A sad story of plagiarism

Hey Tauhd,

where did you get this ?
Any music sample of "La Davotzim" ?

THIS IS A BOMB ...

 

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

Edited by Tauhd Zaïa

Maybe Max can manage that we can download this song (just an idea)

MP3s of both songs are available, here it goes:

MAGMA "Retrospektiw Vol. 3"
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD. asp?cd_id=3311

MIKE OLDFIELKD "Tubular Bells"
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_BAN D.asp?band_id=839

 

Your comments .... ?

Edited by MAX@

My face  says it all  !

Well , I also listen to the interview and WOW, it is a shame on OLDFIELD !

Vander is the GENIUS behind TUBULAR BELLS

Hey thx Max...for the Mp3...I will listen now...

Certied

 

Isn't it true that Paul McCartney's increasing wealth comes from song copyright royalties, rather than sales of Beatles or Wings albums? Before Bob Dylan became well established, (along with the cult of singer-song-writers),  tin pan alley tunesmiths wrote the tunes for the hits singles and these guys hoped several singers would record a tune simulataneously aiming for the singles charts. In the UK hit spotting became a fine art, i.e. trying to identify  a US single heading into the US charts and then rapidly recording, pressing-up, getting it to the shops in the UK, Europe, Canada, Australia, South Aftrica markets. The sainted Cilla Black, covered successfully a couple of Dionne Warwick's US hits.

And as for plaguarism, Jimmy Page was very good at it. I can think of a couple of artists who covered Blackwater Side, and attribute the composition to Page, when Page 'borrowed' the arrangement from Bert Jansch. Paul Simon did something similar to Martin Carthy's arrangement of Scarborough Fair.

All:

Before I address Magma vs. Oldfield, I think it is important to distinguish between "influence," "tribute" and "rip-off," as well as note that simply doing a cover of something does not constitute "plagiarism."  "Plagiarism" is taking someone else's writing (music, book, article, etc.) and claiming it as your own without ascription or credit to the original writer.  Thus, the fact that hundreds of groups have done hundreds of covers of hundreds of songs does not make that "plagiarism" - unless they try to claim the song as their own original material.

We deal with "influence" every day in our listening and reviewing.  Indeed, I have posited a number of times that virtually everything in prog was influenced in one form or another by the eight "seminal" groups of prog: Crimson, Floyd, Moody Blues, Jethro Tull, Genesis, Yes, Gentle Giant, ELP.  True, some would argue that there are other "seminal" groups, and that there are exceptions to this rule in neo-prog.  However, I think we would all agree that the vast majority of prog bands after those eight groups were influenced by them to one degree or another.

This does not make those bands "rip-offs," much less plagiarists.  As I have also posited, for me the success of any prog group after the seminal groups is the degree to which they are able to "filter" their influences and come up with something relatively original, if not exciting or compelling.  I have used this "yardstick" consistently in my reviews.

Thus, "influence" does not equal "plagiarism."

"Tribute" could be ascribed to bands like Klaatu, whose shamelessly Beatle-esque elements go beyond "influence" into the realm of tribute.  Starcastle may be another band that straddles the line between influence and tribute.  The use of "influence" as "tribute" is actually quite rare, and there are only a few bands I can think of who have accomplished this successfully, without sounding maudlin or just plain foolish.

"Rip-off" is the closest to plagiarism, and occurs when a band has clearly, without question, "lifted" a musical section from another band and incorporated it into their own material in a conscious manner.  For example, there is a damn good neo-prog bands that nevertheless "lifted" an entire musical section of a Marillion song and incorporated it into their own song.  The "lift" is unarguable; anyone who knows the Marillion song would hear the lift instantly.  Yet, like "tribute," "rip-off" is actually quite rare.

Plagiarism is a defined concept, and a serious charge.  With regard to Magma vs. Oldfield, as one who is a trained musician with over 14 years of theory and composition instruction, I believe that, if Tauhd's story is true vis-a-vis Oldfield being at The Manor when Magma was writing its composition, there is enough similarity between the two songs to warrant a possible accusation of plagiarism.

Although the two "main themes" are not exactly the same - Oldfield's is a somewhat "inverted" form of Magma's - there are two very damning elements.  The first, more obvious, one is the repetitive nature of the main theme, especially given the similarities between the two.  However, the more damning element is the rhythm.  Although the Magma piece sounds like it is in a slightly "off-time" 4/4, it follows an irregular pattern of 4/4 - 3/4 - 4/4 - 5/4, or 4/4 - 3/4 - 5/4- 4/4.  Thus, although Tubular Bells follows a strict 4/4 - 3/4 - 4/4 - 4/4 rhythm, there seems little coincidence in the fact that both rhythms are way too similar for chance, especially given the similarities in the main themes.

As a final aside, my brother (who has a B.S. in Composition from Mannes College) has always considered ELP one of the biggest "rip-off" bands in history.  This is because Emerson constantly uses specific classical themes, yet rarely, if ever, ascribes them to the original composers.  In fact, "Pictures" may be the only time he has done so.  Consider ELP's first album.  "The Barbarian" is based (heavily) on Bartok's "Allegro Barbaro" and Knife-Edge is based (even more heavily) on Janacek's "Sinfonietta."  There is no argument about either of these.  Yet Emerson flatly refused to credit Bartok or Janacek until he was essentially forced to do so when the album was re-issued years later on CD.  And he continues to refuse to credit all the other classical composers from whom he lifted material - sometimes a great deal of material.  This borders on true, conscious plagiarism (to say nothing of hubris).

Thus, Elvis didn't "steal" anything, since, first of all, he wrote very few of the songs (they were mostly written for him) and, second, he never said he created that "form" of music.  Led Zeppelin didn't "steal" anything, since they were simply covering blues standards (when they weren't writing their own material), and anyone who has any knowledge at all of blues knew and knows this.  Jimi Hendrix didn't "steal" "Wild Thing," he simply did a cover of it, and fully credited The Troggs.  And Paul McCartney's income from copyrights is not "plagiarism" since he is not claiming to have written any of the songs for which he owns the copyrights.

However, in the case of Magma vs. Oldfield, were I on the jury, I would find Oldfield guilty of "plagiarism" to the same degree that George Harrison was found guilty vis-a-vis "My Sweet Lord" and "He's So Fine" (which, by the way, I believe may have been "subconscious influence" as opposed to outright plagiarism).

Peace.

Edited by maani

I downloaded and had a listen.Very beautifull music.I'm not surprised that Oldfield was inspired to compose Tubular Bells after hearing it.As 'Plagiarism' is this actually any worse then famous classical composers ripping off folk artists and not giving any credit to the original song writer? A great peice of music still stands as a great peice of music.(on saying that I only gave Tubular Bells 3 stars when I reviewed it )

I don't know what to think of it...

Tubular bells is not an exact copy... but the similarities are not to be denied

I will listen to it more closely tomorrow or so... now I'm going to bed.

What a story!

The emoticons say it all!

This 'story' () really shocked me, Tauhd. How come nobody has ever heard this before?

Edited by Joren