Questions for Rockists:

[pauledwardwagemann]

Question #1:
If an musical artist rips off someone elses song, melody, riffs, etc, does that automatically lower them in terms of 'quality'?

For example, Here's a list of songs that Led Zep alledgedly stole from:

~ "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You" - A folk song by Anne Bredon, this was originally credited as "traditional, arranged by Jimmy Page," then "words and music by Jimmy Page," and then, following legal action, "Bredon/Page/Plant."

~ "Black Mountain Side" - uncredited version of a traditional folk tune previously recorded by Bert Jansch.

~ "Bring It On Home" - the first section is an uncredited cover of the Willie Dixon tune (as performed by the imposter Sonny Boy Williamson).

~ "Communication Breakdown" - apparently derived from Eddie Cochran's "Nervous Breakdown."

~ "Custard Pie" - uncredited cover of Bukka White's "Shake 'Em On Down," with lyrics from Sleepy John Estes's "Drop Down Daddy."

~ "Dazed And Confused" - uncredited cover of the Jake Holmes song (see The Above Ground Sound Of Jake Holmes).

~ "Hats Off To (Roy) Harper" - uncredited version of Bukka White's "Shake 'Em On Down."

~ "How Many More Times" - Part one is an uncredited cover of the Howlin' Wolf song (available on numerous compilations). Part two is an uncredited cover of Albert King's "The Hunter."

~ "In My Time Of Dying" - uncredited cover of the traditional song (as heard on Bob Dylan's debut).

~ "The Lemon Song" - uncredited cover of Howlin' Wolf's "Killing Floor" - Wolf's publisher sued Zeppelin in the early 70s and settled out of court.

~ "Moby Dick" - written and first recorded by Sleepy John Estes under the title "The Girl I Love," and later covered by Bobby Parker.

~ "Nobody's Fault But Mine" - uncredited cover of the Blind Willie Johnson blues.

~ "Since I've Been Lovin' You" - lyrics are the same as Moby Grape's "Never," though the music isn't similar.

~ "Stairway To Heaven" - the main guitar line is apparently from "Taurus" by Spirit.

~ "White Summer" - uncredited cover of Davey Graham's "She Moved Through The Fair."

~ "Whole Lotta Love" - lyrics are from the Willie Dixon blues "You Need Love."

[Galactus]

I don't know if I'm a rockist, but I'd say it depends on whether they just straight up rip it off to ride a current trend or if they actually add or even improve upon it.

Led Zeppelin is a good example...the first album is jusyt some blues songs played real loud and even in that context they built on them and expanded them musically. The rest of their career was spent buiding on that ground...often times leaveing the orginal blues behind. If they had continued "just" playing the blues real loud I don't believe they would have any where near the impact they had but since they used it as a stepping stone...and not a crutch no it doesn't lessen the quality of the music. The the first album while very good is easily considered their least creative album (until Presence which is just a bad album) so in that repect it's still somewhat of a mark in negetive column.

[pauledwardwagemann]

My take is, that if its a straight rip-off, and it sounds exactly like the original then that at best shows some techinical skill, but not much originality. But alot of music is evolved, which means it is ripping something off in some way. If an artist uses somone elses idea and expands on it, then that can be a good thing. If they use someone else's Idea and turns it into crap, then that's nearly impossible for me to respect.

[Ayinger]

I think it's more of a shame when the credit due isn't given if indeed the song is a blatant intentional ripoff. Zeppelin getting a lick or a line or two in inspiration from "Killing Floor" to graft into their own "Lemon Song" is more forgivable than the job they did with "Bring It On Home" and claiming it totally as their own. Too with the way rock was evolving with lots of heavy blues elements, I think there was a sense that those old originals being grafted upon were almost public domain and free pickings.

(the Jake Holmes version of "Dazed & Confused" is friggin' great BTW)

[frag]

How do you determine between what's taken as an homage and what's taken out of laziness and a blatant disrespect for another's creation? Isn't that only in the artist(s)' intentions? And for that matter, how was it legal for Creed to have a career? Outside of the general suckitude they possessed...just...how? Why?

