Songs That Sound Like Other Songs

[telefunker]

well, you can argue that there's no such thing as original thought.. which is probably true considering that all thought is a subconscious, abstract series of connections between peices of knowledge acquired through our conditioning in the world.. in the context of music, this would be connections between various peices of music you've heard and played throughout your lifetime

however, there is a distinction between this and conscious theft of another idea (even if the idea to do this did arose from the same process of subconscious abstraction) and oasis most definitely fall into the latter category

you seriously think the outro to "she's electric" is the only peice of overt plaigiarism committed by noel gallagher? you do know the main melody of that song was also stolen from a childrens tv programme too right? come on, noel gallagher has admitted himself to many counts of theft, has been successfully sued for it and even has the original songwriters credited as songwriters in some cases (stevie wonder, gary glitter etc)

don't get me wrong though, i love oasis for what they are and the songs that are actually original are some of the best of the 90s - "don't look back in anger" is one of my all time favourites

i think musical originality has 2 basic prerequisites:

- innate aptitude for free-flowing abstract thought (i.e natural creativity)
- diverse bank of music listened to (i.e freddy mercury loved opera as well as rock, ended up writing peices like bohemian rhapsody)
_________________
no fat chicks

[joannajewsom]

Max, I agree that it is "harder for the modern artist to participate in the tradition of rock n roll with the same degree of originality that the canonical classic rock artists did." But the thing is, the genre of rock (not rock and roll) has grown extensively and the possibilities have drastically increased, so the modern artists aren't forced to participate in that tradition. The modern artists have doors opened (musically and technologically) to them that those classic groups didn't have, so it's their fault if they don't take advantage of that. Someone in the 50s, unless they were an exceptionally innovative genius, wouldn't think to do more than the traditional rock and roll.

If Oasis wants to participate in that tradition badly enough to rehash old ideas, then by all means, I hope they enjoy themselves. But that's no excuse for the numerous blatant rip-offs. To me, they just sound like their stealing ideas and trying to appropriate them into their own sound, while failing (imo) at doing so, rather than working within the rock and roll tradition. There are still contemporary artists working within the folk tradition who are making some considerably original music. There are some garage rock revival bands and so on who manage to sound much more like classic rock and roll than Oasis, without blatantly stealing riffs left and right.

As far as drawing the line, I wouldn't call it bullshit. Sure everyone's threshold for derivative works will be different, but what Oasis does is blatant theft by, I hope, anyone's definition.


"i think musical originality has 2 basic prerequisites:

- innate aptitude for free-flowing abstract thought (i.e natural creativity)
- diverse bank of music listened to (i.e freddy mercury loved opera as well as rock, ended up writing peices like bohemian rhapsody)"

Your second point kind of points to what I was saying, telefunker. The more innovation that is made, the more genres that are established, the more diverse that bank will be, and the bigger chance for considerably original music.

[Richie Hunt]

Interesting comments, most i agree with.

Whats the difference between a band doing a cover of someone elses music (legally) and a band copying the melody or guitar riffs from another song... cha ching $$$

In both instances its copying right, but its socially acceptable to copy when its considered legal (pay a few $'s), but a few copied riffs will make you a fraud and not a true artist.

There is alot of 'new' genres, but really, they are a mix/layering of various others in my opinion. Not so much new doors but a mix of doors... maybe.

I guess i'm being selfish here because i like bands mainly limited to guitar, vocals, drums, keyboards and then in production various minor effects which dont dum down the main instruments which likely limits my choice of music and means there will be alot of copying. So ill just put that caveat here with my comments.

[RFNAPLES]

Any music that follows rules of a musical scale is limited by the ability to use a small number of notes. The 7 note diatonic scale is the foundation of the European musical tradition. Algorithms or formal sets of rules have been used to compose music for centuries. Thus accidental or 'unconscious' plagiarism is possible and some artists abandon the stigma of plagiarism altogether.

But if it is good music who really cares?
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[telefunker]

yeah, it would be some kind of neurological miracle for someone only ever exposed to one genre of music to compose a peice of music completely outside the parameters of that genre.. sure, part of creativity is unbridling yourself from the fear of truly being yourself, but you do also need underlying musical experience for your brain to make the relevant connections

so, i agree with you jewsom on your expanding genre theory.. so many of the possible melodies and rhythms have already been used.. people growing up today have ready access to music in a huge variety of different styles, going back centuries and travelling all over the world

it would seem to me that most people have trouble forming those instant, abstract connections.. they labour over them without realising that true creativity is never laboured.. they're also in the chokehold of fear.. fear that the expression of their true selves would be rediculed or rejected in some way.. and then that same fear causes them - ususally during adolescence - to 'pick' a genre of music that helps them establish some kind of identity for themselves and then they get in the habit of rejecting music that doesn't conform to that genre or its supposed ideals

so when they come to make their own music, they laboriously re-hash ideas from a genre that will keep them safe from redicule and from straying too far from their assumed identities

so yeah, i would lump noel gallagher in that category.. even though i love the end result, usually more than the original

i do think though that if you take an existing idea and do something really novel with it that it's not quite the same.. it at least demonstrates someone more in congruence with their true selves and who is willing to try something different.. i guess it depends what you do with it.. if you're kanye west you take a daft punk song and talk rubbish over it.. if you're jimi hendrix you take a bob dylan sketch and turn it into a glorious panaromic oil painting..
_________________
no fat chicks

[maxxy]

[telefunker]

the song you're referring to is "don't look back in anger" although i would say it would be a stretch to call that a case of plagiarism

all it really does is borrow the chordal structure for the intro and the chorus.. the melody is completely different

and those chords are used in a million pop songs really.. but yeah, it's hard not to think of the beatles when liam and noel are swanning around in john lennon sunglasses in the video..
_________________
no fat chicks

[RFNAPLES]

Oasis Songs:

Champagne Supernova -1995

Cigarettes and Alcohol -1994- The main riff of the song is supposedly "borrowed" from "Get It On (Bang a Gong)" by T.Rex and also bears a similarity to the opening of Humble Pie's cover of "C'Mon Everybody" from the album Smokin'

Don't Look Back in Anger -1995- Noel admits that certain lines from the song are lifted from John Lennon: The piano during the intro of the song highly resembles Lennon's "Imagine"

D'You Know What I Mean -1997- The morse code in the background was inspired by Strawberry Fields

Live Forever -1994- Inspired by The Rolling Stones' "Shine a Light"

Roll with It -1995- Oasis have often been criticized for 'borrowing' samples from 60s and 70s bands; this was one such song containing 'borrowed' music

Some Might Say -1995- The track was apparently inspired by the Small Faces and/or T-Rex

Stop Cryin' Your Heart Out -2002

Supersonic -1994- Supersonic's distinctive lead guitar part wasn't a deliberate copy of the intro to George Harrison's 1971 single "My Sweet Lord" according to Gallagher

Whatever -1994- Part of the song's melody was lifted from Neil Innes' song "How Sweet To Be An Idiot". Innes successfully sued Oasis for plagiarism and was awarded subsequent royalties

Wonderwall -1995

Yet all these songs are heralded as among the most acclaimed.
_________________
Top 100 Greatest Music Albums by RFNAPLES
Bubbling Under The Top 100 Greatest Mus...y RFNAPLES

[Ironic Karma]

I always found that Coldplay's intro to "In My Place" sounds like Ride's "Dreams Burn Down" intro, just a tad though.

[Mr. Shankly]