I know it's always been said that Mick and Keith were credit hogs who wanted all the songs in their own partnership, and Mick Taylor alleged that he was never properly credited for contributions he made.  But looking back, I wonder if this is really the case that the guys were averse to anyone outside themselves contributing tracks.  Ronnie certainly has many credits, roughly 1-3 tracks per album (one on most, 4 on Dirty Work). 

Chuck Levell got a songwriting credit on Dirty Work.

Steve Jordan, who wasn't even in the band got credit for a track on Steel Wheels.

Pierre, who is merely the bands guitar tech has a writing credit on Voodoo Lounge.

It would stand to reason that if the guys had asked Chuck, Steve, and Pierre to simply take a flat buyout and remain ghost writers so as to preserve the 'Mick/Keith' public facade, surely they would have.  

Is it possible that Ronnie simply isn't much of a writer, and rarely brought decent ideas to the band?  It doesn't 'cost' Mick/Keith money to have a Ronnie penned track on an album. It's just another song on the record and if it's good, it adds value to the record.  

So why has there always been a legend that Mick/Keith didn't believe in allowing anyone but themselves to write if that's demonstrably false? 

Songwriting credits can be subjective. I received songwriting credits as a producer and really only contributed drum machine parts and mixing. The songwriter felt I influenced his material enough and granted me credit.

It seems Jagger/Richards really only perceive the initial idea as songwriting, hence Ventilator Blues. In their minds, whomever is coming up with the bones of the song is the writer and anything else is embellishment.

I don’t know enough about their later work, but my guess is those artists contributed something to the original idea.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-10 19:24 by TravelinMan.

songwriting is where the BIG $$$ are. sharing or granting co-credits = less $$$. simple. yes, it is a fair assumption. Ronnie could write all he wanted--using the songs on Stones releases...well, that is something else again.

Inclined to say yes. Credits are mostly a political thing within bands. I know Dave Mustaine gave his doctor a writing credit on a Megdadeth song.

Of Ronnie's time in The Rolling Stones recording on albums he's contributed to technically five albums out of eleven worth of album sessions even though TATTOO YOU didn't have sessions and it's a SOME GIRLS session song, nothing on SOME GIRLS but the B-side to Shattered and then a deluxe, through DIRTY WORK.

Jagger-Richards-Wood songs:
Everything Is Turning To Gold
When You're Gone
Dance
If I Was A Dancer
Black Limousine
Pretty Beat Up
One Hit
Fight
Dirty Work
Had It With You

Not credited:
It's Only Rock'N'Roll
Hey Negrita

Is it "really fair to say that Mick and Keith 'didn't let Ronnie write?" songs - obviously not through 1985 but since then, maybe he has and they haven't been released or... Mick and Keith didn't like what he had to offer.

Of course, there's the aspect of is Ronnie believable?

I was wandering between studio 1, 2 and 3, I eventually set up my own room in studio 4 with Charlie and Jim Keltner and we did an alternative album at the same time that the (Stones') album was made. We had some good things coming out of that as well. I'd put my nose in one room and see Mick working on something with Danny Saber, and then I'd do something with Don Was or going to see what the Dust Brothers were doing in the other. This was quite good fun really.
- Ron Wood, 1997

[timeisonourside.com]

Mick nor Keith nor Charlie ever spoke a word about such a thing.

As I see it, all the individual stones had plenty of time and sufficient resources to make whatever solo album they wanted while remaining full members of the band. With the additional advantage of being famous for being a Rolling Stone. When promoting a solo album, this is a big factor.

Mick Taylor didn't take advantage of this situation.

Bill, Ronnie and Charlie did.

Now, I love their solo albums, and I truly believe that they are packed with very good songs. But how many do you think could have suited / improved a rolling stone record?

Probably Ronnie is the one who has more. But how many? 5 or 6?

C

In a fair world, the credit should/could have been:

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

And I'm pretty sure that a few tunes are actually Jagger/Wood.

Quote
liddas
As I see it, all the individual stones had plenty of time and sufficient resources to make whatever solo album they wanted while remaining full members of the band. With the additional advantage of being famous for being a Rolling Stone. When promoting a solo album, this is a big factor.

Mick Taylor didn't take advantage of this situation.

Bill, Ronnie and Charlie did.

Now, I love their solo albums, and I truly believe that they are packed with very good songs. But how many do you think could have suited / improved a rolling stone record?

Probably Ronnie is the one who has more. But how many? 5 or 6?

C

I have a cruel attitude to this: Jagger/Richards are able to write mediocre songs by themselves - they don't need support for that. And that's all the other Stones members are able to offer (their solo albums are examples of that - a couple of Wyman and Wood tracks going a bit above that). But when it goes to make great songs, you know, actually great ones, classics, hits, etc, one asks talent like McCartney, Lennon, Dylan, Fogerty, Paul Simon - and only Jagger/Richards has that. The actual brilliance to make a difference. Yeah, Mick and Keith are good also picking up ideas from others and using them - and they could be a bit more generous in giving credit for that I admit - but what they do with those, with their unique vision, is the real talent. They shape the songs, sometimes adding the magic. It is not always fare, but that¨s the cost of it. Song-writing isn't any democracy and the ideas are not equal...

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-11 12:56 by Doxa.

Quote
The Worst.
In a fair world, the credit should/could have been:

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

And I'm pretty sure that a few tunes are actually Jagger/Wood.

Why shouldn't Keith be credited for this part, that he wrote and played?

Dandelion, you are probably right. But at least we can agree that Taylor deserve some credit on that as well?

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-11 12:55 by Doxa.

Quote
The Worst.
In a fair world, the credit should/could have been:

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

And I'm pretty sure that a few tunes are actually Jagger/Wood.

This is all pure nonsense. All the songs with Taylor were written (mostly by Jagger) before they were presented to Taylor -why would he earn a writing credit?

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
The Worst.
In a fair world, the credit should/could have been:

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

And I'm pretty sure that a few tunes are actually Jagger/Wood.

This is all pure nonsense. All the songs with Taylor were written (mostly by Jagger) before they were presented to Taylor -why would he earn a writing credit?

Mathijs

Unless Taylor was straight up lying at the time (why?), Jagger told him he would receive credit for his help finishing the songs on IORR. I'm not talking about 30 years later bitter Taylor interviews, I am talking about period authentic interviews where he specifically mentioned Sway, Moonlight Mile, and others.

I would say Sway, Moonlight Mile, Hide Your Love, and Silver Train were Jagger/Taylor (and a few others were Jagger/Richards/Taylor). But due to not wanting to split credits three ways due to the existing Jagger/Richards writing partnership, they were "forgotten" to include him when registering the songs lol.

Nothing personal, just business - Mick Jagger



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-11 17:22 by TravelinMan.

Mathijs, you know a lot about Stones history - especially regarding guitars, amps etc. So I respect you for that. But sometimes you use strong words.

This is ALL pure nonsense you say. That would mean that EVERY example I provided is wrong. Which is simply not the case. I might have done one or two errors, but there are sources to back most of the claims. We can take one song at a time if you want, starting at the bottom with Sex Drive.

Here's an interview with Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts:
Bill: "It was from a jamming before soundcheck. We got into it and someone taped it, Mick heard it and thought I write some words to it. So here we are..."
Charlie: "He stole it from us is what he's actually trying to say."

Quote
The Worst.
Here's an interview with Bill Wyman and Charlie Watts:
Bill: "It was from a jamming before soundcheck. We got into it and someone taped it, Mick heard it and thought I write some words to it. So here we are..."
Charlie: "He stole it from us is what he's actually trying to say."

Well right, but aren't writing credits specifically for the person who writes the song? It doesn't matter that the genesis of the composition came from those two, they didn't write the words and that's how composing credits go.

