Who wrote which of the songs attributed to 'Queen'?

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

But according to one of Freddie´s bios, i remember that there was a session in Freddie´s home where some of Freddie´s friends were having a good time helping Freddie with the words to IGSM.

Yeah but 'helping with the words' is not the same as 'co-writing the words.' Plenty of authors run ideas by their friends and relatives all the time. If they were to credit every single person who told one of them 'hey, why don't you say "we're gonna rock it" instead of "we wanna rock it"?' then liner notes would be bloody encyclopaedias.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

And David Richards contributed with some piano to it.

That doesn't count. Axl Rose played piano on Guns 'n' Roses' cover of 'Knocking on Heaven's Door', but the song is still Bob Dylan's.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

David Richards felt later in life that he deserved some credit in UP too.

Yeah, for having *played* there, not for having *co-written* it. Two completely different verbs.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

This is the opposite of what i read some time ago. I believe it was David Richards or Brian himself who said that the guitar part was played in one(?) take and it was sort of improvised.

Brian confirmed on his website that Fred came up with the opening guitar line and sang it to him. He also confirmed on Guitar & Bass mag '06 that Fred had a lot to do with the guitar parts and Brian had a lot to do with the vocal parts. It was not improvised.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

And Brian credits Jeff Becks´s "Where were you" as the inspiration for Bijou.

He also credits Aretha Franklin as the inspiration for 'Somebody to Love' and that doesn't mean he wrote that one either. He simply knew where the inspiration came from, that's not by any means the same as writing it (Roger said 'Now I'm Here' was inspired by the Stones, does it mean he wrote it?).

In 'Bijou''s case, it was inspired, *on them both*, by Jeff Beck (yeah, Freddie also knew who Jeff Beck was).

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

everything about this song screams Brian as the author of the guitar melodies.

No, it doesn't. Playing something is not the same as having composed it. There are many wonderful guitar lines that Brian wrote and played, and many wonderful guitar lines that Brian played but didn't write.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

But this view just belitles a LOT what Brian did to this song.

No, it doesn't, since he was still the chief lyricist, the main (perhaps only) arranger, the main (perhaps only) producer and he wrote the melody and developed the song from the sequence. But the sequence is not just the 'verse' sequence, it's the intro + verse + chorus + solos sequence. That doesn't belittle anyone.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Of course one could say that the chord sequence is the same throughout the song, so therefore everything is Roger and John´s except for the middle eight.

Er, no, I didn't say that. The sequence is the harmonic basis for everything on the song bar the middle-eight, yes, but that is NOT the same as saying that John and Roger wrote everything. They wrote the sequence, which is one of the main components for the song. They did not write the melody or the lyrics, both of which were Brian's.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

What Brian did with that chord sequence is extraordinary!

Yes, nobody's denied that.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

How can you discard the guitar solos that easily?

At absolutely categorically no point in any of my posts did I discard the guitar solos. I just said that the sequence is not just the 'verse' sequence, and that's true.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

The care with which Brian constructed each guitar line and solo deserve more credit that what you gave him.

I'm not taking any credit away from him. Please learn how to read.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Simply put, without Brian we wouldn´t have "TSMGO".

That's true. Without John or Roger, we wouldn't have had that song either, so it's worth co-crediting all three for it, even though Brian definitely worked much more on it than they did. The song is chiefly Brian's, but the song wouldn't have existed without any one of the three of them.

Seb - you seem to have a very rigid view of compositional credits; I agree that suggesting a word here or there is not 'co-writing' a song, but you also seem to want to aggressively omit large and concerted chunks of contributions from band members to songs purely because they weren't the ones to come up with the original idea or song structure.

cmsdrums wrote:

Seb - you seem to have a very rigid view of compositional credits

Well, that's subjective. What might be 'too rigid' for someone, might be 'too loose' for someone else, and 'just right' for Goldilocks.

cmsdrums wrote:

you also seem to want to aggressively omit large and concerted chunks of contributions from band members to songs purely because they weren't the ones to come up with the original idea or song structure.

