|
|
Post by Diamond in The Dark on Feb 19, 2022 4:28:12 GMT -5
-«I don't feel the need to write songs when you can steal other people's ones». (Noel Gallagher 1995)
-«Here's what you do. You take the guitar, you steal songs from some people, you change them a bit, you put your brother in it, you punch him in the head every moment ... and it sells.» (Noel Gallagher 2019)
The sound of Chasing Yesterday was born from the remixes that Amorphous Androgynous did on the demos. Noel was so stunned that he decided to re-record the songs with that new psychedelic sound.
Noel's third solo album was born from a studio collaboration with composer David Holmes. Noel himself also stated that Johnny Marr and Paul Weller collaborated in the harmonic construction of the guitars on some songs and helped to unlock parts that he himself found difficulty in.
-«On my first solo album I wrote a lot of songs by myself. With the second I decided it had to be much bigger, so I got some co-writers. If I have an idea, I will immediately send it to them. After As You Were I wrote a series of songs but I wanted the second album to be better than the previous one and I know that to do better I had to get someone to help me. I sent the proofs, they kept the good parts and we completed the rest. We did six songs together in the first week creating all the singles, and we took our time to finish the rest.» (Liam Gallagher 2019)
They both create songs
They both create something 100% inauthentic
None of them invent anything new, none of them are authentic poets and neither creates a new way of making music. All we can do with them is decide if their song is good or bad.
Are some of you bothered to know that both are not Beethoven?
Personally, I only care that they produce good music.
|
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 19, 2022 5:05:46 GMT -5
Well neither are Dylan in terms of songwriting ability but Noel is obviously much better of the two. Liam has natural talent but lacks the technical ability musically to fully express himself. Liam is a much more natural and powerful performer. He can sell a song on a stage to a degree that I dont feel when I watch Noel. Thats why Oasis went downhill after BHN, Noel starting performing his own songs much more whereas Liam was primarily singing lower quality songs written by LAG. You can't really separate the two when it comes to classic oasis.
Post Oasis Noel has replaced Liam singing his songs by performing them himself which can obviously be felt as more authentic, whereas Liam initially replaced Noel writing songs by writing them himself, found it wasn't working out and so started to use other songwriters to create songs. This leaves him open to criticism of being inauthentic. Its a nebulous argument with no real answer as it entirely depends on your own view of what is more important, the singer or the song. I mean I could stand here and sing the best written song in the world and it'd sound shite cos I can't sing and have a horrendous voice 🤣🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 19, 2022 5:49:47 GMT -5
What does authentic poets means ?
Poets from the French renaissance or the likes of Shakespeare recycled old stories from before their time, from the Greeks or the Romans or stuff only transmitted from mouth to ear and never put to paper before. And even ancient cultures took tradition stories from other cultures.
Everyone knows that. The Beatles took from earlier bands and artists too. Spielberg and Lucas also took from earlier work. Indiana jones and Star Wars are the main examples.
It’s not nothing new. Art is a never ending recycling machine and every artist will or have taken from others.
No one is saying Liam is not a songwriter. We are saying that on most or some of AYW, his method is mostly not songwriting. He is coming after the song is done and modifying one or two lyric. It’s like when your boss put his name on something you did on your own.
What I and other are saying is that credits need to be transparent. If you hardly contribute to a song then you shouldn’t get credit. Like EE. It’s just wrong.
But it goes both ways. Noel should have given credits to some songs on Oasis records, true. But he also did came up with most (99%) of the songs before going in the studio. What comes next is simply producing. And producing credits are due, not songwriting, unless the song completely changes, which was not the case in Oasis. We have the demos as proof.
