JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Writing Credit

Hello boards, new in town....

I have a general question for which I'd like to find consensus. I have encountered the following scenario twice in my past:

A guitarist (for example)comes up with a chord progression and presents it to a singer to come up with the lyrics and a melody. When the song is finished, the guitarist types up the credits as follows:

Music written by: Guitarist
Lyrics written by: Singer

In my opinion, the singer who comes up with the melody is just as responsible for writing the music as the guitarist, but I have dealt with two individuals who feel otherwise. Anyone agree or disagree with me?

Dude,
Check any Beatle's lyric sheet. Says it all.

Chord progressions are two cents a dozen.
You an tell a zillion computer programs to come up with them time after time until you get one you fancy, then sing a whole lot of melodies to them.
In the situation you suggest, I would by almeans give the Guitarist equal billing on the music side of it, and have done it quite often. Particularly if the guitarist can sing, and maybe put out a beter demo than me.
Simplest thing to do in the scenr thougth is to sing it to a CD and send it to a work for hire studio and pay them to do the demo if it is beyond you.
Although, for demos at least, I don't see writing backings to be beyond anybody given the afore mentioned computer composing programs.
I use Hit Jammer from www.soundtrek.com.
They have a tryable free demo.
There are others.
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm


[This message has been edited by Graham (edited 10-09-2004).]

As stated - sounds like you've got this:

Music written by: Guitarist/Singer
Lyrics written by: Singer

Work it out or find someone else to work with.



------------------
Marty listen here

Is there a setting on the digital delay that will allow me to think before I speak?

I should point out that I am not in any litigation regarding this, nor have any friendships been destroyed as a result. The instances in my experiences have all been songs written by non professionals for fun/hobby purposes for the most part. It's just a question of principal.

Does anyone side with the chord progression as sole contribution to the music camp?

Nope, the guy did not write the "music" for the song just because he played a chord progression.
A thousand songs have been written to the same chord progression. A million more will be written to the same chord progression.

If the two of you are writers and he comes over to write and plays the chord progression and you start writing to it, then of course he should be included in the credits. But it would be a lot better if contributed more than a chord progression that has been used over and over before he ever was old enough to pick up a guitar.

People have to be willing to quantify their contribution if they continually write songs this way. they cannot expect to be able to claim 50% ownership in a song for doing 5% of the work. That is ridiculous and greedy.

------------------
Chris

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/chrisgarrettmusic.htm

Hello...long term 50-50 is best. Short term, play the heck out of the song in public, giving full credit to your collaborator. Start out with THE DETROIT CHAPTER. We just had a VERY informative meeting. Good luck!

Hello...Long Term 50/50 is not best if you are the person actually doing the writing of the song. It might be if you are the one sitting in the room playing a 50 year old chord progression while someone else does the writing.


------------------
Chris

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/chrisgarrettmusic.htm

Chord progressions are not, to my knowledge, able to be copyrighted. If they were included in copyrights, we'd have an awful lot of law suits in the industry.

Some people who ARRANGE and/or PRODUCE tracks for a collaboration do ask for a 50/50 royalty split. That is between the collaborators. If I write the lyrics and melody for a song to someone else's chord progression, I do not share the copyright. I can make my own arrangment or have one done for hire. HOWEVER, if a producer is willing to do an entire demo/arrangement for free, for a song to which I've written lyrics and music, I WOULD (and do) consider sharing the copyright 50/50. Such an agreement is not a GIVEN. It is discussed ahead of time. But it allows me to get music produced well for no money up front. Essentially, the producer is willing to "invest" in the song and believes it can be a hit. He/she will put the work into it that it requires to be commercially attractive, because he/she stands to make MORE in royalties than I could pay as a "work for hire", only if the song is picked up. But, if a producer asks for a 50/50 split AND wants me to pay (even half) of the production costs, I decline (many decide differently). In my opinion, the "50/50 royalties in exchange for 50/50 production costs" doesn't work, because the producer can make those costs anything he/she wants (i.e., I can't verify the hours spent). And I have been burned by this type of arrangement in the past.

Back to the point, no -- chord progressions do not merit 50/50 royalties.

Baz / Erik
www.eriktyler.com


------------------
"The only way to get anywhere is to cross a few lines."

[This message has been edited by TheBaz (edited 10-08-2004).]

Chords are generally considered part of the arrangement of a song, not part of the composition. There are almost unlimited numbers of chord patterns that can accompany any melody.

The guitarist is not earning a writing credit, IMO.

I think some of this is missing the boat. If the guitarist is coming up with the best possible chords AND rhythm to fit your words and melody, then by all means anyone involved in the "writing" deserves a share. How much that share is, is entire dependent upon you and your co-writers.