Er ... no. I do consider Brian to be the chief author of both 'Show Must Go On' and 'The Hitman' despite not having been the one who came up with the original idea for either.

It's about semantics indeed:

* Songwriter: The person who pens the lyrics.
* Composer: The person behind the harmony and melody.
* Author: A combination of the two above.
* Arranger: Who decides what the bass will do, and how backing vocals will go, etc.
* Producer: The person in charge of the ... well, product :D

Now, in many cases, we've got more than one person in each category. For 'Show Must Go On', Brian's the songwriter, Brian/John/Roger are the composers and, as a result, Brian's the chief/main/principal author. He also happens to be the main (perhaps sole) arranger and the main (perhaps sole) producer, but those go separately from what authorship actually involves. Freddie's contribution to that song, which is reduced to a line and a half of lyrics, is not enough (IMO) to consider him a co-author.

Let's see Radio Ga Ga: Roger penned the lyrics (yeah, sure, he was inspired by something his toddler said, and at some point someone from the record company sent some corrections, but the lyrics are still his) and he also created both the vocal melody and the chords that go behind said vocal melody. Freddie took the song over and arranged it (i.e. he decided the order, the structure, probably what some of the instruments would do or where they'd go and may have had some input on the vocal harmonies as well) but Fred's not a co-author since everything he did was directed by the chord progressions Roger had put (same way Guns 'n' Roses adding solos and epic intros, etc., to 'Knocking on Heaven's Door' doesn't change the fact the song is Bob Dylan's, since everything they did was directed by a variation of the chord progression he'd used).

A non-Queen example: 'Yesterday.' George Martin (co-)arranged it (i.e. he decided what each violin would play and what the viola would do and what the cello would do and where and how), he also conducted it and he also produced it. All those elements are absolutely essential for the song to have been the phenomenon it was (and still is). But George Martin was not an author or co-author of the song. The author is Paul McCartney, since chords, lyrics and melody were all his. That's not being rigid (IMO), that's being clear.

BETA215 wrote:

Hey, calm down a bit.

I am calm. There's no need to get livid in order to type the words 'learn how to read.' And I stand by them, by the way.

BETA215 wrote:

which only leads to more responses, which ends in (forum) battles

Not necessarily. It can also lead to the person in question learning how to read, in which case literacy wins, and that's a huge plus. So I'm willing to take the risk.

BETA215 wrote:

Control what you say, please.

I do control what I say, and part of that control was deciding I would write the words 'please learn how to read' since it was blatantly obvious the person missed the whole point of what I was conveying.

BETA215 wrote:

Sebastian wrote:

[...] Please learn how to read.[...]/QUOTE]

Hey, calm down a bit. There's no need to say that. I've seen that in lots of your comments you say this kind of words, which only leads to more responses, which ends in (forum) battles. Control what you say, please.

I agree with BETA.

There's a little something known as "tact". Knowing your stuff and being articulate and factual does not absolve you from being tactful in your communication.

Things can be said/written in many different ways, yet have the same meaning. It's about the way you put forward your arguments just as much as it is about the point you are making. You give off a certain antagonism sometimes.

The content of Sebastians posts on here usually split about 50/50 between great research work and keyboard warfare - including schoolbook master suppression techniques like the one seen above, breaking down opponents arguments into small fragments so that they're out of context, and splitting hairs with unnecessary relativising - using pseudo intellectual classics such as "who defines unnecessary?", "black and white/grayscale/millions of colours".

It's very telling how a fair percentage of the discussions Sebastian enters lead to people either feeling insulted or questioning his way of debating.

@Sebastian,

first of all Sebastian, i think you are a very arrogant person. It´s in the way you talk to people on this board. The piano thread comes to mind!

But it´s not about me per se, because you don´t intimidate me, at all! But i see that you use your condescendent tone towards others as a form of intimidation. Many of your discussion techniques might be useful between schoolars while you guys jerk off knolwedge to each other, but that doesn´t impress me, or intimidate me, because simply put you don´t have the brains to discuss with me any subject. You know why? Because you already know everything!
You have the mentality of an ignorante person. I like to learn, and i like to be provern wrong, and even though i only like to talk about what i know, i can understand that sometimes even my memory can play a trick on me.

The difference between you and me and pretty much many others on this forum that you like to belittle is that it didn´t took us 30 years to realize that John Deacon played on "Who wants to live forever". And i´m not counting the fact that when the Queen multitracks were leaked you were proved wrong in so many assumptions that it´s not even fun!

That´s why i dont understand your level of arrogance, and your condescending tone towards others here. If more people don´t want to argue with you is because:
a) they don´t care;
b) English is not their primary language, so they struggle to keep up with your misdirections and not-so-very-good-examples for you to make a point, and win the argument.

Now back on topic.
The original poster is asking about other people´s contributions in Queen songs, he didn´t asked for other people´s contributions to Queen songs according to Sebastian.
So, if Peter Straker or any other friend gave words to IGSM, it deserves to be mentioned in this topic, for the Queen fans who are reading this, and don´t have the time or patiente to read every article and bio on Freddie and Queen for the last 25 years. Things that i´ve read, and you too, and many others. So, if this is a place for knolwedge, Queen fans deserve to know who wrote the solo for Bohemian Rhapsody, even if you don´t agree to call Brian a co-author of the song.

Having said this:

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]

But according to one of Freddie´s bios, i remember that there was a session in Freddie´s home where some of Freddie´s friends were having a good time helping Freddie with the words to IGSM.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah but 'helping with the words' is not the same as 'co-writing the words.' Plenty of authors run ideas by their friends and relatives all the time. If they were to credit every single person who told one of them 'hey, why don't you say "we're gonna rock it" instead of "we wanna rock it"?' then liner notes would be bloody encyclopaedias. .[/QUOTE]

This is beyond the topic, and it´s not for you to decide, and it´s not Freddie´s decision either. If you read again my reply - and i´m not going to be rude asking you to learn how to read, even if in the end you´ll realize that you need it more than me! - i said that they did some gentelman´s agreement. Freddie knew better than anyone that you just cannot ask for people`s input on his song and then not credit them. He could get suited by Peter Straker. And since you like to give examples - and bad examples i may add - maybe you´d like to read the story behind "O bla di O bla da" by Paul McCartney.


[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]

And David Richards contributed with some piano to it.
[/QUOTE]

That doesn't count. Axl Rose played piano on Guns 'n' Roses' cover of 'Knocking on Heaven's Door', but the song is still Bob Dylan's.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]

David Richards felt later in life that he deserved some credit in UP too.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, for having *played* there, not for having *co-written* it. Two completely different verbs. .[/QUOTE]

Again, you completely missed what i said. I´m not saying that he wrote it - read again my original reply - but Queen fans have the right to know what happened and take their own conclusions - not your conclusions.

I didn´t want to be more specific in this issue as a sign of respect to what David Richards was going through. Some people even suggested that it was his medication that made him write what he did. On this matter i only say, that being David a man who knew music business inside out, if he felt that he should have been taken care of with money for his input in UP, then i suppose he felt he deserved a credit on the song. And people don´t ask to be credited in songs because they played in it. They ask if they feel they have contributed with something music wise.
And since they cannot agree with whom composed the bass riff, i´m not going to put aside the fact that David Richards could very well be the composer of the piano fills.

But of course, according to your definition that´s not enough. Well, according to my definition, it deserves credit, because the piano in UP takes to song to another lever.

And your example of GnR KOHD is not a good example, because that song is a cover and there´s no way in the world Bob Dylan was going to lose royalties to other artists for a song he wrote. "Under Pressure" was an original song and David did took part of the creative process in the studio.


[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]

This is the opposite of what i read some time ago. I believe it was David Richards or Brian himself who said that the guitar part was played in one(?) take and it was sort of improvised.
[/QUOTE]

Brian confirmed on his website that Fred came up with the opening guitar line and sang it to him. He also confirmed on Guitar & Bass mag '06 that Fred had a lot to do with the guitar parts and Brian had a lot to do with the vocal parts. It was not improvised. .[/QUOTE]

Maybe "improvised" was not the best therm to use in this example, because Brian already had an idea of the tune in his head. But i´m pretty sure i read an interview where David Richards described the process of recording this song in the studio as very fast - an hour or something like that. But because i cannot find the said article i will not discuss this further.

But what you said on your original post isn´t correct. You said:

"Brian was more involved with the vocal parts and Freddie with the guitar parts".

What Brian says on 2008 Guitar Player article is:
http://queenarchives.com/index.php?title=Brian_May_-_01-XX-2008_-_Guitar_Player

"I also like “Bijou” off Innuendo. I worked very closely with Freddie on that. He had a lot to do with the guitar line and I had a lot to do with the vocal lines."

This doesn´t mean Freddie was more involved with the guitar lines. Freddie had the initial idea that he sang to Brian and after that - according to Soapbox (February 04, 2004):

"Each bit of the melody was alive in our heads and "hummed" before it was played - Freddie coming up with the beginning line which started us off on the trail."

Meaning that Freddie was important because his initial idea was what started the rest of the melody.

[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]

And Brian credits Jeff Becks´s "Where were you" as the inspiration for Bijou.

[/QUOTE]

He also credits Aretha Franklin as the inspiration for 'Somebody to Love' and that doesn't mean he wrote that one either. He simply knew where the inspiration came from, that's not by any means the same as writing it (Roger said 'Now I'm Here' was inspired by the Stones, does it mean he wrote it?).

In 'Bijou''s case, it was inspired, *on them both*, by Jeff Beck (yeah, Freddie also knew who Jeff Beck was). .[/QUOTE]

Is this the best you can come up with?
You´re not honest in your discussion because if you were honest, when you cited your source (2008 Guitar Mag) you should have included the n

continuation of last reply:

Sebastian wrote:

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

And Brian credits Jeff Becks´s "Where were you" as the inspiration for Bijou.

He also credits Aretha Franklin as the inspiration for 'Somebody to Love' and that doesn't mean he wrote that one either. He simply knew where the inspiration came from, that's not by any means the same as writing it (Roger said 'Now I'm Here' was inspired by the Stones, does it mean he wrote it?).

In 'Bijou''s case, it was inspired, *on them both*, by Jeff Beck (yeah, Freddie also knew who Jeff Beck was). .

Is this the best you can come up with?
You´re not honest in your discussion because if you were honest, when you cited your source (2008 Guitar Mag) you should have included the next bit:

http://queenarchives.com/index.php?title=Brian_May_-_01-XX-2008_-_Guitar_Player

"That tune really shows your Jeff Beck influence.

Oh yeah. I idolize Jeff. "

Or, you could use Guitar World 1991, the interview Nuno Bettencourt did with Brian:

http://www.queenarchives.com/index.php?title=Brian_May_-_08-XX-1991_-_Guitar_World

"BETTENCOURT: "Bijou."

MAY: I have a debt there, and you know to whom - Jeff Beck. "

As you can see, your reply about Aretha Franklin is completely irrelevant in this context. But i´ll let other Queenzoners get their conclusions about this subject.

Sebastian wrote:

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

everything about this song screams Brian as the author of the guitar melodies.

No, it doesn't. Playing something is not the same as having composed it. There are many wonderful guitar lines that Brian wrote and played, and many wonderful guitar lines that Brian played but didn't write. .

I can deduze that you never played electric guitar, otherwise you wouldn´t say such thing even after what i said in my original post about tapping. Freddie could have hummed Brian the beginning of the melody (hence Brian stating he was important for the guitar parts), but unless you have other sources, and even if i agree with Brian that it was a team work, i still think Brian´s input was bigger based on everything i said before.


I will end the first half of my reply to you.

[QUOTE] [b]Costa86 wrote:[/b]
I agree with BETA.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t but that’s part of the beauty of it. The world would be ridiculously boring if we all agreed on everything.
[QUOTE] [b]Costa86 wrote:[/b]
There's a little something known as "tact". Knowing your stuff and being articulate and factual does not absolve you from being tactful in your communication.
[/QUOTE]
I fully agree there… but, I don’t believe in trying to please everyone and sugar-code everything. At the end of the day, if the person in question is already a good reader, then I’ll happily stand corrected; if not, I might contribute to them further developing those skills (even if it’s just to shut me up), which I’m also happy with. Again, I’m willing to take the risk.
[QUOTE] [b]Costa86 wrote:[/b]
Things can be said/written in many different ways, yet have the same meaning. It's about the way you put forward your arguments just as much as it is about the point you are making. You give off a certain antagonism sometimes.[/QUOTE]
At the end of the day, that’s not my problem. If I tell you ‘please learn how to read’ and you know you already know how to read, you can simply ignore the comment and that’s it. If it offends you, it might mean you somehow agree. It’d be completely ridiculous if someone told me ‘you’re really rubbish at football’ and I felt offended by that because it’s completely true. If someone told me ‘you’re rubbish at Sporlce,’ I’d simply laugh it off, because I know I’m not rubbish at that (well, it depends on which category).
[QUOTE] [b]Oscar J wrote:[/b]
The content of Sebastians posts on here usually split about 50/50 between great research work and keyboard warfare[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t call that ‘warfare.’ I’m not calling anyone names or issuing any sweeping insults to anyone’s ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, political stance, etc. I’m not issuing any death threats to anyone or wishing anyone’s mother dies of cancer or anything like that… I simply asked a person to learn how to read. If they already know how to read, then that’s great, they can ignore my comment. Otherwise… well, I said it already.
[QUOTE] [b]Oscar J wrote:[/b]
It's very telling how a fair percentage of the discussions Sebastian enters lead to people either feeling insulted or questioning his way of debating.
[/QUOTE]
1. If someone feels insulted by a comment, it’s that person’s problem (with exceptions, obviously).
2. Feeling insulted doesn’t derail either side’s argument anyway.
3. Quoting Stephen Fry, if anyone’s offended, well … ‘so fucking what?’
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
first of all Sebastian, i think you are a very arrogant person
[/QUOTE]
Well, I’m not. An arrogant person thinks they’re better than everyone else, and I don’t think that. Therefore, I’m not arrogant. I do defend my conclusions, but I’m happy to change my views when I’m proved wrong (which has happened many times) as well as I’m happy to stand by my views when they’re supported by evidence (which has also happened many times).
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
But it´s not about me per se, because you don´t intimidate me, at all!
[/QUOTE]
And you don’t have any reasons to feel intimidated anyway. So… I asked you to please learn to read, big deal! Fortunately, you’re being sensible enough not to let it affect you (and it shouldn’t, since I don’t know you at all and you don’t know me either, so there should be at least a thousand people whose opinion on your reading skills is way more valuable and accurate than mine).
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
But i see that you use your condescendent tone towards others as a form of intimidation.
[/QUOTE]
It’s not condescending and it’s not meant to intimidate anyone. Now, if anyone’s intimidated by that, it’s their choice.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
that doesn´t impress me, or intimidate me
[/QUOTE]
Fortunately, my life doesn’t revolve around impressing or intimidating you.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
You know why? Because you already know everything!
[/QUOTE]
No, I don’t. The amount of stuff I know is absolutely categorically ridiculously small compared to the amount of stuff I don’t know. Still, that doesn’t mean I (or anybody else for that matter) should refrain from expressing views or providing evidence.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
You have the mentality of an ignorante person.
[/QUOTE]
I’d like to think I don’t, but I’ve got to evidence either way. So thanks for offering that comment anyway.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
I like to learn, and i like to be provern wrong, and even though i only like to talk about what i know, i can understand that sometimes even my memory can play a trick on me.
[/QUOTE]
There we agree, as I like all those things as well and I also relate to memory being far from perfect.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
The difference between you and me and pretty much many others on this forum that you like to belittle is that it didn´t took us 30 years to realize that John Deacon played on "Who wants to live forever".
[/QUOTE]
Well, it didn’t take me 30 years either. From the moment I first heard the song (and incorrectly assumed there was no electric bass) to the moment it was pointed out to me that there was indeed some electric bass there (thanks to whoever it was!) the amount of time passed was probably 12 or 13 years, but not 30 for sure.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
And i´m not counting the fact that when the Queen multitracks were leaked you were proved wrong in so many assumptions that it´s not even fun!
[/QUOTE]
Really? Which ones?
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
That´s why i dont understand your level of arrogance, and your condescending tone towards others here.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll explain it to you: there’s no arrogance and there’s no condescending tone. When I’ve been proved wrong (as in the cited WWTFL case), I happily conceded. An arrogant person wouldn’t do that.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
If more people don´t want to argue with you is because:
a) they don´t care
[/QUOTE]
Which is great. So … why do you care?
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
b) English is not their primary language, so they struggle to keep up with your misdirections and not-so-very-good-examples for you to make a point, and win the argument.
[/QUOTE]
The point is, it’s not about winning arguments. When I’ve been proved right (e.g. when claiming ‘Bo Rhap’’s recording sessions began before the 24th of August 1975) and when I’ve been proved wrong (e.g. the aforementioned WWTLF bass), the results were the same: we got closer to the truth, unattainable as it ultimately might be. That’s where you ‘win’ or ‘lose’, not by establishing who was right or wrong. And that’s why I’m happy to change my stance if evidence convinces me about it. And that’s why I’m not at all arrogant.
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
So, if Peter Straker or any other friend gave words to IGSM, it deserves to be mentioned in this topic
[/QUOTE]
Key-word: *if*
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
Queen fans deserve to know who wrote the solo for Bohemian Rhapsody, even if you don´t agree to call Brian a co-author of the song.
[/QUOTE]
Because he’s not. Writing a solo’s part of the arranging stage, not the songwriting one. Brian was a co-arranger of ‘Bo Rhap’, and a really great one, but he didn’t write or co-write the song and he’d be the first one to admit it (in fact, he’s admitted so, many times).
[QUOTE] [b]Mr.QueenFan wrote:[/b]
if in the end you´ll realize that you need it more than me!
[/QUOTE]
Now: that’s condescending, and that’s arrogant (i.e. thinking of yourself as superior). Maybe that’s why you accuse me of being all that, then…

