[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:[/QUOTENAME]Very interesting discussion, guys. In my opinion, composition and arrangement are equal, and thus arrangement should deserve equal credit... although it rarely gets it.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting point, which I partially share. Generally, popular music's essentially oblivious about the importance of arrangements, while classical and jazz gives the deserved consideration to them (and more to the point, to the creative force behind).[/QUOTE]
Yep... agreed.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote:[/QUOTENAME]Very interesting discussion, guys. In my opinion, composition and arrangement are equal, and thus arrangement should deserve equal credit... although it rarely gets it.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting point, which I partially share. Generally, popular music's essentially oblivious about the importance of arrangements, while classical and jazz gives the deserved consideration to them (and more to the point, to the creative force behind).[/QUOTE]
Yep... agreed.
[/QUOTE]
I think that might be to do with the fact that, usually, jazz- and classical musicians/composers have far more technical understanding of the process of making music than those in the pop/rock area. And I'm not referring to technical proficiency in playing or composition, but more to musical philosophy.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting point, which I partially share. Generally, popular music's essentially oblivious about the importance of arrangements, while classical and jazz gives the deserved consideration to them (and more to the point, to the creative force behind).[/QUOTE]
Yep... agreed.
[/QUOTE]
I think that might be to do with the fact that, usually, jazz- and classical musicians/composers have far more technical understanding of the process of making music than those in the pop/rock area. And I'm not referring to technical proficiency in playing or composition, but more to musical philosophy.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6>
Very interesting discussion, guys. In my opinion, composition and arrangement are equal, and thus arrangement should deserve equal credit... although it rarely gets it.
[/QUOTE]
Touché!!
Exactlly my opinion. If people don´t guive credit, that doesn´t mean it´s ok.
I understand that people often see arrangement as "put some cloths on the body". The chords are already there, so the arranger only has to add some instruments here and there! Well, in some cases i agree ; ) but when the arrangement elevates the song to another level, then i think that a co-credit wouldn´t harm.
Examples:
Michael Kamen on "Who wants to live forever";
George Martin on some of the Beatles stuff;
Freddie Mercury on Radio GaGA (when i hear this song and compare it to "Love Kills" i wonder how much of the music and song structure is really Roger´s- and without Freddie this would probably be just another Queen song);
Now, then there are cases when i think it´s insultuous to have royalties (because that´s what were´re really talking about). And the number one slot goes to :
Sting on "Money for Nothing" by Dire Starits.
Well, Sting only sanged a few words. He didn´t write nothing, and Still his publishing company insisted on co-writing credits (50% ??-need confirmation here). Well, at least Sting was embarassed (yeah, right!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_for_Nothing_(song)
Take care
Very interesting discussion, guys. In my opinion, composition and arrangement are equal, and thus arrangement should deserve equal credit... although it rarely gets it.
[/QUOTE]
Touché!!
Exactlly my opinion. If people don´t guive credit, that doesn´t mean it´s ok.
I understand that people often see arrangement as "put some cloths on the body". The chords are already there, so the arranger only has to add some instruments here and there! Well, in some cases i agree ; ) but when the arrangement elevates the song to another level, then i think that a co-credit wouldn´t harm.
Examples:
Michael Kamen on "Who wants to live forever";
George Martin on some of the Beatles stuff;
Freddie Mercury on Radio GaGA (when i hear this song and compare it to "Love Kills" i wonder how much of the music and song structure is really Roger´s- and without Freddie this would probably be just another Queen song);
Now, then there are cases when i think it´s insultuous to have royalties (because that´s what were´re really talking about). And the number one slot goes to :
Sting on "Money for Nothing" by Dire Starits.
Well, Sting only sanged a few words. He didn´t write nothing, and Still his publishing company insisted on co-writing credits (50% ??-need confirmation here). Well, at least Sting was embarassed (yeah, right!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_for_Nothing_(song)
Take care
> but when the arrangement elevates the song to another level, then i think that a co-credit wouldn´t harm.
Same thing with performance for that matter. What I think is that each song should have "music by ..., lyrics by ... arrangement by ...".
> George Martin on some of the Beatles stuff;
Over half actually :)
Listen to 'Yesterday' by Boys II Men: nearly 80% is new! Yet the song is still McCartney's. Or the much cited 'Knocking' by GnR (or by many others).
Otoh, many hip-hop artists give credit to anybody who's contributed with anything. Quite a different philosophy.
Same thing with performance for that matter. What I think is that each song should have "music by ..., lyrics by ... arrangement by ...".
> George Martin on some of the Beatles stuff;
Over half actually :)
Listen to 'Yesterday' by Boys II Men: nearly 80% is new! Yet the song is still McCartney's. Or the much cited 'Knocking' by GnR (or by many others).
Otoh, many hip-hop artists give credit to anybody who's contributed with anything. Quite a different philosophy.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]> What I think is that each song should have "music by ..., lyrics by ... arrangement by ...".
[/QUOTE]
Funny you said that 'cos this is exactly how things are up here in Finland. I can't remember I've ever seen a Finnish album that doesn't give credits to the arranger(s). So, maybe it's a cultural difference, different tradition on giving credits... or maybe it's got something to do with fact that we have relatively small domestic markets up here... dunno really. But I've always wondered about that...
[/QUOTE]
Funny you said that 'cos this is exactly how things are up here in Finland. I can't remember I've ever seen a Finnish album that doesn't give credits to the arranger(s). So, maybe it's a cultural difference, different tradition on giving credits... or maybe it's got something to do with fact that we have relatively small domestic markets up here... dunno really. But I've always wondered about that...
Celine Dion's 'Falling Into You' (one of the few albums that I actually bought instead of downloading) does credit the arranger for each track too. As far as I remember, 'Thriller' credits the arrangers too ... at least regarding vocals.
For some extent Queen did it too, but on a more general basis. It'd have been nice if they specified, for instance "this song was written by Brian but Roger defined the tempo, Freddie came up with the bass line and John mixed it", but certainly it didn't matter to them as much as it does to us.
For some extent Queen did it too, but on a more general basis. It'd have been nice if they specified, for instance "this song was written by Brian but Roger defined the tempo, Freddie came up with the bass line and John mixed it", but certainly it didn't matter to them as much as it does to us.