Bethoven is like noel or even Liam, they all create music and Melodies. The fact that they are complex or very simple is irrelevant. The simpliest music can touch your heart while the most complex piece of music can be boring as fuck.
|
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 19, 2022 6:05:43 GMT -5
To me authentic or not is only relevant in an artistic sense. Is what you produce an expression of your inner self? So the first question is do noel/ liam consider what they do as art?
|
|
|
|
Post by Diamond in The Dark on Feb 19, 2022 6:22:58 GMT -5
What does authentic poets means ? Poets from the French renaissance or the likes of Shakespeare recycled old stories from before their time, from the Greeks or the Romans or stuff only transmitted from mouth to ear and never put to paper before. And even ancient cultures took tradition stories from other cultures. Everyone knows that. The Beatles took from earlier bands and artists too. Spielberg and Lucas also took from earlier work. Indiana jones and Star Wars are the main examples. It’s not nothing new. Art is a never ending recycling machine and every artist will or have taken from others. No one is saying Liam is not a songwriter. We are saying that on most or some of AYW, his method is mostly not songwriting. He is coming after the song is done and modifying one or two lyric. It’s like when your boss put his name on something you did on your own. What I and other are saying is that credits need to be transparent. If you hardly contribute to a song then you shouldn’t get credit. Like EE. It’s just wrong. But it goes both ways. Noel should have given credits to some songs on Oasis records, true. But he also did came up with most (99%) of the songs before going in the studio. What comes next is simply producing. And producing credits are due, not songwriting, unless the song completely changes, which was not the case in Oasis. We have the demos as proof. Bethoven is like noel or even Liam, they all create music and Melodies. The fact that they are complex or very simple is irrelevant. The simpliest music can touch your heart while the most complex piece of music can be boring as fuck. Part of your analysis finds me very much in agreement with you. Another part does not. You say that Noel also invented most (99%) of the Oasis songs, but to be precise he didn't "invent" anything but "composed" or built the Oasis songs but he didn't really invent anything. The point is that there are people who criticize in Liam the fact that the songs he co-writes are not totally coming from his creativity, and this is true, but the same people cannot help but "criticize" Noel too or say that that what he produces was 100% authentic because it is not. Even with Noel it is a "copy and paste" of pieces and materials that he recovers from his record collections, even what he writes comes from advice with producers and musicians with whom he collaborates or meets. So we can say that Noel is better than Liam at "building" songs but neither of them releases authentic or extremely personal music. So co-writing or borrowing parts from others has the same value. As for the song credits there is total confusion for both of them. Noel for Oasis managed to hide a lot of his "tricks" by only putting co-writers on Whatever and Hello, but we know very well (if we're fair) that there are tons of his songs full of melodies and lines from someone else. .. I'll give you the example of columbia which was originally composed by Liam and Chris Griffiths but which only carries Noel's credits as an author, or in Waiting For The Rapture which takes much of the melody from Five to One by the Doors and a verse pasted directly from a David Bowie song. And I can give you dozens of others if I start digging up information. |
|
|
|
Post by eva on Feb 19, 2022 6:35:53 GMT -5
Diamond in The Dark good idea to have this in a separate thread and not derail other topics let's keep it civil, guys 
|
|
|
|
Post by mouth on Feb 19, 2022 7:10:09 GMT -5
is this a troll thread by a liam stan?
