.  I wish I could tell you that there’s a profound reason behind my selection of colors and shapes.  I can’t but I think the bright rainbow colors unite the sustained theme of how NOT to write a hit song.

Now, let’s describe more ways  –  specific music compositional ideas  –  to finish the hit song (great musical composition) I began to describe yesterday.

How NOT To Write A Hit Song  –  Part 2

Let’s repeat from yesterday:

1.  make it 7 minutes long

2.  use 5 different singers

3.  make sure that no singing is heard for the first 2 minutes of the song

4.  make sure the bass  guitar only plays 3 different pitches (for all 7 minutes)

5.  make sure that the entire bass guitar melody is 6 notes long

6.  make sure that this 6-note bass guitar melody is played once and then repeated 51 times

NOW, here are the final five (5) steps:

7.  make sure that there are no chords (and, therefore, no chord changes) in the entire song

8.  make sure that the principal solo instrument in the song is an instrument that is not a preferred one – it should be an instrument that the audience for this song does not especially like.

9.  make sure that this song has appeal to U. S. and international audiences

10.  make sure that the subject matter of the lyrics is about a person who has no redeeming qualities

11.  make sure that this is not a love song

To repeat and expand from yesterday’s post…

Do you think the above eleven (11) constructs/stipulations are good advice for a songwriter?  For a composer?  (What’s the difference between a songwriter and a composer?  This is a question to be explored in future posts.)

Could you write a a great piece of music following these eleven (11) points?

If you wrote a song that followed these exact eleven (11) stipulations, would you be infringing copyright? That is a complex question and one that could lead to debate, certainty, uncertainty, anxiety, anger or confusion.  Of that, I am certain.  If you’d like, please start off that discussion below.  I promise I can add to whatever discussion begins.  🙂

Do you know of anyone who has set out to write a song/musical composition, in such a foolish manner as mentioned above?

The FINAL QUESTION 

From the above description, can you name the famous popular song that fits the eleven (11) points above?  I will post the answer next week, if you don’t post it first.  Please post away!

 

Have a great weekend and great weekend music – start with this song:

It’s Friday, Thank God it’s Friday.  Did you just get paid? 

Posted on

How NOT To Write Great Music – Part 1

I have been involved in many styles of music as a composer, performer, theorist, musicologist, ethnomusicologist, conductor, guitarist and pianist and lover of music.  I’ve plunged into almost every kind of music from almost every period and continent.  I am not claiming to have expertise or even knowledge in and about so many kinds of music.  I am claiming to be very curious about, attracted to and in love with music from all over this planet.

One of the best things about a being a music theorist, or musicologist, or best word yet – ethnomusicologist – is that we strive to understand how music – the music we experience – came to be.  Ideally, the more one knows about how the music was conceived, created, performed, recorded, disseminated and valued, the more likely it is that we can better enjoy the music, better understand the people who created the music, better understand our own music, culture and identity and, ideally, live better.

How do we create music?  What are the best and worst ways to create music?  Is it possible to answer these questions?  I try to answer them in my own life and will begin a discussion with this post.  So, here goes.  I hope that the end result is laudable.  I know the answer/end point and will concoct this path to get to the end.  The way I’ll approach these particular posts is to examine what NOT to do.  By examining what NOT to do, we might better deduce what TO DO.  (This series of posts, like some of my others, will be ongoing but intermittent.)

The overall title is  —   How NOT To Write Great Music.  But for these first posts, we will change “…Write Great Music,” to the more specific, “…Write A Hit Song.”  The title, therefore, is “How NOT To Write A Hit Song.”  I will outline a series of music compositional steps that might seem foolish, and guaranteed to result in not good music, but were followed in the creation of this music.  And despite the foolish musical suggestions/directions/prescriptions/steps, the result was Great Music, or a Hit Song.

How NOT To Write A Hit Song

1.  make it 7 minutes long

2.  use 5 different singers

3.  make sure that no singing is heard for the first 2 minutes of the song

4.  make sure the bass guitar only plays 3 different pitches (for all 7 minutes)

5.  make sure that the entire bass guitar melody is 6 notes long

6.  make sure that this 6-note bass guitar melody is played once and then repeated 51 times

A few questions for anyone reading this –

Do you think the above six (6) constructs are good advice for a songwriter?  For a composer?  (What’s the difference between a songwriter and a composer?)

Could you write a great piece of music following these six (6) stipulations?
Do you know of anyone who has set out to write a song, or musical composition, in such a foolish manner?

The FINAL QUESTION

From the above prescription, can you name the famous popular song that fits the 6 points above?  The next post will present more information and more clues.  I will post the answer soon, if you don’t post it first.

I hope to hear from you.