Let's talk about music

[jmh470]

If bands were unable to rip off foregoing acts, then there would have been 90% fewer releases in the past half century.

[PensFanInDC]

Ride the Lightning is such an amazing song.

[cma3585]

If bands were unable to rip off foregoing acts, then there would have been 90% fewer releases in the past half century.

Big difference between being influenced by and blatantly stealing select riffs/lyrics that never go credited until lawsuits are presented.

[JS©]

[youtube][/youtube]

[tifosi77]

Not sure what you are trying to get at? Should we all stop listening to LZ because they took something and made it their own, because nobody does that, right? Is it because they were famous and made millions from it? They are one of the greatest bands in the history of the world, it doesn't bother me one bit.

Also, what about the 82+ other songs they did? LZ is one of the few bands in the world that you can go through their entire discography and rarely find more than 1 or 2 songs on a album that aren't incredible. Who cares if 15% of their total output pays tribute to someone that influenced them and they didn't put a name on the album sheet

and 1 more thing, who is to say that those old blues artist they stole songs from weren't passed down to them from someone. That could be a whole long list of stealing. Just enjoy the good music. If anything it opens my eyes/ears to music I may not have discovered without them.

The problem isn't so much that they took someone else's work and 'made it their own', or 'paid tribute to someone that influenced them'. The problem was that a large part of their early repertoire was presented to the world as their own unique creations, when that simply was not the case. You aren't paying tribute to a musician by claiming you wrote their song; you're stealing from them. The people that wrote "How Many More Times", "Dazed And Confused", "Whole Lotta Love" were never in any way acknowledged on the original releases of those Zep recordings. Their names appeared nowhere.... that's a pretty effed up way of 'paying tribute'. "In My Time Of Dying" is a traditional song that's was well known before Zep came along (Bob Dylan had even covered it), but it appears as 'Written by' all four members of the band - The correct credit is 'Arranged by'... the difference being, you can't press a copyright claim on an arrangement of a PD song, but you can on a songwriting basis. Legally speaking, this means they claim authorship over a song that was written 40-some years before the band existed.

Will California's suite be successful? I don't think so; I don't think you can credibly argue that Page didn't lift the riff from Tarus (Zep opened for them in '68, he heard the song nightly), but it's not similar enough to rise to the level of infringement, imo.

As regards the notion of stealing from stealers..... many of the original songwriters have sued LZ in the intervening years, similar to what Randy California's estate is doing, and rightly had their names added to the songwriting credits of their songs, which has allowed them to haul in millions in royalties that Zep were claiming for their own. Look at a vinyl of their first albums and compare the songwriting credits on the recent reissues. You'd be forgiven for thinking they were different bands. Some of the original songwriters still aren't being properly credited, but Robert Plant himself has said, "You only get caught when you're successful."

Get caught.

It's shameful and simply cannot be defended.

[eddysnake]

I have no problem saying it's wrong and shameful, but I'm also not one who's going to shun them because they didn't give proper credit. Music speaks for itself, doesn't become unlistenable because of politics. I like their stuff and everything they're stealing from.

[eddysnake]

I guess what I'm saying is, if your not an entertainment lawyer or one of the artists complaining, what does everyone else want out of this? Is it just a morals thing? Will proper credits change their view on the band?

[jmh470]

If bands were unable to rip off foregoing acts, then there would have been 90% fewer releases in the past half century.

Big difference between being influenced by and blatantly stealing select riffs/lyrics that never go credited until lawsuits are presented.

About the only meaningful difference to me is the presence of a jury/judge who agrees with the plaintiff.

'tis a fine line between influence and thievery.

[columbia]

Houses of the Holy, Physical Graffiti and Presence are prime examples of rock music; the rest never interested me much.

[cma3585]

If bands were unable to rip off foregoing acts, then there would have been 90% fewer releases in the past half century.

Big difference between being influenced by and blatantly stealing select riffs/lyrics that never go credited until lawsuits are presented.

About the only meaningful difference to me is the presence of a jury/judge who agrees with the plaintiff.

'tis a fine line between influence and thievery.

No, one is literally copy/pasting. The other is forming a sound using your own techniques and, God forbid, DIFFERENT notes/structures to pay homage to those who influenced you. You can play doom metal without stealing note by note Sabbath's "Hand of Doom" and still sound a little bit like Sabbath. You can play death metal and add in some different elements/techniques and not sound identical to Cannibal Corpse. Zeppelin got rich off thievery and ironically, unless you're one of those fans who will support something regardless of how guilty they are, those very songs they stole ended up as the majority of their greatest hits.

[eddysnake]

Just so I'm clear, are there people out there that actually would like the music of LZ if they credited the right people? That is the one thing they couldn't get past?

[Willie Kool]

Physical Graffiti and Presence are prime examples of rock music

Presence is definitely my favorite. These two albums are Zep at their pinnacle.

[cma3585]

Just so I'm clear, are there people out there that actually would like the music of LZ if they credited the right people? That is the one thing they couldn't get past?

I'm a fan of honest people in general, whether it's a cashier giving me correct change, a mechanic giving me a fair price, or an artist giving proper due to a song they ripped off. How does that not rub you the wrong way what Zeppelin did? I mean, they're one of the biggest rock acts of all time, they're in the RNR Hall of Fame, and it can be argued they got there on the backs of those they stole from. That doesn't concern you in the slightest? As I said prior, a lot of their hits, including their first, were stolen as evidenced by that link I showed. Even fi they were, there are a ton of past artists out there who never saw a dime of royalties from those songs they borrowed from. That's the crappiest part in IMO. Whether Zeppelin made it shinier and more accessible isn't the point. The point is Zeppelin made hundreds of millions over time on the backs of the songs that they didn't even write. Would they really have this type of legacy built up if you remove all those songs? I find that hard to believe. I don't love or hate them. They're just there for me.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

I like Zeppelin and their music stealing ways doesn't really matter to because I do think their own twist,be it Page's shredding, Plant's vocals or Bonham's drumming are all really good and add a uniqueness to the LZ discography.

It sucks that they were bastards, but I also listen to 2pac and whatnot, who was hardly a law abiding citizen.

[eddysnake]

Just so I'm clear, are there people out there that actually would like the music of LZ if they credited the right people? That is the one thing they couldn't get past?

I'm a fan of honest people in general, whether it's a cashier giving me correct change, a mechanic giving me a fair price, or an artist giving proper due to a song they ripped off. How does that not rub you the wrong way what Zeppelin did? I mean, they're one of the biggest rock acts of all time, they're in the RNR Hall of Fame, and it can be argued they got there on the backs of those they stole from. That doesn't concern you in the slightest? As I said prior, a lot of their hits, including their first, were stolen as evidenced by that link I showed. Even fi they were, there are a ton of past artists out there who never saw a dime of royalties from those songs they borrowed from. That's the crappiest part in IMO. Whether Zeppelin made it shinier and more accessible isn't the point. The point is Zeppelin made hundreds of millions over time on the backs of the songs that they didn't even write. Would they really have this type of legacy built up if you remove all those songs? I find that hard to believe. I don't love or hate them. They're just there for me.

good music is good music. I acknowledge what they did is wrong, I just don't know what else you want the common folk to do about it? ISIS could put out a rock band (lets call them Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the FIM-92 Stingers) and if they were talented and good, I'd say, you know what, that's good music. Maybe that's a terrible comparison (pretty sure it doesn't even make sense). Point is, if a song came on the radio that I really dig, I'm not going to ponder whether or not Howlin' Wolf or lead belly's name was attached to the lyric sheet and then say, you know what, this is wrong, let's see what else is on. That's mental. Again, I was more concerned with the phenomenon that there are actually people out there that enjoyed the music of LZ at one point until they found out they "stole" some of their songs and then said, no nevermind, it's rubbish. I will also add that I used to wear girls size 0 stretchy jeans so I could dress up as Robert Plant in an air band, so I'm probably more than biased.

[Digitalgypsy66]

I remember reading a geocities-era blog/website about Led Zeppelin being horrendous thieves. Nothing new, unfortunately.

In other news, it looks like Universal Music Group puts an audible watermark on digital music files. As a user of Google Play Music, I can't say I've heard the watermark, but this guy has a good iso of what it sounds like:

http://www.mattmontag.com/music/univers ... -watermark" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Gaucho]

RIP Edgar Froese

[tifosi77]

I remember reading a geocities-era blog/website about Led Zeppelin being horrendous thieves. Nothing new, unfortunately.

In other news, it looks like Universal Music Group puts an audible watermark on digital music files. As a user of Google Play Music, I can't say I've heard the watermark, but this guy has a good iso of what it sounds like:

http://www.mattmontag.com/music/univers ... -watermark" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting..... that's something that likely would get filtered out by built-in processors in your CD player or receiver or whatever, so you won't actually hear it on playback. (It will be treated as background noise by the codec) But it will still be in the digital file.

This is sort of how Dolby Digital surround sound compression works; analyzes the file for dynamic and frequency range peaks and then selectively just drops soundtrack information your ear wouldn't hear during that particular moment of playback because of all the other competing sounds.

[tifosi77]

Houses of the Holy, Physical Graffiti and Presence are prime examples of rock music; the rest never interested me much.

Despite having two so-called 'stolen songs, Physical Graffiti remains one of my all-time favorite albums, and it's something I'd take as my five-albums-on-a-deserted-island selections. The other 18 or 19 tracks are brilliant. Proof that they didn't need to claim someone else's work as their own to have success.

Point is, if a song came on the radio that I really dig, I'm not going to ponder whether or not Howlin' Wolf or lead belly's name was attached to the lyric sheet and then say, you know what, this is wrong, let's see what else is on. That's mental.

No one's saying you should. You're quite right to characterize that as mental. It's totally fair to go in with a new artist presuming that they are accurately characterizing their material.

The point of contention is what the artist and I, as a listener, do once the cat is out of the bag. What basically did them in for me was when I learned my favorite Zep song ('Nobody's Fault But Mine') was one of the ripoffs.

[cma3585]

Anyone ever see a show at Gooski's? I've never heard of the place but my favorite stoner doom metal band Elder is playing there in March. I believe it's their first trip to Pittsburgh.

This album has already cemented itself as one of the best and most revered in the subgenre. Just a total musical journey.

[youtube][/youtube]

[Froggy]

i don't care for Led Zeppelin at all. nothing to do with the plagarism... i just hate the sound of robert plant's voice.

[Troy Loney]

Gooskis is a dive bar in polish hill with a stage in the back. Mostly local punk shows. Cheap beer and a fun place to see music. Only issue is that people smoke inside.

[Factorial]

I'm with EddySnake snake here:

good music is good music.

even if I find the artists loathsome. I would like to see the original artists given their fair writing credits and their share of the money on these LZ songs.

On a related note, I just finished the recently updated Lou Reed biography (thanks Columbia) and he was a POS to put it nicely but I still love some of the music he created.

[Gaucho]

So what's everyone's favorite David Bowie album?

[columbia]

Top 10:

Hunk Dory
Low
Ziggy Stardust
The Man Who Sold the World
Aladdin Sane
Heroes
Scary Monsters
Lodger
Station to Station
Space Oddity