I'm not saying its fair. Honestly, in most cases I would say writing credits should just be an even split with the whole band. They are all contributing, in large cases they are ALL why the song came out the way it did. But in most cases that's not how most bands do it and that's not how it works. You write the lyrics, the song is written by you. Doesn't matter that the guitar solo is more famous than anything else in a song.

That was the famous argument with Chest Fever by the Band. Levon Helm argues that Garth Hudson should have a writing credit because the organ part of the song is the most famous thing that you remember from it. But Robbie wrote the words. Therefore, he got sole credit. So Mick heard Charlie and Bill jamming and "wrote" a song to their jam. One could argue that jam is nothing without the words. One could argue Mick doesn't have a song to write to if he doesn't have a musical foundation. It should probably be a Jagger/Wyman/Watts credit, but just is what it is. Everyone is doing their job. Mick's job is to write a song, Wyman and Watts' job is to come up with music for the band.

I can do Sway and Moonlight Mile:

«I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song».

«I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile. I remember Mick writing that one in a train carriage on the way from Paddington to Bath».

So, yes, of course he had an influence on those songs. That's his job as a guitarist! However, doing a great job or making your mark isn't really the same as writing a song, is it? If I played a great solo on somebody else's tune, I would never claim songwriting credits.

Had he suggested to Mick, «we should have a different bridge here», or «let's try this chorus instead» – and Mick accepted that – it would have been different. But there are no indications of that, not even from Taylor. On the contrary, in his opinion great work should have sufficed for getting credits for composing a song.

I know that some think that should be the case – people are different – but it's not the usual way of handling songwriting credits. At least it wasn't back in the day. Today, all the engineers, producers and hangers-on want a piece of the cake



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-11 18:21 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
The Worst.
In a fair world, the credit should/could have been:

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

And I'm pretty sure that a few tunes are actually Jagger/Wood.

This is all pure nonsense. All the songs with Taylor were written (mostly by Jagger) before they were presented to Taylor -why would he earn a writing credit?

Mathijs

Tell that to Taylors face and see what he says.

Quote
RollingFreak
Well right, but aren't writing credits specifically for the person who writes the song? It doesn't matter that the genesis of the composition came from those two, they didn't write the words and that's how composing credits go.

No. Words and music are both part of musical composition.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can do Sway and Moonlight Mile:

«I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song».

«I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile. I remember Mick writing that one in a train carriage on the way from Paddington to Bath».

So, yes, of course he had an influence on those songs. That's his job as a guitarist! However, doing a great job or making your mark isn't really the same as writing a song, is it? If I played a great solo on somebody else's tune, I would never claim songwriting credits.

Had he suggested to Mick, «we should have a different bridge here», or «let's try this chorus instead» – and Mick accepted that – it would have been different. But there are no indications of that, not even from Taylor. On the contrary, in his opinion great work should have sufficed for getting credits for composing a song.

I know that some think that should be the case – people are different – but it's not the usual way of handling songwriting credits. At least it wasn't back in the day. Today, all the engineers, producers and hangers-on want a piece of the cake

"would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile."

Many a savvy lawyer has made far less turn to gold when it comes to songwriting credits.


Taylor also said this about those songs: (A)s far as the (Stones songs) I played on, I like Sway - and Moonlight Mile because I sort of had a hand in co-writing that, in a way. Or at least I wrote the riff the string part is based on.

IMO, there is just too much evidence in favor of Jagger, and maybe a lesser extent Richards, using other musicians' ideas to finish their songs without crediting them. Bill Wyman—who was actually there—has said as much. Whether you want to defend Jagger/Richards is up to you, but I tend to believe the evidence out there indicating they probably should have given a little bit more credit where it was due. They were coming off the Klein ripoff and probably became extremely stingy with songwriting credits.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-11 18:55 by TravelinMan.

I’ve always noticed that after Dirty Work and the end of “World War 3”, Ronnie stopped contributing to writing and his role was reduced. My personal theory is during the height of their feud, both Mick and Keith would pull Ronnie to their side to develop music, not unlike how parents going through a divorce might do the same with their children.