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 19, 2022 7:21:09 GMT -5
What does authentic poets means ? Poets from the French renaissance or the likes of Shakespeare recycled old stories from before their time, from the Greeks or the Romans or stuff only transmitted from mouth to ear and never put to paper before. And even ancient cultures took tradition stories from other cultures. Everyone knows that. The Beatles took from earlier bands and artists too. Spielberg and Lucas also took from earlier work. Indiana jones and Star Wars are the main examples. It’s not nothing new. Art is a never ending recycling machine and every artist will or have taken from others. No one is saying Liam is not a songwriter. We are saying that on most or some of AYW, his method is mostly not songwriting. He is coming after the song is done and modifying one or two lyric. It’s like when your boss put his name on something you did on your own. What I and other are saying is that credits need to be transparent. If you hardly contribute to a song then you shouldn’t get credit. Like EE. It’s just wrong. But it goes both ways. Noel should have given credits to some songs on Oasis records, true. But he also did came up with most (99%) of the songs before going in the studio. What comes next is simply producing. And producing credits are due, not songwriting, unless the song completely changes, which was not the case in Oasis. We have the demos as proof. Bethoven is like noel or even Liam, they all create music and Melodies. The fact that they are complex or very simple is irrelevant. The simpliest music can touch your heart while the most complex piece of music can be boring as fuck. Part of your analysis finds me very much in agreement with you. Another part does not. You say that Noel also invented most (99%) of the Oasis songs, but to be precise he didn't "invent" anything but "composed" or built the Oasis songs but he didn't really invent anything. The point is that there are people who criticize in Liam the fact that the songs he co-writes are not totally coming from his creativity, and this is true, but the same people cannot help but "criticize" Noel too or say that that what he produces was 100% authentic because it is not. Even with Noel it is a "copy and paste" of pieces and materials that he recovers from his record collections, even what he writes comes from advice with producers and musicians with whom he collaborates or meets. So we can say that Noel is better than Liam at "building" songs but neither of them releases authentic or extremely personal music. So co-writing or borrowing parts from others has the same value. As for the song credits there is total confusion for both of them. Noel for Oasis managed to hide a lot of his "tricks" by only putting co-writers on Whatever and Hello, but we know very well (if we're fair) that there are tons of his songs full of melodies and lines from someone else. .. I'll give you the example of columbia which was originally composed by Liam and Chris Griffiths but which only carries Noel's credits as an author, or in Waiting For The Rapture which takes much of the melody from Five to One by the Doors and a verse pasted directly from a David Bowie song. And I can give you dozens of others if I start digging up information. But was it conscious or not ? I’m all for giving credits if Noel « Stole » parts of songs. Credits need to be due. I wrote tons of songs and sometimes days months or year you realize that bits were from another song and it was totally not made on purpose. Mind work in a way where you take your previous experience to come Up with something new. That’s how humanity has worked since the beginning of times. No one has created anything. We discover stuff and apply our experience to stuff to make them work in a new way. That’s it. We evolved as a species from our interaction with others, nature and animals. No one invented music. Or electricity or singing. Same goes for music. But NG did his part to make the unique sound that is Brit pop with Owen Morris and most of his songs are « originals » eg that they were not existing before. In rock n’music there’s bound to be songs that lift from other songs simply because there’s a limited number of combinations possible. It’s only 7 notes and their variations. Then you create your universe with production, your technique and the voice of the singer. Plus bowie and the doors also stole from earlier artists. So where does this end ? It’s not fair to pinpoint only NG when literally every artist do it. The one who deny it are just liars. Believe you me if those NG steals where that obvious then owners would have sued Oasis. They did for the songs we know, and got credit. Should the Griffith show bros and Liam got credits on DM ? probably on some songs but that’s between them. Just like Harrison, Ringo and the inner circle of the Beatles or George Martin should have got credits on some songs. I’m just saying that Liam shouldn’t put his name on a song if he didn’t contribute in a way that he made it his. Like in a big way. Like most of The second record which are just songs he sings on. Or the new one. It’s just not fair to his fans. Eva we will keep it civil 🙂 |
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 19, 2022 7:43:02 GMT -5
The Beatles are considered one of the most creative bands yet there are numerous examples of them lifting bits from earlier songs. Its just part of songwriting.
Owen mgee, I think, said that if Oasis had released the first version of definitely maybe they recorded then nobody would have ever heard of them. It was the same songs, so it can't just all be about songwriting.
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 19, 2022 7:49:38 GMT -5
The Beatles are considered one of the most creative bands yet there are numerous examples of them lifting bits from earlier songs. Its just part of songwriting. Owen mgee, I think, said that if Oasis had released the first version of definitely maybe they recorded then nobody would have ever heard of them. It was the same songs, so it can't just all be about songwriting. Totally it’s a mix of writing, recording and performing to create a unique sound You miss one of the three and it can be a disaster When the three work, magic happens |
|
|
|
Post by defmaybe00 on Feb 19, 2022 7:57:27 GMT -5
I was at the cinema yesterday, a doc about Morricone's on these days
Sometimes talking about his own compositions he explained how he took lines from Bach or other composers, or how in a way or another he was simply influenced by what he studied as a kid/teenager/young adult
Does that make him less of a genius? Does that make him non-authentic?
