Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy
In the case where Jimmy Paige contributes a slide guitar, there are many instances in which he would get a songwriting credit, imo. Especially if it's just a standard blues number and the slide is the best thing about the song.
...

Your opinion is wrong. He's not the songwriter. The string and horn section for Zep's Kashmir should get songwriting credit according to your opinion.

agree

Not if they just played what Page hummed or played for them, which is probably what happened, since there part is basically the song.
But why did Bonham get a credit for Kashmir? Did he write the song with Page, or did they just appreciate what he did for the song? Or maybe they were paying him back for past contributions.
The band decides. And we can speculate.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Regarding the contributions of band members who are not songwriters:

One way to think about might be to examine how a band member comes to play his or her part in a song. If a bass player or guitarist or horn player, for example, is told by the songwriter "for the next eight bars play something cool in your own style that is congruent with the chord progression I've established in this song," then my guess would be that that player would not 'qualify' for a songwriting credit, no matter how killer his/her contribution might be.

If, on the other hand, in the process of 'jamming out' a song which is in an embryonic state, a non-songwriter comes up with a riff, for example, that elevates the music and takes it in a new direction and in effect redefines that 'song,' then that player has probably helped write the song.

Agreed.
Plus he stands up and asks for a credit.
Thinking of the Stones, Wyman might have deserved a credit on Miss You or Fingerprint File, for example.

Why? Billy Preston showed Bill the bass line on MY, and Taylor played the FF-bass.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Why? Billy Preston showed Bill the bass line on MY, and Taylor played the FF-bass.

My bad on FF, I thought Bill's synth was a big part of that.
But on MY thought Bill came up with the bass line there.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Why? Billy Preston showed Bill the bass line on MY, and Taylor played the FF-bass.

My bad on FF, I thought Bill's synth was a big part of that.
But on MY thought Bill came up with the bass line there.

"The idea for those (bass) lines came from Billy Preston, actually. We'd cut a rough demo a year or so earlier after a recording session. I'd already gone home, and Billy picked up my old bass when they started running through that song. He started doing that bit because it seemed to be the style of his left hand. So when we finally came to do the tune, the boys said, Why don't you work around Billy's idea? So I listened to it once and heard that basic run and took it from there. It took some changing and polishing, but the basic idea was Billy's.

- Bill Wyman, 1978"

Timeisonourside.com

As a band-based musician and sometimes songwriter I find this conversation kind of interesting but also somewhat of an exercise in attempting to keep from rolling my eyes.

When I see comments along the lines of "that second trumpet line was so important to my enjoyment of the song that I think whomever played the trumpet that day should have gotten a credit for writing the song" my eyes are rolling and head is shaking. And those maraca's... Man, if we're going to give credits to the maraca player, the ghost of Jerome White is gonna be hunting down Bo Diddley in Rock & Roll Heaven.

I'll toss a few thoughts into the fire...

Should Merry Clayton have been given a writers credit on "Gimme Shelter"? In my mind her performance was pretty important to that recording. But she never performed it live. Should all of the released live versions which DIDN'T feature the part she sang have been credited to just Jagger & Richards? Once they started performing live versions WITH a female vocalist should Merry have gotten song writing credits and royalties for THOSE versions?

Should Jimi Hendrix receive a credit for his version of All Along the Watchtower? or Wild Thing? Or the U.S. National Anthem? His versions took those songs to places the original writers presumably didn't think of themselves.

How about giving the Hebrew King Solomon credit for Pete Seegers Turn! Turn! Turn!? or at least King James (since there's debate as to whether Solomon wrote the original) for compiling the version Seeger lifted.

Not wanting to hijack the thread, but looking at other types of artistic endeavors...

Should we credit the assistants of painters and other visual artists? I mean, the people who built the scaffolding were pretty important to anyone painting a masterpiece on a ceiling. When a photographer copyrights a photo, should the subject of the photo receive equal credit? (Note: on that last example, they may already receive some sort of rights/credits but I don't think so).