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
you like to give examples - and bad examples i may add

I wouldn’t say they’re bad examples, although it’s obviously subjective whether I could’ve come up with better ones. But the ‘Yesterday’ one is quite clear: George Martin wrote parts for cello, viola and two violins, and he also conducted the string section, and he also produced the song, and all those things were really important, but he’s still not an author or co-author.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
Again, you completely missed what i said. I´m not saying that he wrote it - read again my original reply - but Queen fans have the right to know what happened and take their own conclusions - not your conclusions.

And not yours either… which again is far off the point. I’m not telling anyone they should just read my posts and believe them, that’d be ridiculous. I’m offering my views (e.g. that Straker is not a co-author) and anybody’s more than entitled to agree or disagree with them.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
i suppose he felt he deserved a credit on the song.

A credit for having played on it, not for having allegedly co-authored it.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
And people don´t ask to be credited in songs because they played in it.

Of course they do! Not all people, of course, but there’s no physical law preventing them from doing so.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
They ask if they feel they have contributed with something music wise.

Yeah, and performing is part of contributing to the music, but it’s not the same as being authors or co-authors.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
And since they cannot agree with whom composed the bass riff, i´m not going to put aside the fact that David Richards could very well be the composer of the piano fills.

And if he was he would count as a co-arranger, not as a co-author.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
But of course, according to your definition that´s not enough. Well, according to my definition, it deserves credit, because the piano in UP takes to song to another lever.

It does deserve credit, but not as co-author.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
i read an interview where David Richards described the process of recording this song in the studio as very fast - an hour or something like that.

Yeah but an hour is not the same as an improvised first take.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
But what you said on your original post isn´t correct. You said:
"Brian was more involved with the vocal parts and Freddie with the guitar parts".

I did say that and it’s not incorrect.}

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
"I also like “Bijou” off Innuendo. I worked very closely with Freddie on that. He had a lot to do with the guitar line and I had a lot to do with the vocal lines."
This doesn´t mean Freddie was more involved with the guitar lines.

Well… yes, it does.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
"That tune really shows your Jeff Beck influence.
Oh yeah. I idolize Jeff. "
“MAY: I have a debt there, and you know to whom - Jeff Beck. "

Both quotes confirm a Jeff Beck influence on Brian, neither quote denies a Jeff Beck influence on Freddie. So yes, Brian could’ve been influenced/indebted to Jeff Beck and still not having been the main author of the guitar lines.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
I can deduze that you never played electric guitar

That’s completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
otherwise you wouldn´t say such thing

Of course I would, and I did.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:
Freddie could have hummed Brian the beginning of the melody (hence Brian stating he was important for the guitar parts), but unless you have other sources, and even if i agree with Brian that it was a team work, i still think Brian´s input was bigger based on everything i said before.

So we disagree about that one, fair enough. In my opinion, Brian’s comments point at Freddie being the chief (though not by any means sole) arranger of the guitar lines (which obviously doesn’t mean he could play them or that he directed every single iota of it). Brian did a magnificent work playing it and also co-arranging it (the whole thing seems to have been a collaboration through and through), but he was not the chief composer of the guitar parts.

"If someone feels insulted by a comment, it’s that person’s problem (with exceptions, obviously)."

If four different people at once point out that you come across offensive, one could argue that it's your problem as much as anyone else's. If it's over a controversial or political comment then sure, "so fucking what?". But if it's over an unnecessary comment you dropped or your general attitude towards other people and their opinions, you had better take peoples opinions to heart, or in the end you'll have nobody to discuss with.

Oscar J wrote:

"If someone feels insulted by a comment, it’s that person’s problem (with exceptions, obviously)."

If four different people at once point out that you come across offensive, one could argue that it's your problem as much as anyone else's. If it's over a controversial or political comment then sure, "so fucking what?". But if it's over an unnecessary comment you dropped or your general attitude towards other people and their opinions, you had better take peoples opinions to heart, or in the end you'll have nobody to discuss with.

Whoever feels offended by my comments can simply refrain from reading them, it's not that hard. It's not like we're locked here.

So you basically agree with my last sentence: your unwillingness to drop the attitude will cause people to avoid discussing things with you.

Er... no, I don't. I think, when you're outspoken, loads of people will be offended anyway. I don't mind, I'm not trying to please anybody (let alone everybody).

I'm not offending anyone, issuing threats, etc., so there's no need to drop any attitude. If someone completely misunderstood a text and I asked them to learn how to read, it's their choice whether they agree or disagree with it. The world's not gonna end either way.

I can assure you this and other threads would have been more constructive and less time consuming for everybody had you chosen your words a little more carefully. But then I'm starting to doubt that you had much interest in a constructive discussion in the first place.