Noel's crossed the line a few times with plagiarism, but 95% of it is just what everyone does, we're all inspired by something else, not necessarily note for note may I add, then you add your twist to it and you come up with something that is new
The fact that Noel is so open, even to the point of minimizing his own talent sometimes, doesn't mean he's the exception when it comes to the creative process
Co-writing is another thing, but it can be as authentic
If two, three people can team up and come up with ideas and manage to build something, or they're able to add up to what someone else has proposed as a little seed and shape it then why not? Collaborating is part of the fun
What I think is tricky is the way songwriting credits are distributed these days, and I'm not just pointing at Liam, because sometimes in the pop industry you get artists that take up the credits without doing a whole lot, like changing a little line, or even without doing anything at all
I'd struggle to call that co-writing, and I'd struggle to claim that as authentic when you're taking ownership of someone else's hard-work
That's not even just for music, happens with film and television scripts as well etc
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 19, 2022 9:33:53 GMT -5
What I think is tricky is the way songwriting credits are distributed these days, and I'm not just pointing at Liam, because sometimes in the pop industry you get artists that take up the credits without doing a whole lot, like changing a little line, or even without doing anything at all I'd struggle to call that co-writing, and I'd struggle to claim that as authentic when you're taking ownership of someone else's hard-work That's not even just for music, happens with film and television scripts as well etc Yep that’s the core of the problem. Maybe Liam contribute more than Some of us think but just the way EE was brought to him is kind of a proof. He’s got a songwriting credits and did fuck all. So it must apply to many other songs as well. Also I wouldn’t take Noel’s words too seriously about how he writes or « steal » songs. The guys is a con artist when it comes to interviews more than he is with songwriting. Just listening to the fame mustique demos right now and it’s the recording that ended up on the bsides without overdubs or remix. But I remember clearly Noel said in 98 that those two bsides (this and flashbax) were written after BHN was released because they needed b sides. This anecdote only proves how much NG can’t be trusted when he talks about stuff. Those mustique demos are also BHN right here before our ears. It’s all there. Same for sotsog and some of dbtt and HC, or Mg demos, Doys demos… etc you can’t deny talents on demos because there is no one or next to no-one around. Many years have passed and NG still comes up with great tunes, so maybe we should give him a little credit after all ? 🤓 |
|
|
|
Post by dampcottage on Feb 19, 2022 10:00:23 GMT -5
Look at how little james came to be, then compare it with how everything's electric came to be...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Crimson Rambler on Feb 19, 2022 13:50:56 GMT -5
live4ever.proboards.com/post/1684774Probably best I reply to this in this thread Diamond in The Dark It sounds like you're saying that every single section of melody and every lyric ever written by Noel has has been lifted from another source and Noel has no capability to write simple lines of English or compose original music at all? This cannot be what you're saying right? You keep on saying the word "authentic" when I believe the word you're grasping for is 'original'. They don't have the same definition. Using the term "inventing" is quite unusual in the context of writing music but I know what you're trying to say. Combining things together is an enormous part of the process of writing/creating/(or as you're saying) 'inventing'. To say otherwise is simply naive.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Feb 19, 2022 14:56:07 GMT -5
What I think is tricky is the way songwriting credits are distributed these days, and I'm not just pointing at Liam, because sometimes in the pop industry you get artists that take up the credits without doing a whole lot, like changing a little line, or even without doing anything at all I'd struggle to call that co-writing, and I'd struggle to claim that as authentic when you're taking ownership of someone else's hard-work That's not even just for music, happens with film and television scripts as well etc Yep that’s the core of the problem. Maybe Liam contribute more than Some of us think but just the way EE was brought to him is kind of a proof. He’s got a songwriting credits and did fuck all. So it must apply to many other songs as well. Also I wouldn’t take Noel’s words too seriously about how he writes or « steal » songs. The guys is a con artist when it comes to interviews more than he is with songwriting. Just listening to the fame mustique demos right now and it’s the recording that ended up on the bsides without overdubs or remix. But I remember clearly Noel said in 98 that those two bsides (this and flashbax) were written after BHN was released because they needed b sides. This anecdote only proves how much NG can’t be trusted when he talks about stuff. Those mustique demos are also BHN right here before our ears. It’s all there. Same for sotsog and some of dbtt and HC, or Mg demos, Doys demos… etc you can’t deny talents on demos because there is no one or next to no-one around. Many years have passed and NG still comes up with great tunes, so maybe we should give him a little credit after all ? 🤓 On the one hand you want transparency when he is transparent you criticise the result. What should take from it is perhaps that Liam has been honest about his contributions to previous work as well. And I know you said earlier that ‘you and others’ wanted more transparency but who are these others? Hardly anyone else bangs on about it. |
|
|
|
Post by jezza2 on Feb 19, 2022 15:40:12 GMT -5
Shut the forum down everyone, Noel and Liam's music ain't authentic.