Using the example of a famous movie (at least here in the US but I think it was pretty big internationally as well): Remember "Good Morning, Vietnam"? Remember Robin Williams' radio monologues? Pretty central to the movie and it would have been a much different movie without them. They were, for the most part, improvised. Although Williams was nominated for and received multiple awards for his work as an actor (which he was also credited for, duh) he did not receive a writer's credit for the move. Did he deserve one? Based on some of the criteria being used for deserving songwriting credits, you'd be on solid ground thinking that he might. But he didn't.

As a fan, I'd love to know who "inspired/wrote" what. Would it be nice if songwriting credits reflected that? Sure. But they don't. At least not always.

I'm out for a while and going back to reading y'alls thoughts on the matter... I just wanted to throw a few more logs on the fire and see what they might stoke up!

Peace,
Mr DJA

I think Rocky Dijon deserved co-writing credits.

Here's a true story. A friend of mine wrote a book. It was pretty good, but a bit unfocused since he self-published and didn't have a proper editor. He decided to turn it into a screenplay (he's an actual screenwriter with credit on a produced script from Warner Bros. so he's not just a dreamer), but the lack of focus made adapting the book difficult. He read a short story I had written and knowing we had the same mentor, he asked me to collaborate with him on adapting the script. We worked on about seven drafts together. The usual experience followed. At first, he loved the changes I brought to it, but later he became concerned I was changing it too much and it wasn't his story any more. The final draft we wrote was purely compromise as our working relationship became fairly rough at the end as each of us felt the other was screwing things up. Many months later, the script received some interest from New Line Cinema. There was a producer and a director interested. An up and coming actress was interested. Everything was looking like it was headed for an option. Hardly summer blockbuster material, but it would still happen. Our agent said the studio would want to bring aboard a name writer to do a rewrite. There was a very real possibility that all I would get was the option money since the name writer and my friend who wrote the book would be protected by the Guild's rules, but my work would likely go unrecognized since I would fall through the cracks of development. That was a horrible feeling. Here was my big chance and I wouldn't have my one and only screenplay credit. Now it turned out, there never was an option as the director and actress who really liked the script stopped talking to the producer about it and the producer stopped returning calls to our agent and the whole thing faded away and went back to being another script in the circular file. Briefly, when there was interest, I was convinced it was my contribution that made the difference. I couldn't do anything about it though. It was based on my friend's book. He had story credit and a pro was going to do the actual shooting script. I had a role creatively, but no one would see my credit and I wouldn't profit the same way, either. Same situation for Mick Taylor, Bill Wyman, Billy Preston, and on and on. You're part of the process, but it isn't your tune and you didn't deliver the final song. Is it fair? Maybe yes, maybe no. You played your part, but unless you can go the distance, you're just another person saying you got screwed.

Answers below:

Quote
mr_dja
As a band-based musician and sometimes songwriter I find this conversation kind of interesting but also somewhat of an exercise in attempting to keep from rolling my eyes.

When I see comments along the lines of "that second trumpet line was so important to my enjoyment of the song that I think whomever played the trumpet that day should have gotten a credit for writing the song" my eyes are rolling and head is shaking. And those maraca's... Man, if we're going to give credits to the maraca player, the ghost of Jerome White is gonna be hunting down Bo Diddley in Rock & Roll Heaven.

I'll toss a few thoughts into the fire...

Should Merry Clayton have been given a writers credit on "Gimme Shelter"? In my mind her performance was pretty important to that recording. But she never performed it live. Should all of the released live versions which DIDN'T feature the part she sang have been credited to just Jagger & Richards? Once they started performing live versions WITH a female vocalist should Merry have gotten song writing credits and royalties for THOSE versions?

Should Jimi Hendrix receive a credit for his version of All Along the Watchtower? or Wild Thing? Or the U.S. National Anthem? His versions took those songs to places the original writers presumably didn't think of themselves.

How about giving the Hebrew King Solomon credit for Pete Seegers Turn! Turn! Turn!? or at least King James (since there's debate as to whether Solomon wrote the original) for compiling the version Seeger lifted.

Not wanting to hijack the thread, but looking at other types of artistic endeavors...

Should we credit the assistants of painters and other visual artists? I mean, the people who built the scaffolding were pretty important to anyone painting a masterpiece on a ceiling. When a photographer copyrights a photo, should the subject of the photo receive equal credit? (Note: on that last example, they may already receive some sort of rights/credits but I don't think so).