[pauledwardwagemann]

ayinger said:

I think it's more of a shame when the credit due isn't given if indeed the song is a blatant intentional ripoff. Zeppelin getting a lick or a line or two in inspiration from "Killing Floor" to graft into their own "Lemon Song" is more forgivable than the job they did with "Bring It On Home" and claiming it totally as their own. Too with the way rock was evolving with lots of heavy blues elements, I think there was a sense that those old originals being grafted upon were almost public domain and free pickings.

(the Jake Holmes version of "Dazed & Confused" is friggin' great BTW)

I think its a bit hypacritical of bands to consider 'traditional' arrangements or old tunes to be public domain--then bitch and moan about fans 'stealing' their tunes through illegal downloading.
Which brings me to
QUESTION #2:
Does illegal downloading take money out of the artists pockets or does it actually generate a larger following for them?

[Galactus]

Answer #2- Depends on how you look at it. It takes away money from major labels. Most bands make the biggest part of there money on tour and through merch. One hit wonders are taking a beating becuase now you don't have to by their greatest hits for the one song that was on the radio when you were in highschool. While it is true major label album sales are in a pretty steady decline it's also true that independant label sales have gone up. The problem being that no one can show that downloading is cuase of the decline however, it's quite clearly the cuase of the increase for the indies. I can only assume this because it's easier to find band that are better then what's on the radio. That being said, indies never made much money to begin with so most of those bands still have day jobs. So majors are certainly making less money and therefore less bands are becoming superstar bands, the bands that were already major bands are feeling the decline in album sales to a far lesser degree and it's really hard to say for sure there wouldn't have been a decline anyway. In reality album sales have dropped back to where they were in mid 80's...is this becuase there was just a huge boom in the 90's? Is there the same preceived lack of quality as in the mid 80's? is it becuase of downloading? It's probably a combination of all of these things. So has downloading had an effect on the music industry? Without question. So does it take money out of the artist pocket or actually geberate a larger following? The answer is it does both.

[pauledwardwagemann]

If it generates a larger following though, doesnt that put MORE money in the pocket of the artists--by way of more people going to their shows and more people buying their t-shirts, posters or cds, etc?
Besides, don't artists only make like 2 cents for every 17 dollar CD that is sold? So that seems like by illegally downloading you are actually sticking it to the man (the corporate music machine)...
So I gues the question is, is illegally downloading--in an overall sense--hurting or helping the artists?

[Galactus]

Yes but with a much larger pool of artists it's not as noticable. Instead of that money being funneled back into the majors...into say the top twenty artists, it's being spread out through the top twenty as well as fifty or so indie bands. The same amount of money is being spread much thiner.

[maarts]

Illegal downloads hurt the artist. Legal downloads and the sale of CDs will benefit the artist as he will get a percentage of the royalties- that is, if his contract allows for that and if he has the rights to his own material.
Illegal downloads are untraceable, therefore subsequent payments of royalties are non-existent.

[luke]

I think illegal downloads help. A LOT.

I mean, say I buy your album and I like it. Wow, you just got a few cents off me. Say I illegally download your album and like it. I buy a t-shirt and go see you live. You just made about fifty bucks off me.

I completely believe in the "following" part. Now, big pop artists and one hit wonders and shit like that- illegal downloads murder those guys. Which isn't always good, because that's where the labels get their bread and butter, and that's what lets them keep on more quality artists who don't sell as much.

So...it's two sided.

[kmc]

Were it not for illegal downloading, I wouldn't own half the albums I own now.

[Thorngrub]

Depends on what they do with it. For instance, Pearl Jam took Going To California's basic riff and soncially expanded it into the dynamic (and excellent) song "Given To Fly". This was a good thing.

[Thorngrub]

But when Vanilla Ice takes Bowie/Queen's "Under Pressure" riff, and excises but 1 single note to achieve some "difference" on a pure technicality - that is a ripoff. And it sucks. Bigtime.

[Thorngrub]

Which remains one of the reasons Vanilla Ice is derided, and Pearl Jam applauded, to this day.