|
|
|
|
Post by girllikeabomb on Feb 19, 2022 16:50:05 GMT -5
What I think is tricky is the way songwriting credits are distributed these days, and I'm not just pointing at Liam, because sometimes in the pop industry you get artists that take up the credits without doing a whole lot, like changing a little line, or even without doing anything at all I'd struggle to call that co-writing, and I'd struggle to claim that as authentic when you're taking ownership of someone else's hard-work That's not even just for music, happens with film and television scripts as well etc
Film and television writing are really quite different from music and handled entirely differently.
In film, it generally takes years, and not uncommonly more than a decade, to get a project to completion. During that very long period of time, a script can pass through many hands. If there are disputes over who wrote a screenplay, these are arbitrated (in the US/Hollywood, they are arbitrated mainly by the WGA.) Arbitration uses a specific formula as to how writing credits are listed. There are also different kinds of writing credits -- there is story credit for example for people who contributed original ideas, which is different from screenplay credit.
There is also such a thing as a "script doctor," someone brought in sometimes to fix a very specific problem in a script. (You might bring in a comedy writer for example to punch up the humor or bring in a woman to make the female character seem more relatable.) Script doctors are often uncredited (but they are paid.)
In the film business, a writer's contract is negotiated individually with the studio or production company. You might get points on the movie but only if you're well established so you want to make sure you are getting an appropriate amount up front.
In the music business, it's different because the main source of income for artists is publishing. As many already know, this is why Noel made so much more from Oasis than anyone else. He has nearly all of the publishing, which continues to grow in value. Because the industry has changed to the point that it's harder to make substantial income from recording, more people are given a slice of the publishing in order to compensate them for their contributions (which are often creative if not strictly "writing.") It works that way in large part because that is how the industry is structured -- to value writing financially over other elements. In movies, that is not the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by girllikeabomb on Feb 19, 2022 16:58:39 GMT -5
Francis Ford Coppola on using other people's work as inspiration in the new GQ interview: "I once read a Balzac article—I wish I could find it, but it's not published, and I don't know where the book is.” (I think this was Coppola's way of telling me he owns, or once owned, an unpublished work by Balzac.) “But people said, ‘Oh, these young people are stealing your stuff.’ To Balzac. And Balzac said, ‘That's why I wrote it. I want them to take everything, whatever I have, they're welcome, these young authors. Take all you want. One, because it can't really come out like me because each one of them is an individual and it's going to come out like them, so they can't steal it. They can appropriate it, but it's going to come out through them. And number two, it gives me immortality, so whatever I do, if young people take it, are influenced by it, that's great. Because that then makes me part of their work."
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 20, 2022 2:08:40 GMT -5
What I think is tricky is the way songwriting credits are distributed these days, and I'm not just pointing at Liam, because sometimes in the pop industry you get artists that take up the credits without doing a whole lot, like changing a little line, or even without doing anything at all I'd struggle to call that co-writing, and I'd struggle to claim that as authentic when you're taking ownership of someone else's hard-work That's not even just for music, happens with film and television scripts as well etcFilm and television writing are really quite different from music and handled entirely differently.
