Prog’s Most Derivative Moments!

Another track I like but which smells a bit of someone else's work is Rainbow's Stargazer - It's not a rip-off but you definitely get the feeling that Blackmore was playing close attention to what Page was doing with Led Zep, specifically "Kashmir"

timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^ I think you're confusing "sounding like" with "ripping off". No Explain then. The song starts with an acoustic guitar riff which is eerily similar to the one which opens "Dogs" and there is an instrumental section which is frankly identical to the one in "Sheep" - in truth I was being a little sharp using "rip-off" over "sounding like" but firstly it is a bit more than sounds like and secondly it's not as funny!

Thanks for nuancing

Nathaniel607 wrote: thehallway wrote: Regarding Led Zep -   It is customary, encouraged even, for blues musicians to adapt and develop each other's melodies and chord progressions. In the then-recent advent of Blues-Rock, such a principle applies doubly so with the new rock element there to play around with. Page commited no crime just as Emerson didn't with his Copland and Brubeck.   Anyway they aren't a prog band! Errr... but you're supposed to give credit! There's no excuse. They should have either made it a cover, or at least given credit (and royalties).

I would rather suspect Grant, the manager who couldn't stand giving away even a dime, of not giving the full information when licensing Zepp's music, than suspecting the band of trying to cover what they (so obviously) borrowed, reinterpreted, etc.

harmonium.ro wrote: Nathaniel607 wrote: thehallway wrote: Regarding Led Zep -   It is customary, encouraged even, for blues musicians to adapt and develop each other's melodies and chord progressions. In the then-recent advent of Blues-Rock, such a principle applies doubly so with the new rock element there to play around with. Page commited no crime just as Emerson didn't with his Copland and Brubeck.   Anyway they aren't a prog band! Errr... but you're supposed to give credit! There's no excuse. They should have either made it a cover, or at least given credit (and royalties). I would rather suspect Grant, the manager who couldn't stand giving away even a dime, of not giving the full information when licensing Zepp's music, than suspecting the band of trying to cover what they (so obviously) borrowed, reinterpreted, etc.

Edited by Nathaniel607 - January 17 2011 at 12:44

Nathaniel607 wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: Nathaniel607 wrote: thehallway wrote: Regarding Led Zep -   It is customary, encouraged even, for blues musicians to adapt and develop each other's melodies and chord progressions. In the then-recent advent of Blues-Rock, such a principle applies doubly so with the new rock element there to play around with. Page commited no crime just as Emerson didn't with his Copland and Brubeck.   Anyway they aren't a prog band! Errr... but you're supposed to give credit! There's no excuse. They should have either made it a cover, or at least given credit (and royalties). I would rather suspect Grant, the manager who couldn't stand giving away even a dime, of not giving the full information when licensing Zepp's music, than suspecting the band of trying to cover what they (so obviously) borrowed, reinterpreted, etc. I've never heard about this Grant guy, but it sounds like he could of contributed. To be honest though, I still think Page and Plant are pretty dodgy. Did you read that quote? It did seem like Page and Plant were deliberately trying to cover it up (changing the lyrics and whatnot). And remember - not all of them are that obvious. A lot of them are pretty damn obscure bands.

Peter Grant was a man mountain, both physically and in terms of bulldozing his way to what he and the band wanted, and not a great deal stood in his way. On one occasion, he occasioned GBH. The little matter of "inspiration" certainly wouldn't have stopped him.

harmonium.ro wrote: lazland wrote: infandous wrote: timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^ I think you're confusing "sounding like" with "ripping off". No Explain then. The song starts with an acoustic guitar riff which is eerily similar to the one which opens "Dogs" and there is an instrumental section which is frankly identical to the one in "Sheep" - in truth I was being a little sharp using "rip-off" over "sounding like" but firstly it is a bit more than sounds like and secondly it's not as funny! Well, to paraphrase Steven Wilson (don't have the exact quote handy), he changed the music just enough to not get sued.  The song he was paying tribute to was Dogs, I believe, but the Animals album as a whole as well.  He's on record on this one, so it's really a tribute, and he doesn't actually plagiarize at all in that song.  But it certainly is damn close. You're right Mike. I have had this debate with Alex on more than one occasion, and neither of us will change our position, but mine remains that Wilson was exceptionally lucky/close not to get sued. I don't remember touching this issue, though, Steve, I only recall us not agreeing on how good the album is (it bored the hell out of you and you found it a step in the wrong direction if I'm not wrong).

