Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65249
|
Topic: Aspiration and Inspiration Posted: March 12 2015 at 02:09 |
With all the hubbub around music plagiarism at the moment ~ where ideas and grooves come from, how close is too close, and when a piece of music should be judged against another ~ what are your thoughts on all this as musicians, composers & songwriters? Where do your ideas come from? Should influence never be imitation, but rather only a cloaked homage at best? And is having an original voice in your art more important than carrying an already established approach further?
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65249
|
Posted: March 13 2015 at 20:19 |
How does a thread get a 5-star rating and not have any posts
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415
|
Posted: March 14 2015 at 06:04 |
^ it's amazing how attractive indifference can be...
I guess that without any previous musical reference points at all, the resultant music would sound like an incoherent mess. (Even the 'fire in a pet shop' atonal free jazz milieu has a semblance of order about it) A timid nod in the direction of popular music structural forms could also be deemed a vestige of quotation of sorts. (Intros, verses, middle eights, turnarounds, choruses etc) Nothing is created in a vacuum and it's interesting that despite the seemingly infinite possibilities afforded by our western 12 semitone pitch choices, there are certain melodic and harmonic combinations that we do find more aesthetically appealing than others (which is where cliches originate after all) Unremitting dissonance and chaotic disorder is every bit as dull and tedious as bland replications of time honoured genre licks y'all.
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: March 14 2015 at 07:26 |
Composers have always built upon the work of others. Bach did this, Mozart did this and so did every other classical composer through history. It is how music progresses and develops. The skill is in making it unique and original while maintaining a link to the heritage from whence it came, and (dare I say it?) making it better. The Stones, Led Zepp., Deep Purple et al, all borrowed heavily from their influences, often to the point of bare-faced plagiarism, but they did it well... often we prefer their "versions" over the originals they lifted a phrase, riff or "groove" from, their filtering (and development) of that music eclipsed the source material, it became more popular, it sold more, it has been remembered for longer. Now we only remember It's A Beautiful Day's Bombay Calling because of Child In Time. We forgive those who plagiarise when they create something new with the building-blocks they use, and do not condone those who appear to simply plunder and cash-in on the work of others without reverence, acknowledgement and a spark of originality.
Pure inspiration is a rare commodity, especially in music where we love to compare, categorise and compartmentalise even the slightest nuance of familiarity. After all these years I do not believe, for example, that George Harrison set out with the deliberate intention of plagiarising He's So Fine when composing My Sweet Lord, it was an unfortunate accidental borrowing, one that I suspect detrimentally affected Harrison's subsequent writing and composition.
I make music but I would never claim to be original, when creating something I believe to be non-referential I know that it emulates a style that has been done before. Even using a particular synth-tone that I have created by twiddling knobs and playing with filters and tone-generators, that process of sound-creation will home-in on a timbre and colouration that is reminiscent of something else, and from that the music that tone inspires will be subconsciously drawn towards a similar style of music. Sometimes that is intentional, often it is not.
Edited by Dean - March 14 2015 at 07:29
|
What?
|
|
Littlecarrots
Forum Groupie
Joined: August 12 2011
Location: Uruguay
Status: Offline
Points: 86
|
Posted: March 14 2015 at 11:37 |
There's an interesting documentary named "Everything's a remix" which pretty sums up my point of view about this topic, and it's not so different from the opinions posted before. It's impossible for someone to be completely original in the sense of making something that has never ever be done in some way.
Music (and so do other arts, and even scientific, philosophical and moral ideas) evolves by imitation, transformation, fusion or opposition. Every artist ever has referenced music before his time, and some lucky ones have inspired those artists that have come after them. Either by trying to make something similar -but at the same time, unique, as in the whole music making process is completely subjective and individual, so there's always this 'thing', something difficult to put on words that every artist infuses to their music- than what's already been done (that's how genres are made), or by merging or fusing previous ideas (blues-rock is a fusion of blues and rock, folk-rock is the fusion of folk music and rock, etc. Even prog is the product of fusing diferent genres and musical ideas, from jazz, classical, folk, pyschedelic rock and even avant-garde, electronic or latin genres sometimes), or by transforming something that already exists and pushing its boundaries (psychedelic rock and blues rock led the way to hard rock and heavy metal, and so on), or by opposition to what's being done that at the right moment (either leadin to revivals or 'new' styles that oppose in its central ideas to what's being done, being punk a great example of that, a 'simplistic' style with short songs that was in opposition to prog's complexity and song length).
In the end musical ideas, though seemingly infinite, most of them have some common ground that is inescapable. There's only a limited amount of notes and chords and scales you can use to compose, and that's it. Do what you can.
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: March 14 2015 at 11:40 |
It's unavoidable to draw from previous influences of what you have heard and liked during your life, but genuine artists have the gift of being able to create something which sounds personal and original, to incorporate something from themselves in what they create, and since no 2 persons are the same, their music is not the same either as that previously created by other artists.
|
|
Star_Song_Age_Less
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 08 2014
Location: MA
Status: Offline
Points: 367
|
Posted: April 23 2015 at 00:14 |
^Gerinski, you just took the words right out of my mouth.
I got a bit miffed when I was at a small concert a few months ago and the performer on stage claimed (as I have heard others claim before) that enough songs have already been written, so there's no point in writing new ones. I had trouble enjoying the performance after that. There's a personal aspect to songwriting and performance that is never identical, even if the structure of the song itself is derivative.
|
https://www.facebook.com/JamieKernMusic
|
|
Polymorphia
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 06 2012
Location: here
Status: Offline
Points: 8856
|
Posted: April 23 2015 at 23:05 |
^ and ^^
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.