Case in point: I was recently thrown into a writing situation with two lyricists. I ended up relegating myself to the music side of the song. I did help make certain decisions on the words (though minor) but we all shared in the song equally. Lucky me, it's now being backed with a MAJOR publisher that has the legs to do something with it. We all win.

I've also written with others where I've taken the words, helped tweak them and then do the music and the melody. Sometimes I ask for a bigger percentage, sometimes I don't. It depends on how I feel about the song and the effort I put into it.

But here's the thing, if you honestly believe that in this day and age, that the order of the chords & rhythm and how it goes down for a record when it's written doesn't deserve co-writing credit, then you best learn how to play an instrument and write those throw-a-way chords that don't mean anything to your words and melody for yourself. Or maybe just start singing all your stuff a-cappella. Cause in the end you're going to leave a trail of people that won't wish to work with you again when you're not giving credit where credit is due.

Jody

Yep. That's what I said. Give the bloke half of the music if you use his chords.
Words are yours of course.
Do let him know, that him claiming the lot of the music for a chrod progression built under an existing melody, is a little greedy though.
being a lyricist, it suprises me how many lyrics belonging to others, I have written music to.
Most times I don't do any claim on any words I have to alter, and the lyricist approves the changes to, as that makes my job of composer easier anyway, and it the collab falls through we each still have control over what we went into the venture with, so can continue on with it.
Sometimes, in the case of failed deals, I write another lyric out of what I contibuted to that side.
Most times though use the music for something else.
Words come easy. Music I have to work at.
Just a quick look at all the differant progressions used tab and lead sheet of the same songs, will give a good indication of how flexible chord progressions are.
Most certainly some sound better than others.
All have been done before.
If it is just a chorus, or verse sent to me, then I take a cut out of it word wise also.
Most times when it is a full lyric, it is in fact the way the lyric was set out by the lyricist that gives me the melody in the first place, so giving them some words is just a simple scratch scratch thing, and the simplest way to do it.
Most times if I write lyrics to a backing, I give the melody away with the lyric if the backing doesn't have a real one of it's own.
It is surprising how many think if that thrash about a bit, they have actually composed something.
Graham



------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

Just to clarify: if I sat down with 2 others to write a song and one guy did the words, I hummed the melody and another guy came up with a cool chord pattern, I would consider it a 3-way co-write. Absolutely. End of story.

I can't imagine writing a song from a chord pattern. That is 180 degrees from the way I work. To me, the melody suggests the appropriate chords, not the other way around. There is only one "Johnny B. Goode," but there are 20 million songs with that chord pattern.

I'm sure others do it differently and a person should do it however it works best.

[This message has been edited by TrumanCoyote (edited 10-09-2004).]

Intend to place this thread in my favorites file. Thanks to all involved for the exceptional insight. If anyone else has new/more information to bring to the table... please do so...

------------------
"digging deep in the verbal sludge of society, for the gems of interest"

When writing by myself I always start with a chord progression and then fill in the melody/lyric usually simultaneously.

When co-writing, I often have the music and then work with a co-writer on the lyric or someone presents me with music tracks and I write the lyric and melody. To me, it's an even split because without their music track, I wouldn't have been inspired to write that melody or lyric.

But in the end it's irrelevant. Without a prior written or otherwise legally documented agreement, it's always a 50/50 split (or an equal share split if more than 1 person has input) on the creation of a song. What a guitarist wants or a lyricist wants is irrelevant without that agreement.

Brian

I'm one of those Blokes who ended up broke cause I did'nt get credited for the part that was.....great to see someone out there with 2 posts.

Writing for me is completely different from just about everyone I've ever met.

I write lyrics in notebooks, and generally write them in a "song" style of structure that I'm thinking of as I write them. Sometimes I'll make notes as to what tempo, what time sig, etc... I do that all without thinking of a melody, strictly about words.

I write the music tracks, without thinking of the melody. I like to write music that can stand up on it's own without any words or melodies.

I then listen to the music I've writen as I read through the notebooks, looking for lyrics that fit the vibe of the music.

I then start working on the melody and rhythm of the words as I sing them over the song while it loops. Occasionally I'll have to rewrite a few words to make them sing better.

It's an odd approach but works great for me, when I'm writing solo. Especially now that I pay way more attention to the melody and rhythm of the words. I used to just throw on something that just worked and moved on. I've learned not to do that anymore. I really take the time to listen to myself and make sure that the melody is tweaked to the point that it will move me and others.

When I'm working with co-writers, I really attempt to tune into them and how they work. I'm extremely flexible now - mostly cause I can create at the drop of a hat and there's billions of ideas come up with. But I do stand up for myself for how much I put into it. Whether its music or words or both.

Brian is correct. It gets split evenly amongst all the "writers" in the room, unless you've got a written document that is signed and says otherwise.