My short term memory is appalling Alex, but you are definitely correct in recalling the "boring" issue. My apologies if I have not remembered the "plagiarism" argument correctly. However, I stand by previous comments I have made regarding Wilson being lucky not to have the arse sued off of him.

infandous wrote: lazland wrote: infandous wrote: timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: timburlane wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^ I think you're confusing "sounding like" with "ripping off". No Explain then. The song starts with an acoustic guitar riff which is eerily similar to the one which opens "Dogs" and there is an instrumental section which is frankly identical to the one in "Sheep" - in truth I was being a little sharp using "rip-off" over "sounding like" but firstly it is a bit more than sounds like and secondly it's not as funny! Well, to paraphrase Steven Wilson (don't have the exact quote handy), he changed the music just enough to not get sued.  The song he was paying tribute to was Dogs, I believe, but the Animals album as a whole as well.  He's on record on this one, so it's really a tribute, and he doesn't actually plagiarize at all in that song.  But it certainly is damn close. You're right Mike. I have had this debate with Alex on more than one occasion, and neither of us will change our position, but mine remains that Wilson was exceptionally lucky/close not to get sued. Here is the exact quote (and link to the interview):  "So you hear a very deliberate reference to Pink Floyd for example. The first album I ever bought was Animals. There's a riff in there that's very similar, just different enough to not get sued." http://www.dprp.net/specials/2009_porcupinetree/ I am sure other bands have done this, and maybe never acknowledged it, so at least Wilson admits to it.  Of course, he also claims that he always gets annoyed when other songs of his get compared to Floyd (like The Sky Moves Sideways.......which I think sounds even more like Floyd than Time Flies, especially the first several minutes). But really, all music is a result of building on music that came before it, even (and especially) music from the 60's and 70's.  Certainly prog bands were never shy about adding uncredited classical melodies to their music (and not just ELP).

ELP released the Barbarian on their début album and Emerson claims he never bothered to credit Bartok's Allegro Barbaro (on which it's based) because he felt they had changed it around so much it was barely recognisable. Although ELP were clearly gauche in this regard, to be fair, the plagiarism only sticks out as 'blatant' on the quieter piano section in the middle. (It was Bartok's wife I recall, who contacted ELP's publishers advising them of this oversight)

Similarly, Knife Edge is almost entirely based on Sinfonietta by Janacek (apart from the Bach Italian concerto they quote at the end) and I think ELP were challenged by the composer's estate over copyright infringement on this one as well.

What's interesting about copyright law is that:

1 - ideas cannot be copyrighted (those ideas have to first undergo fixation in a replicable medium e.g. manuscript or recording etc
2 - song titles cannot be copyrighted e.g. I can write a song called 'Karn Evil 9' and no-one can touch me as long as the melodies and lyrics are not deemed to be copied
3 - I think the original composer's exclusive rights pass into the public domain 50 (or 70 depending on the jurisdiction) years after their death.

ExittheLemming wrote: ELP released the Barbarian on their début album and Emerson claims he never bothered to credit Bartok's Allegro Barbaro (on which it's based) because he felt they had changed it around so much it was barely recognisable. Although ELP were clearly gauche in this regard, to be fair, the plagiarism only sticks out as 'blatant' on the quieter piano section in the middle. (It was Bartok's wife I recall, who contacted ELP's publishers advising them of this oversight) Similarly, Knife Edge is almost entirely based on Sinfonietta by Janacek (apart from the Bach Italian concerto they quote at the end) and I think ELP were challenged by the composer's estate over copyright infringement on this one as well. What's interesting about copyright law is that: 1 - ideas cannot be copyrighted (those ideas have to first undergo fixation in a replicable medium e.g. manuscript or recording etc 2 - song titles cannot be copyrighted e.g. I can write a song called 'Karn Evil 9' and no-one can touch me as long as the melodies and lyrics are not deemed to be copied 3 - I think the original composer's exclusive rights pass into the public domain 50 (or 70 depending on the jurisdiction) years after their death.

 

Starhammer wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^ I think you're confusing "sounding like" with "ripping off". Agreed. The only stuff that was "ripped off" were the two opening chords of Dogs. The time sig is different (6/8, not 4/4 like dogs), the picking is different, etc etc etc.