Using the example of a famous movie (at least here in the US but I think it was pretty big internationally as well): Remember "Good Morning, Vietnam"? Remember Robin Williams' radio monologues? Pretty central to the movie and it would have been a much different movie without them. They were, for the most part, improvised. Although Williams was nominated for and received multiple awards for his work as an actor (which he was also credited for, duh) he did not receive a writer's credit for the move. Did he deserve one? Based on some of the criteria being used for deserving songwriting credits, you'd be on solid ground thinking that he might. But he didn't.

As a fan, I'd love to know who "inspired/wrote" what. Would it be nice if songwriting credits reflected that? Sure. But they don't. At least not always.

I'm out for a while and going back to reading y'alls thoughts on the matter... I just wanted to throw a few more logs on the fire and see what they might stoke up!

Peace,
Mr DJA

No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No

I'm exhausted.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
You're part of the process, but it isn't your tune and you didn't deliver the final song.

Ownership of the "tune" is sometimes difficult to establish though, no? Or is it just always the guy that brings in the initial germ, no matter how sketchy or primitive? I think it gets complicated once people start adding bridges, melodies, etc. Was there really a "song" before they invented their contributions, or is that part of the process?

BTW--I feel your pain re: your screenplay story. Know many peeps in similar boats and it's not cool.

Mister DJA--

Here's an actual rather than a smart-assed response:

In your band experience, is the difference between what might be called a musical embellishment and something that is "part of the song" always clear?

I wouldn't argue that the former would be considered songwriting. But is it always easy to tell?

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
keefriffhard4life

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy
In the case where Jimmy Paige contributes a slide guitar, there are many instances in which he would get a songwriting credit, imo. Especially if it's just a standard blues number and the slide is the best thing about the song.
...

Your opinion is wrong. He's not the songwriter. The string and horn section for Zep's Kashmir should get songwriting credit according to your opinion.

agree

Not if they just played what Page hummed or played for them, which is probably what happened, since there part is basically the song.
But why did Bonham get a credit for Kashmir? Did he write the song with Page, or did they just appreciate what he did for the song? Or maybe they were paying him back for past contributions.
The band decides. And we can speculate.

i took copyright law in college. adding parts to already written songs doesn't warrant a writing credit

That's really the lesson in a nutshell. Chuck Leavell's contribution to "Back to Zero" sounds identical to what Bill Wyman says was his contribution to "Jumpin' Jack Flash." The difference was from the second Jagger and Richards said, "Play that again," Chuck demanded he receive a credit, that it be noted in the session log and reiterated as they worked on the tune. It doesn't matter if someone thinks "Back to Zero" is crap and "Jumpin' Jack Flash" is classic. The germ of an idea was someone else who could never have shaped it into the song it became. Jagger and Richards heard something and knew what to do with it. Wyman, like Taylor, seems more passive and unwilling to rock the boat. So they complain after the fact that they didn't receive credit. Jagger and Richards did the heavy lifting and they get the credit or most of the credit. The example I gave about screenwriting is a lesson learned for me. It never went anywhere, but me not getting credit is actually fair and legal by law. I might think I was shifted, but I took the gig and naively thought I would come out okay if it had been optioned. Gratefully, I don't have the sting of bitterness of losing credit, I just received a quick education of how credit is attributed. Not my story and not my shooting script. Therefore, no matter how I feel I shaped the story in collaboration with the original writer, I don't matter. The same with someone who contributes in the studio. I might love Plas Johnson's saxophone work and think he should have a credit because I'm a fan, but the piano player wrote the melody. It's his tune. That's fair and a contributor feeling short-changed or a fan of a contributor vicariously crying foul doesn't change the law.

Quote
keefriffhard4life


i took copyright law in college. adding parts to already written songs doesn't warrant a writing credit

Well, when is the song finished? I'd say when the record is released.
For example, Come Together was a folk song until Paul came up with the bass line that characterizes the song.
There are many examples like that with the Beatles and Stones.
There are other examples like when Lennon helped Harrison with a song like Taxman but didn't get a credit. So it can go both ways.

On Kashmir, why does Bonham get a credit?