Jody

Can't believe a bloke's simple ask could lead this one along the winding road of stray from the point so much.
Interesting meander though I gotta admit.
Tell me.
Am I the only one that often starts with just a drum beat?
Doen't anybody else say,"Hm. Nice groove to that." then hit it with an opening chord and go from there?
Or maybe do some mouth bass lines until ya got the one that cooks for ya, then loop that lot and see what comes out for the rhythm section? that will no doubt have the pinky working and so giving a hint of a melody at least?
I really think they all really spring from the beat 'cos ya just can't sing a melody without a beat to fit the notes in to a metred form.
Graham (meander some more) H

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

I vary the way I write a lot.
Sometimes I write on guitar, sometimes keys, sometimes no instrument at all. And I write differently depending on the instrument or lack of one.

Most times I start out with an idea in mind of what I want the song to be about, but not sure where I want to take it. Sometimes I start with a full outline. Most of the time, I write lyrics and melody simultaneously, but every now and then I will have a melody first, or at least a piece of one, and write a lyric to it.

Very few times, I have written a song around a riff, whether on guitar or keys. And yes, Graham, just a few times I have started with a drum beat. If I am writing an instrumental I often start with a drum beat, but I write very few instrumentals.

------------------
Chris

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/chrisgarrettmusic.htm

[This message has been edited by Helicon1 (edited 10-10-2004).]

Hi All,

I wanted to make a few things clear about my input about, and tying in with what other people have said.

As a writer, I write and compose my own songs from the piano. For me (and everyone varies), I "think of" a song -- lyrics and melody -- all at once. I make an a cappella recording of it. I hear the way the chords and arrangement should me in my head. Then, I sit down at the piano and "compose" around what I have already written.

Many times, if the song I've written is not really a piano-based song, I will send my a cappella file to a producer, who works an arrangment around it. In that case, the producer and I come up with an agreement ahead of time. His SKILLS and EXPERTISE are invaluable to the song, and are not "throw away" by any means. I do not agree that chord arrangments (in many genres of music) are "a dime a dozen". However, I would either PAY the producer as "work for hire" (as most do) or I would work out some other agreement that suits both our goals (I give publishing rights to the song to him/her; I agree to do some demo vocals in exchange for the production, etc.).

I see "a guitarist coming up with chords for a song" as very much the same as a producer. HOWEVER, if you go into a songwriting session ASKING this guitarist to join, because his/her input actually steers the creation of a song, I should think he/she would be treated as "a writer". In other words, if you couldn't write the song without the instrumentalist, then they are a "writer", in my opinion. Legally, I still think you would be hard pressed, as that guitarist/pianist/etc. to argue your claim without anything in writing. But, as was pointed out above, if I were the instrumentalist in a live writing session and got no credit, I wouldn't do it again.

Unless ... I was asked to bring my skills for hire at a set rate per hour and agreed to that ahead of time.

However, if I ALREADY had written an entire lyric and melody, and then asked someone else to compose a chord arrangement with me, I would not consider that person as a "writer". They did not steer the direction of the song. I WOULD, however, expect to pay them for their services (or provide an acceptable barter). Their service is valuable, even as "just a friend". Even if I just take him/her out to dinner afterward, assuming they offered to "help out", they should be compensated on some level.

By the way, whereas a chord progression cannot be copyrighted, an actual ARRANGEMENT CAN, to my knowledge. If someone lays down tracks and you use those exact tracks, that person "owns" the arrangement, and you can't use it without their permission and some kind of inclusion in the royalties (under "music by") unless it was a work for hire.

Baz / Erik
www.eriktyler.com


------------------
"The only way to get anywhere is to cross a few lines."

I take your point baz.
And your very good little vox and snapping fingers thing on Lyrics 2 is a prime example of what I am saying.
I am having a real ball harping along to that believe me.
Have done better than four takes of it, and each would require a differant chord progression I am sure.
Even the not using a harp usually reccomended for the key, and having to bend it to a major is adding that little bit of differance, by getting the low grunt I want.
So. Your way of doing it as a sing it as it feels does point to the fact, to sing it at all, all the ingredients needed to do that are in the sing.
What anybody does backing wise to it, is down to personal taste.
As is how it is sung of course.
I like Anthony, in that one, expected it to be slower.
Was not disappointed when it wasn't. And am sure I would have enjoyed it if it had been too.
If anybody spends time on the soundsites, I am sure they will hear stuff which has to be sung over an existing karaoke backing.
Words and melody are differant, but the underlying bed is there.
And yes. Arranging is an art deserving of crredit, and it gets it on all legit recordings, and shold get it on soundsites too.
Does on all the posts I am involved in noise or word wise.
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm