Jericho-79 Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 I just discovered an underground band from my area that recently released an EP on indie record label. On that EP, I found something peculiar about the songwriting credits. All the music is credited to the entire band, while all the lyrics AND all the melodies are credited to the band’s lead singer. I thought that the creation of melodies (as well as harmonies, rhythms, riffs, and chord progressions) are part of the entirety of musical composition. And I thought that a band lyricist just generated the words. How can a band have its lyricist credit himself with all the melodies? How can a band’s lead singer come up with BOTH the lyrics and the melodies at the same time? Isn’t musical composition considered a complete package consisting of melodies, harmonies, rhythms, riffs, and chord progressions? If an entire band is credited with the musical composition, shouldn’t the whole band come up with all the melodies as well during the songwriting process? Any professional songwriters here care to give some input? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyK Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 I'm not professional, but I've written a fair few songs over the years. Sometimes, I write the whole song, sometimes, I work off chord progressions written by the guitarist, in which case, I write the lyrics and melody. Not sure why you'd think it was that strange? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad1 Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 I just discovered an underground band from my area that recently released an EP on indie record label. On that EP, I found something peculiar about the songwriting credits. How can a band have its lyricist credit himself with all the melodies? How can a band’s lead singer come up with BOTH the lyrics and the melodies at the same time? I know very little about music. But I have written a lot of songs. My understanding is that quite often "the way" the lyrics are sung (and not the words themselves) IS considered the main melody of the song. For me, the lyrics are the easy part. It's how you sing those lyrics that is always the toughest part for me. Songs can contain quite a few different melodies though. To say you wrote them all is probaly not true. He was probaly just talking about the melody of the lyrics as I was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 Song lyrics without a melody are just a poem. When I am writing songs, I create in most cases lyrics with melody and tempo first. Then I build a groove, riffs and chords around them. The latter, determining the chords, is arrangement in my opinion, not composing. In a song, chords have to be part music based on the melody, a background for accompaniment. Sometimes I start it all with a riff, and there are very rare occasions when I begin with a chord sequence and build lyrics and a melody around it. When bandmates of mine come up with lyrics, melody and tempo, then in most cases it's me who contributes the chords, but wouldn't expect to be credited for that. Grooves and riffs are a different thing, however. No matter who writes the songs, until today I am the only lead vocalist in our quartet, and the others just want to sing background vocals although in my opinion two of them are awesome lead vocalists, too. In case I adapt melodies to my voice, I also don't want to be credited but beg the writer's pardon for feeling forced to change his initial idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoya Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I just discovered an underground band from my area that recently released an EP on indie record label. On that EP, I found something peculiar about the songwriting credits. All the music is credited to the entire band, while all the lyrics AND all the melodies are credited to the band’s lead singer. I thought that the creation of melodies (as well as harmonies, rhythms, riffs, and chord progressions) are part of the entirety of musical composition. And I thought that a band lyricist just generated the words. How can a band have its lyricist credit himself with all the melodies? How can a band’s lead singer come up with BOTH the lyrics and the melodies at the same time? Isn’t musical composition considered a complete package consisting of melodies, harmonies, rhythms, riffs, and chord progressions? If an entire band is credited with the musical composition, shouldn’t the whole band come up with all the melodies as well during the songwriting process? Any professional songwriters here care to give some input? What does this mean in terms of publishing and royalties if the band has a huge hit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonzoboy Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I'm pretty sure that in the Smith's Morrissey was responsible for the lyrics while Johnny Marr created all the melodies,interestingly enough,since going solo,Morrissey has been doing a fine job in making up his own melodies.Robert Smith writes mostly all the lyrics for The Cure but I believe that melodies are a shared effort between Smith,guitarist Simon Gallup and keyboard player Laurence Tolhurst yet often songwrting credits are simply listed all members of The Cure.My best buddy and I have been playing in different bands together since we were 14 or 15 and have been writing our own songs ever since.We generally write our own lyrics and melodies but often consult with each other when it comes to the final outcome of the song.We have always shared ideas about changing tempos,choruses and even lyrics at times,so even though a song may largely be my composition,the final outcome is a group effort.I believe that this may be the case with a lot of popular bands/songwriting teams too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Not sure why you'd think it was that strange? I think the OP meant that it was odd to separate "melodies" and "music". The band is credited with writing the music, but the singer with the lyrics AND melody. Seems like most often just "music" and "lyrics" are credited. How is melody not music and vice versa? I'm guessing though that the band wrote only chord changes/riffs but the singer wrote lyrics and melodies over those changes. I think I would have just gone for total shared credit for everyone given those parameters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Scales Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I'd think the singer is effectively making sure he(/she) is credited as the 'songwriter' such that if anyone ever did a cover version/interpretation of the song (in any genre, form or style) OR ripped off the melody line in a completely different song, then he can claim it as his own. It is great that the band is being credited for the music (the singer would not likely have drummed, written bass lines or even done the improvisation/solos etc, and in this case maybe even the chords/riffs/transitions - the band members would have invented these) - but unless another band did an exact cover of the song with all those parts replicated, then the band members potentially would not be able to claim it as theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 All the music is credited to the entire band, while all the lyrics AND all the melodies are credited to the band’s lead singer. It's just lead singers doing what they do best: being spot light hogging, self important princesses. All this is saying is that the entire band wrote the music *and* the singer wrote the vocal melodies and lyrics. I highly doubt that lead singer plays an instrument so he probably did not write one note of music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 In my old band, the drummer wrote the lyrics. The bass player and I wrote the riffs/tunes and the singer, the melody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 It's just lead singers doing what they do best: being spot light hogging, self important princesses. All this is saying is that the entire band wrote the music *and* the singer wrote the vocal melodies and lyrics. I highly doubt that lead singer plays an instrument so he probably did not write one note of music. No one needs to be able to play an instrument or sing for composing music. It's a matter of the inner ear, in the best case relied on the perfect pitch. Knowing about compasses and possible voicings of instruments, and what a human's build allows in handling them, is all you forcibly need. The rest are taste and the urge to create a message. Without the perfect pitch, using an instrument for composing is useful, but not forcibly for performing. Think about how many "pure" vocalists are players, too, regardless if they play an instrument on stage or not. More than any player, a vocalist, in particular lead vocalist, must be a communicative, extrovert person, in using both voice and body language. In my bands, I experienced over the years and still do that lack of this personal attitude fouls up everything. Most of my bandmates are fantastic singers when it's about background choirs but just can't do lead vocals. When it is about songs, the lead vocalist has the most distinguished, oustanding role, and is the main soloist. All the musicians have to agree with that, or the song is lost. Lead vocalists are called vain typically by people who are jealous due to their own vanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimi Mac Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I suspect each band/group/project is probably rather unique right down to each individual style being one's own... I also suspect no two group's song writing dynamics are identical. Yes it is an odd demarcation and there's something specific being intended with the way that one is split-up... To answer in broader terms, I still think most bands have their own way of going about such things as I'm pretty sure most people write very differently. I myself generally start with a rhythm or melody and see if I can find some change in a bridge or chorus that mixes things up. I'll try to string it together in my head and that's where alot of delay arises as sometimes I just can't fit things together in my head and I have alot of parts of songs floating around up there. Lyrics is the very last thing I put together and often I don't. I write alot of my songs as instrumentals as it's actual music that I'm far more passionate about and lyrics aren't my strong point in my own opinion as it's not the foundation of my music passion... As I've mentioned before, for being such a Blues Hound, my own original songs are maybe 50% Blues and I write differently than I would expect from myself... Then I have songs that I wrote entire lyrics to that I can't even remember the title of as I've lost the original sheets where I wrote the lyrics and the song title down. I still remember the rhythm and melody flawlessly and can play it without error, but just can't quite put my finger on what the title of the song was or what the lyrics were after my 20 year hiatus... That just proves my point to myself that singing and lyrics are not a high point in my music passion... I really need to hook-up with someone that has a passion for writing lyrics to music given a certain topic or even a title as I do title most of my songs fairly early on in the process after I get a feeling from a rhythm or melody... I've probably got a dozen or so originals that I know down pat. Most of them have titles, only a few have lyrics and I couldn't recite them if I had to, I'm just not impassioned by lyrics as part of the music. I probably have parts of another dozen songs floating around in my head, maybe more, that I can't decide what to do with or what to fit with them... Some day something will jive and I'll realize it goes together and a couple of those parts will become a song, that's when I usually title or name them for memory's sake... And then since I really can't read or write music properly I'll attempt to tab them in my own kind of notation style about my songs in a way I hope I'll understand if I look back on it and try to figure it out... Often I can play them but can't read my own notes rhythmically... I just don't know enough about timing and rhythm signatures and notation... Or if I at least can read it, most likely others cannot... So most of my work is likely mostly in my own head other than the stuff that I've actually recorded. I record alot of demo's of song rhythms and parts and "melodies." It's much easier these days with cheap digital cams that record video and I can just let one roll in studio. I can post the stuff to YouTube that I want to work out and mix and match parts... I also use a looper for such writing work too. It's far easier in today's day and age as compared to before my 20 hiatus! We have so much more available at our fingertips from a writing perspective to even learning and practice from backing-tracks to a proliferation of vids on YouTube that we can study and learn from! It's actually pretty amazing what there is available to us as music "students" in comparison to years past... But I digress... I think everyone's style or way of writing music is usually pretty unique to themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 No one needs to be able to play an instrument or sing for composing music. It's a matter of the inner ear, in the best case relied on the perfect pitch. Knowing about compasses and possible voicings of instruments, and what a human's build allows in handling them, is all you forcibly need. The rest are taste and the urge to create a message. Without the perfect pitch, using an instrument for composing is useful, but not forcibly for performing. Think about how many "pure" vocalists are players, too, regardless if they play an instrument on stage or not. Maybe I am not understanding you, but your comment makes no sense. Yes, you can compose a whole damn symphony in your head, but if you have no way to communicate that music (through either notation on paper or some instrument: piano, voice, etc.) it is worthless. The voice is as much an instrument as the guitar and it seems everyone except vocalists know this. Go to any music school and poke around. You will find that the voice majors have the worst reputation among their musical peers for being lazy and thinking of themselves as more than they are. More than any player, a vocalist, in particular lead vocalist, must be a communicative, extrovert person, in using both voice and body language. In my bands, I experienced over the years and still do that lack of this personal attitude fouls up everything. Most of my bandmates are fantastic singers when it's about background choirs but just can't do lead vocals. When it is about songs, the lead vocalist has the most distinguished, oustanding role, and is the main soloist. All the musicians have to agree with that, or the song is lost. Lead vocalists are called vain typically by people who are jealous due to their own vanity. Being an extrovert and "hey! look at me!" person is great on stage, but in the rehearsal space with your bandmates and on recordings it is f'ing annoying. Unless you are writing all of the music and dictating parts to your hired guns, be a team player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capmaster Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Maybe I am not understanding you, but your comment makes no sense. Yes, you can compose a whole damn symphony in your head, but if you have no way to communicate that music (through either notation on paper or some instrument: piano, voice, etc.) it is worthless. The voice is as much an instrument as the guitar and it seems everyone except vocalists know this. Go to any music school and poke around. You will find that the voice majors have the worst reputation among their musical peers for being lazy and thinking of themselves as more than they are. Being an extrovert and "hey! look at me!" person is great on stage, but in the rehearsal space with your bandmates and on recordings it is f'ing annoying. Unless you are writing all of the music and dictating parts to your hired guns, be a team player. There are persons who create a message and spread it around, others who just create one, and some who just spread it around. A group will only work with clearly defined roles, depending on the particular song. As for my creative band, in case I write a song, the bass player will have to play to my desire, and in case he writes one, I will have to sing and play guitar to his desire. It is just that simple, and us two write next to all songs. The other guitar player in the band sometimes enhances our ideas with special riffs what we gladly appreciate and credit to him. Same is valid for the drummer when he creates his own beats and tricks. This is just the way we do it. However, this appreciation depends on the songwriter. There is nothing like democracy, it just wouldn't work. Every player will have to agree with the decisions of the writer in the end. I couldn't imagine to do it another way, and same is valid for my pals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vangoghsear Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 That's pretty much how I write songs. I come up with a lyric fitted to a melody, sing that into a recorder. Then when I get a chance I sit down with guitar or at the piano and work chords and other lyrics, bridges, choruses, etc on paper, then record the demo for the rest of the band to listen to and add their own touches. There is a scene I like in the movie "Eddie and the Crusiers" that shows the relationship of inspiration and perspiration required to create a song. Paraphrasing the scene it goes something like this. One of the characters comes to Eddie with a song he wrote and he plays it for Eddie and the band. The song just sort of meanders along to its end and Eddie says "Not bad." The rest of the band laughs and says something like, "Not bad? The kid can't play, the kid can't sing, he can't write." Eddie says "He's got something we need: words and music, Doc, words and music." He then sits at the piano and adds a driving rhythm part, puts some heart into the vocals and the band sees the potential they were missing with just the lyrics and basic melody and chords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L8_4thesh0w Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 It would be a big help to see exactly how the copyright is worded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quapman Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Call me crazy but to me the way the lyrics are sung is directly related to the melody of the song. I agree with Brad. (except for the many different melodies part) Typically there is only one melody to any given song. There can be more but that usually causes people's heads to explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Any band can decide how to credit the stuff themselves. I thought there was just "songwriting" credits. But I guess there's all kinds of ways to split it up. I just comped a different chord shape on a tune. Does that count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I just comped a different chord shape on a tune. Does that count? Yes! "This Song" copyright 2014 rct music, arrangement and instrumentation by badbluesplayer You can change the chords all you want as long as I get my 19 cents per spin. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 All the music is credited to the entire band, while all the lyrics AND all the melodies are credited to the band’s lead singer. Two possibilities here, to me. First is an inexperienced group of people self-producing a record that have not many ideas about how music is described, copyrighted, and published. So they list the creator of the melodies and the lyrics as being different from the music. Whatever. Second is an extremely experienced group of handlers that know that often the melody of a very catchy pop song is co-opted by commercial interests and hummed, la'd, ah'd, or whistled over glowing scenes of backyard bliss after a hard days home improvement. Those handlers may also know of some new or proposed new way of divvying up the money when only the melody is taken, and wish to ensure the estates of these soon-to-be ex-drivethru workers receive the proper credit(s). Take yer pick. Or, I could be completely wrong, that's fine too. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.