In film, it generally takes years, and not uncommonly more than a decade, to get a project to completion. During that very long period of time, a script can pass through many hands. If there are disputes over who wrote a screenplay, these are arbitrated (in the US/Hollywood, they are arbitrated mainly by the WGA.) Arbitration uses a specific formula as to how writing credits are listed. There are also different kinds of writing credits -- there is story credit for example for people who contributed original ideas, which is different from screenplay credit.
There is also such a thing as a "script doctor," someone brought in sometimes to fix a very specific problem in a script. (You might bring in a comedy writer for example to punch up the humor or bring in a woman to make the female character seem more relatable.) Script doctors are often uncredited (but they are paid.)
In the film business, a writer's contract is negotiated individually with the studio or production company. You might get points on the movie but only if you're well established so you want to make sure you are getting an appropriate amount up front.
Very interesting read. Obviously the two industries have a different way of functioning. Music industry clearly use that "grey" area of "you are in the studio, you can be credited". which IMHO is a bit of a stretch. then there's also people who are credited who weren't even there, but their name is on the record. It's purely financial as you point out. Songwriters need work so they have to agree to that when they start, it's an industry standard. So the deal is a win win i guess. This is why all this co-writing debate is a real debate, because in the end, real co-writing is when you contribute substantially to the structure of the song, lyrically or musically. Just adding a Come on or a yeah yeah doesn't make you a songwriter on a song. Even changing a line on a song, to me, isn't songwriting. Because the song is already there, in finished form, so it's pretty easy to come in at that stage and make it look like you did something. It's like painting a blue car in red. The car has been built already. Gettin in in someone's else thought, when it's already lied down 99% is the easiest form of work there is. Again, Liam betrayed himself with the EE story and his "few notes". Obviously didn't write shit yet his name is on the songwriting credit; i doubt Dave or Kurstin submitted a song that wasn't finished and that Liam magically made it better. Makes you wonder if the contract wasn't renegotiated after the success of AYW. It needs to be clearer than that. If you had nothing to do with a song, dont put your name on it. simple. Like Paper Crown. The first album was more honest (most of it). It's all about how you envision group work I suppose. Maybe another credit should have been created years ago : supervision credits. Supervised by, or revised by. I dont know. I know i would be pissed if some artist added their name to a song i did without doing actual work. Oh well... |
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 20, 2022 2:50:31 GMT -5
Film and television writing are really quite different from music and handled entirely differently.
In film, it generally takes years, and not uncommonly more than a decade, to get a project to completion. During that very long period of time, a script can pass through many hands. If there are disputes over who wrote a screenplay, these are arbitrated (in the US/Hollywood, they are arbitrated mainly by the WGA.) Arbitration uses a specific formula as to how writing credits are listed. There are also different kinds of writing credits -- there is story credit for example for people who contributed original ideas, which is different from screenplay credit.
There is also such a thing as a "script doctor," someone brought in sometimes to fix a very specific problem in a script. (You might bring in a comedy writer for example to punch up the humor or bring in a woman to make the female character seem more relatable.) Script doctors are often uncredited (but they are paid.)
In the film business, a writer's contract is negotiated individually with the studio or production company. You might get points on the movie but only if you're well established so you want to make sure you are getting an appropriate amount up front.