Probably because "the song's time signature combines duple and triple meter; the drums and vocal melody is in bars of 4/4 + 2/4 while the guitar riff is played in cycles of 3/8." The simple answer is Plant and Page thought his contribution warranted it.

A better question might be why does Steve Jordan warrant songwriting credits and Charlie Watts doesn't?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Is there a quote somewhere about why the band abandoned the "Nanker Phelge" moniker? There was a time very early on when the Stones had recorded nearly as many of those tunes as Jagger/Richards songs. Were Nanker and Phelge simply not pulling their weight? Were Mick and Keith just tired of doing the heavy lifting and thought keeping the credits to themselves more accurately reflected how the songs were really being written?

They started writing more of their own songs rather than adding lyrics to Jimmy Reed and Bo Diddley-songs?

Yeah, that must be it. To stop doing blues standard-pastishe stuff like "Empty Heart" or "Play With Fire" and start composing their own true originals like "Fancy Man Blues" or "So Young" or "Jump on Top of Me" or "The Storm" or...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-19 04:54 by Doxa.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy
In the case where Jimmy Paige contributes a slide guitar, there are many instances in which he would get a songwriting credit, imo. Especially if it's just a standard blues number and the slide is the best thing about the song.
...

Your opinion is wrong. He's not the songwriter. The string and horn section for Zep's Kashmir should get songwriting credit according to your opinion.

Well, it all depends. Did Paige write the music for those parts?

It doesn't just "all depends". Stick to the content of what was said. "Contributing" guitar does not equate to songwriting.

If that's the case then Eric Clapton should get songwriting credit for Brown Sugar. Ringo should've gotten credit for "contributing" drums on The Beatles' Something.

Wonderboy, you're wondering in the wrong way.

Quote
wonderboy
In the case where Jimmy Paige contributes a slide guitar, there are many instances in which he would get a songwriting credit, imo. Especially if it's just a standard blues number and the slide is the best thing about the song.
...
I remember reading a story about Paul McCartney putting together one of the Beatles' early songs that might illustrate this point. He wanted a French horn on the song. So the horn player comes in, listens to the track and says, 'What do you want me to play?' Paul said, 'Just play in the break there.' The horn player shook his head, and George Martin had to explain to Paul that he needed to tell the player what to play. So Paul hummed the part.
Paul was used to the way a rock band worked, where George would come up with the lead on his own. So George had a hand in writing the song, imo.
The Beatles solved this issue by letting Harrison come up with his own songs (in which Paul and John contributed), so it wound up equaling out.
In the Stones, I think Bill and Charlie settled for not getting credits because they were getting equal shares of other money. And, yes, I think Charlie shaped many of their songs, Moonlit Mile, for example, wouldn't have been a great record without Charlie deciding to use mallets and playing the pattern he chose.

In your opinion? George Martin or George Harrison "had a hand in writing the song"? Your context is null. Coming up with a solo or a horn part is not songwriting. Charlie didn't write Moonlit Mile or for that matter Moonlight Mile because he used mallets instead of sticks.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-19 05:31 by GasLightStreet.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Regarding the contributions of band members who are not songwriters:

One way to think about might be to examine how a band member comes to play his or her part in a song. If a bass player or guitarist or horn player, for example, is told by the songwriter "for the next eight bars play something cool in your own style that is congruent with the chord progression I've established in this song," then my guess would be that that player would not 'qualify' for a songwriting credit, no matter how killer his/her contribution might be.

If, on the other hand, in the process of 'jamming out' a song which is in an embryonic state, a non-songwriter comes up with a riff, for example, that elevates the music and takes it in a new direction and in effect redefines that 'song,' then that player has probably helped write the song.

Agreed.
Plus he stands up and asks for a credit.
Thinking of the Stones, Wyman might have deserved a credit on Miss You or Fingerprint File, for example.

Wyman didn't come up with the bass line for Miss You so he doesn't deserve credit for that and he didn't play bass on Fingerprint File for him deserving credit for that is beyond far fetched.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
keefriffhard4life


i took copyright law in college. adding parts to already written songs doesn't warrant a writing credit

Well, when is the song finished? I'd say when the record is released.
For example, Come Together was a folk song until Paul came up with the bass line that characterizes the song.
There are many examples like that with the Beatles and Stones.
There are other examples like when Lennon helped Harrison with a song like Taxman but didn't get a credit. So it can go both ways.

On Kashmir, why does Bonham get a credit?

I can't answer questions for specific songs or sessions. why does eddie van halen not getting a credit on "beat it"? who knows. we are talking about arrangement vs writing

Some examples:

1) Summer, 1977. Hansa by the Wall, Berlin. David Bowie walks in with most of "Joe the Lion." What he doesn't have is the bridge that begins at 1:20. I give him that bridge. Have I helped write a song?

2) Early 1974. Hi Records, Memphis Tennessee. Al Green walks in humming the melody line of "Take Me to the River." Teenie Hodges has got that funky chicken scratch guitar lick down. You create the strings intro and the horn line that come in at 0:09 and 0:46, respectively. Have you written a song?

3) November 2016. Studio 3. Terrace Martin is all over this sh*t. He's got everything, a song, lyrics, detailed guidance for killer sidemen, everything. But then Rose Gold comes in and tweaks the entire melody line, doing something wonderful he did not expect with his own words. Did Rose Gold help write a song?

If you're looking for rules to apply, there are some that involve legal precedent. In most cases, if you're not credited as the songwriter in the studio and then when the recording is released, you must have some amazing evidence to prove your contribution justifies overturning credit if you take it to court. It can happen, but generally doesn't.

Closer to home, who has actually sued the Stones? I don't think anyone apart from the assistant engineer on BRIDGES TO BABYLON who said his independently released dance tune "Oh Yeah" was stolen for "Saint of Me." That complaint was settled out of court so far as I know with the engineer taking a settlement and signing a document to keep his mouth shut. I would imagine his recording days with major artists were likely hurt by his action. Outside the Stones, Mick was sued by Patrick Alley over "Just Another Night" and Alley lost. I don't think anyone else has actually sued. There are just an inordinate amount of former associates or band members who say variations of "they are not nice men. They took my ideas and didn't credit or me."

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Is there a quote somewhere about why the band abandoned the "Nanker Phelge" moniker? There was a time very early on when the Stones had recorded nearly as many of those tunes as Jagger/Richards songs. Were Nanker and Phelge simply not pulling their weight? Were Mick and Keith just tired of doing the heavy lifting and thought keeping the credits to themselves more accurately reflected how the songs were really being written?

They started writing more of their own songs rather than adding lyrics to Jimmy Reed and Bo Diddley-songs?

Yeah, that must be it. To stop doing blues standard-pastishe stuff like "Empty Heart" or "Play With Fire" and start composing their own true originals like "Fancy Man Blues" or "So Young" or "Jump on Top of Me" or "The Storm" or...

- Doxa

You found the cracks in the boat

Quote
Rocky Dijon
If you're looking for rules to apply, there are some that involve legal precedent. In most cases, if you're not credited as the songwriter in the studio and then when the recording is released, you must have some amazing evidence to prove your contribution justifies overturning credit if you take it to court. It can happen, but generally doesn't.

Closer to home, who has actually sued the Stones? I don't think anyone apart from the assistant engineer on BRIDGES TO BABYLON who said his independently released dance tune "Oh Yeah" was stolen for "Saint of Me." That complaint was settled out of court so far as I know with the engineer taking a settlement and signing a document to keep his mouth shut. I would imagine his recording days with major artists were likely hurt by his action. Outside the Stones, Mick was sued by Patrick Alley over "Just Another Night" and Alley lost. I don't think anyone else has actually sued. There are just an inordinate amount of former associates or band members who say variations of "they are not nice men. They took my ideas and didn't credit or me."

Nope, not looking for rules or credits. Looking for answers to what constitutes songwriting in a musical sense.

Words and music constitute songwriting in a musical sense. That's it.

The question of credit (which you're not interested in) generally depends upon whether contribution was significant enough to justify acknowledgement and royalties. Without the legality of credit, everyone involved would claim to be a songwriter if they contributed at all. The drummer, the bass player, the sidemen, even producers or girlfriends or assorted hangers-on who spoke up. While that might sound fair, why would anyone work so hard if your final result was shared among everyone else who played on it or made a suggestion?

It is like this thread is trying to determine an absolute correct answer to the issue. From personal experience, but also from this thread alone, I know for certain that there is no absolute answer.
It is almost always determined by the individuals, or the individual circumstances.
Had Bill or Taylor acted like Leavell e.g. we probably would be seeing different credits in Stones canon. I am a little amazed that he was able to crack that Jagger/Richards hold that they established. Because that is all it is: from a convenience to an agreement, to a habit, to a legal bond.
With the Beatles it was a clearer case: either it was L/Mc or it was George. Within the L/MC confines, just as with the J/R it was agreed that it would always be both
Led Zep e.g. seemed to take it song by song, but even there it was largely whatever was up Jimmy's butt that day. He has told the story about 'Kashmir' that when Bonzo found that beat, it was huge. Page knows that without that straight beat, the song would not have been possible. He basically GIVES Bonzo the credit. He however does not give it to JP Jones, because chances are those great mideastern lines come from Page.
As a band it probably is best to do it like Deep Purple or early Genesis, where everyone is credited.
Writing a song in band settings IMO should be a collaborative effort. IMO it is the BEST, by far the best part about playing music. Yes, usually one person has an idea. Very often one person has all the changes, and all the words. But if you want to be the kind of person who comes in and says "You play this, and you play that, because it is MY song, and I know, and only I" then it is your loss, and you are shutting yourself off from one of the best feelings in the world.
Every band and writer has said that so often the best parts come out of jams, from ideas whirring around, from overtones, volume and even from mistakes.

I guess in a sense I have been searching for absolutes ... and there of course are none.

And I know I've circled back many times and asked the same question in only slightly different ways--so thanks for bearing with me and playing along. It's just that every time someone would come along and state something with certainty I found myself saying, "is that how it really is?", and starting the whole inquiry over again.

I've said off and on over the yrs that before this board I was largely unaware of the Mick v Keith debate. And I've become fascinated with the vitriol on both sides. My fandom back in the day, although intense, was a bit more innocent--they were just Stones songs to me and I was glad for 'em.

I started this thread because I'd been hearing re-iterations of the "Keith is the real musician" and "Mick just sings and write words" arguments and was curious -- how does songwriting really work in bands in general and in this band in particular? Is it really the case that the creation of a vocal line, for example, is merely an embellishment to an already existing song ... or is it a key ingredient and part of the fabric of that song which requires that its invention be called 'songwriting'?

In any event, I've learned a lot, not the least of which is that there are as many opinions on this as there are fish in the sea, although I suppose if I ask again in 20 years there may be fewer opinions (and more consensus, therfore?) since the numbers of fish in the sea are dwindling.

As we used to say back in Harajuku, Doumo arigatou gozaimashita, minna-san!

Sorry if this has been posted before:

"What constitutes songwriting? As an entertainment lawyer, it is the single question I get asked the most. And without a doubt, its one of the most important and complex questions in the music industry today.

While most musicians know very well how to write a song (whether the songs are good or not is another story!), what is less known amongst musicians is: which elements of the finished song count as songwriting? Should the tambourine player or backup singer be included as writers? What about the drummer and bass player? If the song is co-written with a friend, what percentage should each writer receive? How do we decide what constitutes songwriting?


Songwriting is Complex

The answers are not always straightforward, and I’ve found that the issue of songwriting and publishing is one of the most confusing for musicians. This is due in part to the fact that there is no “right” way to divvy up songwriting. As you can imagine, this creates much uncertainty in the music business…and uncertainty leads to misunderstanding…which leads to conflict…which leads to litigation. Songwriting disputes create a lot of work for entertainment lawyers, myself included. In a way this makes sense: the amount of revenue flowing to songwriters has never been higher. While the amount of recorded music being purchased continues to decline, the amount of music being used (in film/tv, on the internet, on radio, in video games, etc.) continues to escalate. Music is being used more today than ever before. The revenue generated from the use of music goes to the writers of that music.

Most songs in the world have multiple songwriters, so understanding the concept of co-writing is one of the most valuable things you can do for your career.

What are the “parts” of a song?

Most popular songs are comprised of vocals/lyrics, melody, chord structure, and instruments. The melody can be comprised of chords, instruments, vocals, or all of the above. In hip-hop, the vocals and beat take precedence (and instruments are often sampled). In jazz, the instruments are the focal point, with vocals often taking a back seat. Then in rock and roll, guitars and drums are more important than in country. In electronic music, the beat takes center stage, with some sort of melody coming from chords or vocals. So as we see, the “parts” that comprise a song – and the importance of those parts – can change from genre to genre and song to song.

songwriting

Which “parts” constitute songwriting?

Generally speaking, any significant contribution to melody, lyrics, or structure can count as songwriting.

We generally think of a songwriter with their guitar writing the songs and strumming chords, and the melody coming from a combination of those chords and the vocal. But a signature guitar riff (like Keith’s famous lick in “Satisfaction” or the riff in “Smoke on the Water”) might count as songwriting. Or the bass line on Queen’s “Another One Bites the Dust”, or drum intro on their classic “We Will Rock You”. It’s hard to imagine these songs with any other bass line or drum beat, and they form as much of the structure and in fact melody of the songs as the guitar and vocals. A great example is the Procol Harum case, wherein organist Matthew Fisher sued the band for past royalties due from their massive 1967 hit “A Whiter Shade of Pale”, on which he played the main organ theme. Mr. Fisher was never given songwriting on the song, and felt that his organ riff was a critical part of the song’s structure and melody. At trial, his contribution to the song was deemed to be 40%, which amounted to millions in retroactive royalties since 1967. Sadly for him, he lost it all on appeal, with the court declaring his delayed claim “excessive and inexcusable” (he had waited 38 years to make claim, as he knew it would be the end of his tenure in the group!).

However – generally speaking – adding a guitar solo or drumbeat or organ over an existing song structure (and not contributing to the actual structure or melody of the song) is not typically considered songwriting. As you can see, what constitutes songwriting is very much a question of degree. Let’s look at some real world examples to provide some clarity.

songwriting

How do the pros do it?

Chris Martin of Coldplay splits the songwriting equally with his band mates, even though he writes the music, lyrics, and melody. R.E.M. and The Red Hot Chili Peppers divide songwriting equally amongst the band members regardless of who wrote what for each song (and look how happy R.E.M. looks!). In U2, Bono claims the lyric credits but splits the music credits equally between him and the rest of the band. Professional songwriters in Nashville generally operate under a “gentlemen’s agreement” where the songwriting is split equally between whoever is in the room while the song is written (so they make sure the right people are in the room!).

The flipside of this is a band like the Rolling Stones, who split the songwriting 50/50 between Mick and Keith and “hire” other members like guitarist Ron Wood to be in the band, and pay them a fee. Often, this fee is structured as a “work made for hire” arrangement, where the band member forgoes any songwriting credit he/she might be entitled to, as a condition of being “employed”. So even if the Stones record a song to which Ron Wood materially contributed, the songwriting would still be assigned entirely to Mick and Keith (no wonder Ron keeps recording solo albums!).

Then there is more “traditional” singer/songwriters like Neil Young and Bob Dylan, who typically write the entire song themselves, and bring the completed song to their backing band for additional instrumentation. In most cases, this additional instrumentation does not count as songwriting, so all of the songwriting stays with Neil or Bob. Both of these writers have definitely co-written songs over the years, but that usually involves a more overt effort to sit down with another writer for the purpose of co-writing (as opposed to simply bringing completed songs to a band to play instruments over).

So it really is a question of how the songs come about. With the Chili Peppers, the songs come about in a jam-based situation, where the music is created from the jams and Anthony Kiedis completes the lyrics later. With the Stones, it’s more Keith and Mick hanging out writing the songs, and bringing the mostly-complete works to the band. With Dylan and Young, they bring the songs to their band nearly complete.

songwriting

How Should YOU Divide Songwriting?

The R.E.M./Chili Peppers method of songwriting splits is great if everyone in the band is crucial to the sound and success of the band. But if one or more members fail to carry their weight on a regular basis, then you’ll only resent them and be unfair to your own input by giving them an equal share of the songwriting.

The Rolling Stones/Neil Young songwriting approach works if you have enough money to “hire” your band mates, assuming your band mates are willing to give up their creative rights in exchange for a fee. Most bands, however, cannot afford to hire band mates, particularly in the early years. If this is your reality, and your drummer/guitarist/singer simply does not contribute at all to the songwriting process, you’ll want to have a candid discussion on songwriting splits and whether or not they’re going to be included. It could be the most important discussion of your music career.

It is important to remember that you want an arrangement that will keep everyone in the band happy, and more importantly, keep the songwriting juices flowing.

songwriting

When is a Good Time to Determine Songwriting Splits?

The best time to decide songwriting splits is early in the creative process. Whether you’re sitting down in a Nashville-type co-writing situation or with your band mates, a discussion should be had in the early stages as to how things will be split. This is the tough part: sometimes you don’t know who deserves what until the co-writing has occurred. That’s fine — have the discussion shortly after the song(s) are written. The longer you wait, the more complicated things become (just ask the Procol Haram organist!).

A major benefit of having the discussion early is that everyone will have similar expectations in terms of songwriting splits, and this will create a more natural writing environment going forward. Now, the discussion may turn into an all-out fight when everyone’s true colors come out and they don’t happen to match. But maybe not. What I tell my fellow musicians is that it’s better to have that fight sooner rather than later. It will make all the difference".

[lawyerdrummer.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-07-19 19:23 by TheflyingDutchman.

Hmmm. How does Ronnie then rate songwriting credit on "Everything is Turning to Gold," "Dance," "If I Was a Dancer," "Black Limousine," "No Use in Crying," "Pretty Beat Up," "One Hit to the Body," "Fight," "Dirty Work," "Had It With You," and "When You're Gone" if his agreement forgoes credit? I can understand that explanation for his inspirational credit on "It's Only Rock 'n' Roll" and "Hey, Negrita" or Mick's inspirational credit on Ronnie's "I Can Feel the Fire" and "Red Eyes." Maybe that is the key since "Red Eyes" is a Ronnie Wood composition with inspiration by Jagger and the same tune became "When You're Gone" which is a Jagger/Richards/Wood composition. Another question is how Nanker/Phelge tunes became Jagger/Richards tunes in later years. Were the other participants or their Estates bought out?

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
LongBeachArena72
Regarding the contributions of band members who are not songwriters:

One way to think about might be to examine how a band member comes to play his or her part in a song. If a bass player or guitarist or horn player, for example, is told by the songwriter "for the next eight bars play something cool in your own style that is congruent with the chord progression I've established in this song," then my guess would be that that player would not 'qualify' for a songwriting credit, no matter how killer his/her contribution might be.

If, on the other hand, in the process of 'jamming out' a song which is in an embryonic state, a non-songwriter comes up with a riff, for example, that elevates the music and takes it in a new direction and in effect redefines that 'song,' then that player has probably helped write the song.

Agreed.
Plus he stands up and asks for a credit.
Thinking of the Stones, Wyman might have deserved a credit on Miss You or Fingerprint File, for example.

Wyman didn't come up with the bass line for Miss You so he doesn't deserve credit for that and he didn't play bass on Fingerprint File for him deserving credit for that is beyond far fetched.

Wyman based his bass line on that octave playing by Billy. Just like Keith based Satisfaction on Nowhere to run.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Hmmm. How does Ronnie then rate songwriting credit on "Everything is Turning to Gold," "Dance," "If I Was a Dancer," "Black Limousine," "No Use in Crying," "Pretty Beat Up," "One Hit to the Body," "Fight," "Dirty Work," "Had It With You," and "When You're Gone" if his agreement forgoes credit? I can understand that explanation for his inspirational credit on "It's Only Rock 'n' Roll" and "Hey, Negrita" or Mick's inspirational credit on Ronnie's "I Can Feel the Fire" and "Red Eyes." Maybe that is the key since "Red Eyes" is a Ronnie Wood composition with inspiration by Jagger and the same tune became "When You're Gone" which is a Jagger/Richards/Wood composition. Another question is how Nanker/Phelge tunes became Jagger/Richards tunes in later years. Were the other participants or their Estates bought out?

You can always ask the Lawyer.