IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVES/WEEKLY ROCK POLL POST
Return to Gasx3/Poll Post Board Homepage
Name: pluto
E-Mail:
Subject: RE: RE: A little contrition on my part
Date: Monday, October 06, 2014
Time: 6:24:14 AM
Remote Address: 89.242.179.155
Message ID: 288312
Parent ID: 288293
Thread ID: 288246
I would agree FB that if over the piece the 40% are taking the credit for 99% of the words AND the music, then something would not seem right as obviously in the case of the Rolling Stones, all five of them contributed musically to one extent or another( I wouldn't think there was equal contribution on every song) to make the songs what they were. If however it was the 40% taking 99% of the credit for the lyrics, and they wrote 99% of the lyrics, then that would be ok I should think.
I agree with you on melody and counter melody being equally important to words when it comes to putting something together that is good musically. You could add in arrangement and a host of other things as well when it comes to producing a good sounding recording. That wouldn't be completely down to the input of the 5 Stones.
Whilst I agree with you on the equal importance of the music and the words in producing something good musically, I just happen to think that when it comes to a band producing a 'song', words are of primary importance as without words a piece of music can't be classed as a 'song'.
You can have words and no melody or arrangement, but you have the basis for a song. You can have a melody and arrangement but no words, and you have the music that could support a song, but if the words never come then you don't have a song, you have a piece of music. It's words first and foremost that are necessary for a song to be a 'song'.
Anyway, that all sounds a bit like it could become a circular argument,but it's the way I see it.
I said I had no idea how the Rolling Stones came to any arrangement over who got credit for what, how all that was managed I don't know. I don't know either if original arrangements have been superseded by new ones etc, but presume they have. Since reading your post however I have dug out an old booklet I have of published sheet music of 8 Rolling Stones 'Hits', 'A Flagrant Misuse Of the English Language'. On the cover it says 8 Song Hits By The Rolling Stones
Written by Mick Jagger and Keith Richard( sic). However, inside each song is credited words AND music by Mick Jagger and Keith Richard! So it would appear they are being credited ( if not actually claiming the credit themselves) with the music as well as the words. Two of the songs in the book are two ,UMT and OOT, that are mentioned below that I think everyone would agree with you that at the very least Brian Jones had a significant part in making what they were.
As I say, I don't know how all that worked back then or now, but when you say some things need sorting, you could very well be right, and gums perhaps should be bumped.
Just as an aside; I'm sure you will all be pleased for me when I tell you that said booklet of music which cost 75 pence when it was published, is now changing hands for £100.....see, it pays to hold on to things.
I said that the other Stones should be delighted to have had two song writers of Keith and Mick's ability working alongside them, and so they should, it certainly didn't do their musical careers or bank balance any harm (any musical or financial damage they managed under their own steam). Of course what I carelessly omitted was that Mick and Keith should be delighted also that they had people of such quality working with them helping to make the songs they wrote such huge hits. It most certainly didn't do their musical careers or bank balance any harm.
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2022 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.