So when it was time to call it a truce, part of Mick and Keith’s peace treaty included not putting Ronnie in the middle anymore and reestablishing the Jagger/Richards partnership again.

Again, this is all just a personal theory. I was only kid when that era was happening.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can do Sway and Moonlight Mile:

«I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song».

«I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile. I remember Mick writing that one in a train carriage on the way from Paddington to Bath».

So, yes, of course he had an influence on those songs. That's his job as a guitarist! However, doing a great job or making your mark isn't really the same as writing a song, is it? If I played a great solo on somebody else's tune, I would never claim songwriting credits.

Had he suggested to Mick, «we should have a different bridge here», or «let's try this chorus instead» – and Mick accepted that – it would have been different. But there are no indications of that, not even from Taylor. On the contrary, in his opinion great work should have sufficed for getting credits for composing a song.

I know that some think that should be the case – people are different – but it's not the usual way of handling songwriting credits. At least it wasn't back in the day. Today, all the engineers, producers and hangers-on want a piece of the cake

Exactly. An interesting example: Don Felder wrote the guitar riff for Hotel California. He wrote riffs all the time, they were pieces of music and he'd send them to Glenn Frey and Don Henley to inspire them. They liked that piece and wrote Hotel California around it. Now in most cases, Felder wouldn't get a writing credit, and for the rest of their lives it seems Henley and Frey regretted giving him it because they constantly tried to push the narrative that Felder wasn't important (which is false), and it gave Felder this undeserved sense of ego that he contributed to basically their most successful song (which it does seem like went to Felder's head).

In most cases, it would have been a Frey/Henley composition, and Felder did his job in supplying what led to the song. Now its a chicken and egg scenario: you don't get that song without the riff, but if Felder was on his own and just had that riff, we don't actually ever get someone writing Hotel California. I see it both ways, and I'm glad Felder got credit, but there's an argument to be made the other way around. Listen, Free Bird by Lynyrd Skynyrd is BECAUSE of the soloing, and its got writing credits by just Ronnie Van Zandt and Allen Collins. Is that fair? Probably not. But that's just how it goes, and clearly what the band agreed to.

Quote
CamRS
My personal theory is during the height of their feud, both Mick and Keith would pull Ronnie to their side to develop music, not unlike how parents going through a divorce might do the same with their children.

To me, songs credited to Jagger/Richards/Wood sound more like Keith songs, while songs written clrearly by Mick like Winning Ugly or Back To Zero do not credit Ron. So my theory is that Mick was writing his stuff alone (or Back To Zero with Chuck) while Keith who likes collaboration started jamming with Ron.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
RollingFreak
Well right, but aren't writing credits specifically for the person who writes the song? It doesn't matter that the genesis of the composition came from those two, they didn't write the words and that's how composing credits go.

No. Words and music are both part of musical composition.

I don't disagree with you and in most cases I think songwriting credits should be equal to the band. Every member of Guns N Roses is responsible for how something like Sweet Child O Mine was made. Slash had that excercise, Axl wrote to it, Izzy came up with the arrangement for the verses and choruses, and Duff and Steven provide the rhythm swing foundation. Thankfully, they were all equal then. So many Beatles songs are the way they are because all 4 of them contributed. BUT they are credited to Lennon/McCartney. And hey, the band agreed to that early on and never fought against that being the case. I don't disagree with you, but in the majority sense of the music business that's not been how it is. Maybe something should change, but the fact is nothing ever did. Roger Waters still "wrote" all of Dark Side Of The Moon, even though it is the way it is because of all 4 of them. Sure he wrote the words to Money but what is it without that solo from Gilmour? I don't agree with the way its been done, but the fact is Gilmour never fought for a writing credit on Money to my knowledge. And if he did he never succeeded.

Inside bands, who gets writing credit is a function of individuals' practical, legal and market power. The band member who controls the employee who calls the music publisher and lawyer determines who gets writing credit.

