Originally Posted by Michael Zaneski
John and FD,

The whole argument of "but is it striking enough" shouldn't be the only criterion inmho. If it was, then you open the door to ANYONE being able to figure out the maximum amount of notes/bars/etc one can use that can be exact, and how many one can use if one "tweeks" one or two notes. And then "plundering" becomes part of one's compositional process.

Although I often encourage clients who can't sing their melody to point me to pieces of music to base parts of their songs on, I then tweek and pivot far enough away that there's very little resemblance, so I can understand "plundering" as part of the modern compositional process, for sure. But if it becomes okay to "almost duplicate exactly" ANY work for soloist for 3 or 4 bars, John, then we are truly in trouble. Broken chords are ALSO melodies, so THAT fact opens the door to ANY solo introduction being "nickable" --if one follows your train of thought to its ultimate conclusion.

This is why I believe, intention and opportunity, as well as "did anyone acknowledge" etc...should have much weight in these kinds of cases..

Mike



Beautifully stated.

https://soundcloud.com/sunset-poet-of-texas