Very interesting read. Obviously the two industries have a different way of functioning. Music industry clearly use that "grey" area of "you are in the studio, you can be credited". which IMHO is a bit of a stretch. then there's also people who are credited who weren't even there, but their name is on the record. It's purely financial as you point out. Songwriters need work so they have to agree to that when they start, it's an industry standard. So the deal is a win win i guess. This is why all this co-writing debate is a real debate, because in the end, real co-writing is when you contribute substantially to the structure of the song, lyrically or musically. Just adding a Come on or a yeah yeah doesn't make you a songwriter on a song. Even changing a line on a song, to me, isn't songwriting. Because the song is already there, in finished form, so it's pretty easy to come in at that stage and make it look like you did something. It's like painting a blue car in red. The car has been built already. Gettin in in someone's else thought, when it's already lied down 99% is the easiest form of work there is. Again, Liam betrayed himself with the EE story and his "few notes". Obviously didn't write shit yet his name is on the songwriting credit; i doubt Dave or Kurstin submitted a song that wasn't finished and that Liam magically made it better. Makes you wonder if the contract wasn't renegotiated after the success of AYW. It needs to be clearer than that. If you had nothing to do with a song, dont put your name on it. simple. Like Paper Crown. The first album was more honest (most of it). It's all about how you envision group work I suppose. Maybe another credit should have been created years ago : supervision credits. Supervised by, or revised by. I dont know. I know i would be pissed if some artist added their name to a song i did without doing actual work. Oh well... I doubt Liam is forcing himself onto credits. More likely its a standard contract between the like of Kustin, a songwriter for hire, and Warner. They send him artists and said artist receives a pre agreed percentage. Liam doesn't come across as the type to want credit for something he never created which is why he seems to go out of his way to undermine himself with the kind of statement you refer to. On the other hand his relationship with Wyatt seems more natural and they seem to spend time in the studio together creating music. |
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 20, 2022 3:00:54 GMT -5
I doubt Liam is forcing himself onto credits. More likely its a standard contract between the like of Kustin, a songwriter for hire, and Warner. They send him artists and said artist receives a pre agreed percentage. Liam doesn't come across as the type to want credit for something he never created which is why he seems to go out of his way to undermine himself with the kind of statement you refer to. On the other hand his relationship with Wyatt seems more natural and they seem to spend time in the studio together creating music. Yeah I thought Liam wasn’t this kind of artist either that’s why it’s problematic to me if he agreed on this kind of contract. He should have said no and plain refuse to get credits on songs he didn’t write. Such as EE or Wag or shockwave or FWIW. Does he have to be credited on main singles for credibility ? I wonder. Not saying it’s the case on all songs, though. Just most of YMYN and AYW main singles |
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 20, 2022 3:12:25 GMT -5
I doubt Liam is forcing himself onto credits. More likely its a standard contract between the like of Kustin, a songwriter for hire, and Warner. They send him artists and said artist receives a pre agreed percentage. Liam doesn't come across as the type to want credit for something he never created which is why he seems to go out of his way to undermine himself with the kind of statement you refer to. On the other hand his relationship with Wyatt seems more natural and they seem to spend time in the studio together creating music. Yeah I thought Liam wasn’t this kind of artist either that’s why it’s problematic to me if he agreed on this kind of contract. He should have said no and plain refuse to get credits on songs he didn’t write. Such as EE or Wag or shockwave or FWIW. Does he have to be credited on main singles for credibility ? I wonder. Not saying it’s the case on all songs, though. Just most of YMYN and AYW main singles I personally think he doesn't really have a choice. Dont forget he was at his lowest point when he signed kn with Warner so wont have been able to dictate terms of contract. Its telling to me that he recorded the whole of this new album without Kurstin and was ready to release it then suddenly a kurstin single appears and is immediately lead single. The lack of video or vinyl is strange too if Liams team were really on board with this. It either points to a lack of belief in the rest of the album, or more likely in my opinion, Warner pulling rank and insisting he adds a Kurstin single before they will release it. I mean i like EE, its a decent song but no more than that really. |
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Feb 20, 2022 3:36:02 GMT -5