If someone else gets out of line and directs the employee to put them on as a writer, the band member with the actual legal control or market power ("if you don't like it we can get another saxophonist, no problem") reverses that.

It's no different than any other American workplace. If you don't like a decision, you can quit.

Songwriting used to be wholly separate from performing, and the legal system evolved to recognize who wrote the words and who wrote the melody line that could be transcribed onto paper to be legally protected (before tape recorders were invented).

The legal system has not changed to recognize that the "best parts" of a song (the parts that make the money) frequently are not the words or the simple melody line.

Quit and sue within the statute of limitations.

If you are not a band member, you don't have to quit, so it's easier, you just have to sue before the deadline lapses.

Then, it's just an expensive liar's contest in court.

To protect the power players and eliminate litigation over credits and copyrights, the "work for hire" doctrine evolved to be language included in all musicians' contracts, waiving/assigning all claims and rights in exchange for a one-time payment.

Maybe bassist Carol Kaye invented the bass line to Sonny & Cher's The Beat Goes On -- the defining part of the song -- but she isn't a co-writer. She got her union scale at the time for the hours she played.

And to her credit she (and others like her) to my knowledge has never claimed anything more financially -- she understood that was the deal as a studio musician. She added amazing parts to many, many hit songs.

Another way to think of it is "who owns the platform?" You can play great piano all day but unless you are hired to play on a record for someone with a recording contract, you won't be heard by anyone. Are you going to fight for a partial credit because you came up with the best part of the song, and never then get hired for another session?

In the 1950s, the guy who owned the tape recorder, who knew how to press a record and sell it, or even who played it on the radio got songwriting credits!

TV/radio show host Dick Clark (American Bandstand) had 150 songwriting credits.

That's what it takes to get songwriting credit: leverage, chutzpah and sometimes lawyers.

The song writer, or songwriters, are those directly responsible for the creation of the lyrics and melody, no? I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that. Mick Taylor creating a solo over an already composed melody does not warrant a credit, in my opinion.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can do Sway and Moonlight Mile:

«I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song».

«I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile. I remember Mick writing that one in a train carriage on the way from Paddington to Bath».

So, yes, of course he had an influence on those songs. That's his job as a guitarist! However, doing a great job or making your mark isn't really the same as writing a song, is it? If I played a great solo on somebody else's tune, I would never claim songwriting credits.

Had he suggested to Mick, «we should have a different bridge here», or «let's try this chorus instead» – and Mick accepted that – it would have been different. But there are no indications of that, not even from Taylor. On the contrary, in his opinion great work should have sufficed for getting credits for composing a song.

I know that some think that should be the case – people are different – but it's not the usual way of handling songwriting credits. At least it wasn't back in the day. Today, all the engineers, producers and hangers-on want a piece of the cake

Jagger/Taylor: Sway, Moonlight Mile, Winter, Time Waits for No One
Jagger/Richards/Taylor: Bitch, Silver Train, Waiting on A Friend
Jagger/Watts/Wyman: Heaven, Sex Drive

I can do 'Winter":

We started off (Goats Head Soup) with Winter, which was just Mick (Jagger) strumming on a guitar in the studio, and everything falling together from there.

- Mick Taylor, 1973

(That's) a Mick (Jagger) beauty.

Keith Richards, 2020

I can do 'Bitch':

Sometimes we run things down... sometimes we get an idea for a song from, say, a rhythm that Charlie and Keith have played together or something, or like Bitch that Charlie and Bobby (Keys) and me played. Quite often, we go into it without the song being written - which annoys me intensely. But that's the way we record sometimes.

- Mick Jagger, 1971

I can do 'Time Waits for No One': listen to the outtake that has been released recently: recorded when Taylor wasn't around, with Mick playing the piano. All that makes the song is there, including the melodic guitar turn-arounds that Keith invents right on the spot.

I can do 'Waiting on a Friend': Taylor doesn't play on it.

I can do 'Heaven': Bill's bass was overdubbed, so how did he earn a writing credit?

I played on Heaven, I played alleged piano on Heaven. That was laid down with just Charlie, Mick and I, I think. I don't think anyone else was in the room. But the session was called for like midnight and Mick and Charlie were the first to arrive and Mick started playing the chord sequence and I sat down at the piano and started following along and next thing I knew it sounded really good. So I told the assistant to roll it and we put some things on it and it sounded very good.

- Chris Kimsey, 1982

And Sex Drive': if anyone deserved a credit it is James Brown.

Mathijs

m



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-12 12:13 by Palace Revolution 2000.

The fact that Keith Richards contributed zero on Sway and Winter (and others) but got credited 50 %, and Mick Taylor who contributed a lot, got zero credit on the same songs, must be the very definition of unfair. If Jagger was the main writer of Sway and Winter but still needed to add another guitarist to be credited with him, it should – in a fair world – have been Taylor and not Richards. That was my initial point, and I didn’t think that would be so controversial. But everyone understands that within The Stones, it normally gets credited Jagger/Richards regardless – even when Keith has not been present at all during the writing/recording sessions on selected songs.

A quick point regarding Winter. The fact that Taylor has often played this live on his own (and released live versions of it), but The Stones have never done it, it’s a clear indication to me that he feels some ownership to it. A quick point regarding Heaven: Bill Wyman has written that Heaven was recorded by himself, Watts and Jagger. A 100 % fact is that Keith was not present, so again – in a fair, just and ideal world, Richards should not have been credited 50 %.

Anyway, in a MOJO interview in 1997, Taylor himself said this:

«I did have a falling out with Mick Jagger over some songs I should have been credited with co-writing on It's Only Rock'n'Roll. (…) but it wasn't always fun making the records. In fact it was so painful I used to hate listening to them. But now I think the records we made were great. The whole experience made me more cynical. One of the reasons I haven't bothered to make records of my own is because I don't get paid for some of the biggest selling records of all time. Frankly, I was ripped off. You get cynical about the music business and it stops you playing.»

What songs are he talking about, if none of them are mentioned already in this thread? Maybe Taylor is making things up or are being unreasonable, or maybe he actually has a point or two?

The reason I brought up Bitch is simply because it’s Mick Taylor playing the riff. If it’s his riff, he should be credited IMO. (But it is possible Bobby Keys played the riff first on his sax). A riff is crucial to a rock song. Thus, the riff-maker normally gets credited. (As Ronnie should have been on Hey Negrita.) It would have been strange to not credit Glenn Tipton on Breaking the Law by saying that all he did was come up with the riff. The guitar riff is an essential part of a rock song. Even Roger Waters, who is very protective and uneasy to work with, acknowledges this: He gave Gilmour credit on Wish You Where Here for that distinct acoustic guitar intro although he had all the lyrics and chord progression already worked out. Blackmore ‘only’ had the riff and the solo for Smoke on the Water, but it is crucial to the song (that is credited Blackmore/Gillan/Glover/Lord/Paice). It was a joint effort, just like Paint it Black was. The latter should have been credited Jagger/Richards/Jones/Watts/Wyman (or simply Nanker/Phelge) but got credited Jagger/Richards as always.

Jagger/Richards are one of the greatest songwriter-partnerships ever in music history. They wrote some epic stuff together – the list is endless. But on certain songs, some of which has been mentioned in this thread, they should and could have expanded their fair share of songwriting credit. I don’t get why that is a nonsensical argument.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can do Sway and Moonlight Mile:

«I added my solo to Sway, but it's very much Mick's song».

«I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile. I remember Mick writing that one in a train carriage on the way from Paddington to Bath».

So, yes, of course he had an influence on those songs. That's his job as a guitarist! However, doing a great job or making your mark isn't really the same as writing a song, is it? If I played a great solo on somebody else's tune, I would never claim songwriting credits.

Had he suggested to Mick, «we should have a different bridge here», or «let's try this chorus instead» – and Mick accepted that – it would have been different. But there are no indications of that, not even from Taylor. On the contrary, in his opinion great work should have sufficed for getting credits for composing a song.

I know that some think that should be the case – people are different – but it's not the usual way of handling songwriting credits. At least it wasn't back in the day. Today, all the engineers, producers and hangers-on want a piece of the cake

Exactly. An interesting example: Don Felder wrote the guitar riff for Hotel California. He wrote riffs all the time, they were pieces of music and he'd send them to Glenn Frey and Don Henley to inspire them. They liked that piece and wrote Hotel California around it. Now in most cases, Felder wouldn't get a writing credit, and for the rest of their lives it seems Henley and Frey regretted giving him it because they constantly tried to push the narrative that Felder wasn't important (which is false), and it gave Felder this undeserved sense of ego that he contributed to basically their most successful song (which it does seem like went to Felder's head).

In most cases, it would have been a Frey/Henley composition, and Felder did his job in supplying what led to the song. Now its a chicken and egg scenario: you don't get that song without the riff, but if Felder was on his own and just had that riff, we don't actually ever get someone writing Hotel California. I see it both ways, and I'm glad Felder got credit, but there's an argument to be made the other way around. Listen, Free Bird by Lynyrd Skynyrd is BECAUSE of the soloing, and its got writing credits by just Ronnie Van Zandt and Allen Collins. Is that fair? Probably not. But that's just how it goes, and clearly what the band agreed to.

 I'm assuming we can get in some trouble for getting too off topic here, but the Felder / Hotel California saga is one for the ages.  However much they hate him, then and now, Frey and Henley never refuted Felder's contribution to the song, however, they always claimed that the song was wildly different in Felder's version, and had they not restructured it entirely, it would not have been an important song.  

To me, this is very much like Start Me Up, which was about good enough to be a hidden track or a B side in its original Reggae form. I've never looked into who was responsible for reconfiguring it to the version we now know, but even a savvy producer who had the foresight to advise the band to alter the tempo would not have been given a writing 'credit', even though said persons actions could very well have turned a B side into arguably the bands 2nd most well known song. It's funny -- neither Felder nor Henley have ever allowed the release of the original demo of "Hotel California".  Felder says Henley won't do it because it proves how much of the song was his own.  Henley says Felder never will because it disproves it...

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
RollingFreak
Well right, but aren't writing credits specifically for the person who writes the song? It doesn't matter that the genesis of the composition came from those two, they didn't write the words and that's how composing credits go.

No. Words and music are both part of musical composition.

I don't disagree with you and in most cases I think songwriting credits should be equal to the band. Every member of Guns N Roses is responsible for how something like Sweet Child O Mine was made. Slash had that excercise, Axl wrote to it, Izzy came up with the arrangement for the verses and choruses, and Duff and Steven provide the rhythm swing foundation. Thankfully, they were all equal then. So many Beatles songs are the way they are because all 4 of them contributed. BUT they are credited to Lennon/McCartney. And hey, the band agreed to that early on and never fought against that being the case. I don't disagree with you, but in the majority sense of the music business that's not been how it is. Maybe something should change, but the fact is nothing ever did. Roger Waters still "wrote" all of Dark Side Of The Moon, even though it is the way it is because of all 4 of them. Sure he wrote the words to Money but what is it without that solo from Gilmour? I don't agree with the way its been done, but the fact is Gilmour never fought for a writing credit on Money to my knowledge. And if he did he never succeeded.

According to Axl, they did not all contribute equally...

During pre-production for Appetite, Axl said, “Slash devised a system of figuring out who wrote what parts of a song , or part of a song. There were four categories, I believe. There were lyrics, melody, music – meaning guitars, bass and drums – and accompaniment and arrangement. And we divided each one of those into twenty-five percent…..When we had finished, I had forty one percent and other people had different estimates.”