Yeah I thought Liam wasn’t this kind of artist either that’s why it’s problematic to me if he agreed on this kind of contract. He should have said no and plain refuse to get credits on songs he didn’t write. Such as EE or Wag or shockwave or FWIW. Does he have to be credited on main singles for credibility ? I wonder. Not saying it’s the case on all songs, though. Just most of YMYN and AYW main singles I personally think he doesn't really have a choice. Dont forget he was at his lowest point when he signed kn with Warner so wont have been able to dictate terms of contract. Its telling to me that he recorded the whole of this new album without Kurstin and was ready to release it then suddenly a kurstin single appears and is immediately lead single. The lack of video or vinyl is strange too if Liams team were really on board with this. It either points to a lack of belief in the rest of the album, or more likely in my opinion, Warner pulling rank and insisting he adds a Kurstin single before they will release it. I mean i like EE, its a decent song but no more than that really. Well I agree to some extent but got shot down for saying that in few months back. Either he doesn’t have a choice or he choose to play with the devil. But yeah, my guess too is that Warner clearly gave their conditions to sign him and rescue his career and that he agreed. He had decent songs for the first record so they green lighted them and then he just gave up on trying to write some for the follow up knowing most would be rejected |
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Feb 20, 2022 4:03:24 GMT -5
I personally think he doesn't really have a choice. Dont forget he was at his lowest point when he signed kn with Warner so wont have been able to dictate terms of contract. Its telling to me that he recorded the whole of this new album without Kurstin and was ready to release it then suddenly a kurstin single appears and is immediately lead single. The lack of video or vinyl is strange too if Liams team were really on board with this. It either points to a lack of belief in the rest of the album, or more likely in my opinion, Warner pulling rank and insisting he adds a Kurstin single before they will release it. I mean i like EE, its a decent song but no more than that really. Well I agree to some extent but got shot down for saying that in few months back. Either he doesn’t have a choice or he choose to play with the devil. But yeah, my guess too is that Warner clearly gave their conditions to sign him and rescue his career and that he agreed. He had decent songs for the first record so they green lighted them and then he just gave up on trying to write some for the follow up knowing most would be rejected I think I give Liam a bit more credit than you do though. Yes he wrote a lot of songs on his debut because he felt he had a point to prove but although they are good songs there is a bit of a lack of variety because of his limitations, which he freely acknowledges himself. He clearly still writes songs. I just think he became more comfortable with the idea of cowriting by the 2nd album and also felt it needed to be more ambitious musically than he could do by himself. I actually think he enjoys being in the studio with the likes of wyatt and aldred and has more creative input than you give him credit for. The relationship with Kurstin seems more businesslike and yet its always his song that is lead single. Smacks of contractual obligation to me. Its not as if his songs are actually clearly better than the others. |
|
|
|
Post by Diamond in The Dark on Feb 20, 2022 4:45:27 GMT -5
Also for me Liam shouldn't have credits on songs he doesn't even write 1% on, and it seems strange to me that he appears as an author where he shouldn't. With Paper Crown and Chinatown he has no credits, so I think in EE he will have varied something, maybe in the lyrics, but he has a sometimes he doesn't explain everything he should explain. As for Noel's songwriting that takes melodic cues and verses from various parts out there, it's obvious that he's not the only one doing it, it's been centuries that anyone has taken parts from anyone and mixes them into something else. Does Noel take a cue without knowing it? It is not so. During the interviews he himself says it clearly from whoever takes his cue or from whoever is assisted in the studio, but the clever thing is that he does not include anyone in the co-credits, unless someone contacts him to ask him for the rights. So what I mean is that Liam and Noel objectively create a song in the same way and not everything comes from their personalities. The only difference is that Liam receives "physical" help from multiple people and says it clearly by including others in the credits, while Noel collects tips, melodies, verses and remixes from other people, mixes everything together and glues alone or with the producer, the various parties without entering the credits to anyone even if they should do so. But Noel works like this; if you don't ask him he doesn't.
That said, the "magic formula" behind building an Oasis or Noel solo song or Liam's co-writing is always the same: Melodies and verses born from various heads that are mixed together to create new songs. Nothing that comes out is really personal (but it doesn't matter to me ... as long as they are good songs). The times of the authenticity of music and poetry have stopped at least a couple of centuries ago.
I'm glad to finally hear you agree with me ... We are all saying the same thing at last ... that everyone takes a cue from everyone. So anyone today is "helped" by someone in building a song. So we can accept and appreciate without controversy the fact that Liam also uses all of this to create great songs.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5