WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

Hey Tauhd,

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

THIS IS A BOMB ...

...and one day in 1956, a young man recorded a song which took the world by storm. He didn't write it, but people didn't care, because he looked good and swung his pants. Suddenly there were thousands of people all recording variants on the theme and also making large amounts of money. Elvis himself stole the musical ideas, if not the actual music (some argue it was the music) from people of a completely different culture, who were not to have successes for a generation or two. Later, four young men in England recorded some music which was partially theirs, and a lot that was performed by earlier generations of songwriters, and became the biggest band the world has ever known.

In 1967, another young man wrote some songs. His band were doing OK, and they were able to get by. Their album "From Nowhere..." was a good rock/pop album. Then came a flambouyant guitarist named Jimi, and turned "Wild Thing" into an institution. A couple of generations later, and a crap rock band had one of the biggest hits of all time with one of Mr Presley (Not Elvis - Reg)'s other songs, thanks to a crap film - it was such a huge hit that the band themselves pulled it out of the charts rather than have to put up with the fact that their biggest commerical hit was not due to anything they had done, except be in the right place at the right time.

A few generations prior to that, a certain Ludwig van Beethoven began his music-writing career by copying styles of composers of generations before him - his earliest works are easily mistaken for "middle-period" Mozart or Haydn, and virtually all composers start by writing in the style of J.S. Bach.

Moral; It's not what you've got, it's what you do with it that counts.

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

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 - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD. asp?cd_id=3311

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

Your comments .... ?

MAX@ wrote: Your comments .... ?

And yours ?

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

Wow, talk about timing- I just finished writing this site's biography for Oldfield. I'm not a huge fan, but I was surprised it wasn't already done. By the way, any "real" fans should read it and let me know if I did a decent job

I remember years ago a friend of mine said that "Castle Walls" by Styx ripped off Oldfield (I've never heard the former, so I can't testify one way or the other). It's also pretty similar to things like Constant's "Twilight Zone" theme and John Carpenter's film compositions. Is it possible that the main theme of "Tubular Bells" is just such a basic kind of melody that many composers have similar sounds? It is, honestly, one of those things that a lot of musicians come up with- riffing off of an open-string or pedal tone.

The Manor connection is pretty compelling circumstantial evidence, though. Even the most rabid Oldfield fans have to admit that if it weren't for his time at The Manor, he wouldn't have been able to put together his first album. The real test would be if Mike has some rough drafts of his music from before he went to the studio, but we probably don't have any real way to be sure.

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

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.

Tauhd Zaïa wrote: James Lee the Great Thinking Man wrote: The Manor connection is pretty compelling circumstantial evidence, though. Even the most rabid Oldfield fans have to admit that if it weren't for his time at The Manor, he wouldn't have been able to put together his first album. The real test would be if Mike has some rough drafts of his music from before he went to the studio, but we probably don't have any real way to be sure. Yes, your words are full of wisdom

Vous etes trop aimable- je ne suis pas cela sage

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.

In the interests of maintaining a balance here, I suspect there are two sides to this story. Oldfield's recollections of the circumstances may be soemwhat different to those which have been described.

I have not listened to the sound samples, but readily accept that they must be similar. Given that the two musicians were in the same place at the same time, is it possible perhaps that Oldfield came up with the theme first (or perhaps they jammed together!), but had not commited it to tape at that time? We should remember that "Tubular bells" was something he had been working on over a long period, and that even once it was ready, it took a while for a record label to pick it up and release it.

It's interesting that the "Great gig in the sky" story, which relates to a simlarly long time ago, has come up around now. The two are of course not related, but I do feel in both cases that the memory can play tricks on you over so many years, and you can end up convinced of an injustice you did not perceive at the time.

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

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?

Joren wrote: I will listen to it more closely tomorrow or so... now I'm going to bed. This 'story' () really shocked me, Tauhd. How come nobody has ever heard this before?

Maybe you'll find the answer in your dreams

I agree with Easy Livin... on this one.  And in a way, it is a very similar story to Clare Torrey's when you think about it.. in that more than 30 years later, they are bringing it up as an injustice, when they should have done that a long time ago.

I also read in James's review (which was very nice, btw, James!) that before Oldfield even got to "The Manor" he already had enough on demo that got the head honchos attention.  So he had evidently had something on tape. If he was brought in to "The Manor" to record... why would he have so much time to sit around listening to another band rehearse... and a drummer playing around on a piano.  If he did and subconsciously picked up on the rhythm... I just find it hard to believe it was downright plagiarism and Vander didn't do or say anything about it at that time.

Also out of curiousity... why was Vander's version recorded almost 10 years after Tubular Bells?

Oh and Maani... regarding Keith Emerson.  You might want to interview Keith one of these days and ask him about that... cause if I remember correctly, it wasn't him that didn't want to credit the classical composers on that first album...

Also other than Pictures... he did credit:

On Trilogy -"Hoedown" taken from Aaron Copland's "Rodeo"

On BSS - "Jerusalem"  to Parry;  Toccata to Ginestera;

On Works 1 - "Fanfare" to Aaron Copland again... and Enemy of God (even tho on Carl's side) to Prokofieff

On the live album "In Concert"... Peter Gunn to Henry Mancini

and On" Black Moon" - Prokofiev for Romeo & Juliet;

Tauhd:

Even having met Vander, you are taking his explanation "on faith."  He may be the nicest, most seemingly honest guy in the world.  But he also may have an "agenda," and it is simply impossible for you to know that.  This does not mean that I think he does have an agenda, or is "lying"; just that it is possible.

Also, at the risk of sounding "academic," rhythms and patterns (among other "technical" elements) are not "superficial": in determining "plagiarism," they are the very essence of the matter.  And even were they not, to call any important technical element of music "superficial" is to disregard over two thousand years of music.  Yes, music comes from "feelings," but one cannot "commit it to paper," as it were, without the necessary technical elements that define that music. None of those elements - melody, harmony, chordal structure, counterpoint, rhythm, pattern, etc. - is "superficial."  Indeed, one could argue that, while the "feeling" that created the music is the progenitor of the music, it is those feelings that are "superficial."  This does not mean that feelings are, per se, "superficial."  But all the "feelings" in the world won't "create" the music unless someone can listen to it: and for that, you need what you are calling "superficial" elements.

Finally, you say that "the main idea, the creation was fundamentally there."  This brings up two issues.  First, if the word you really want is "fundamentally," then you are leaving open the possibility that it was not there, since "fundamentally" is not the same as "absolutely."  And I am not trying to play semantics here.

Second, there are dozens (possibly hundreds) of cases of two (or more) artists (from classical to current music) coming up with the same idea at the same time, yet having no connection whatsoever.  True, in this case Oldfield was "in proximity" and may very well have been "influenced by" Vander.  But even this is not "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" as to a charge of plagiarism.  [As I noted, I am not entirely certain that George Harrison "ripped off"  (plagiarized) "He's So Fine" when he wrote "My Sweet Lord."  More likely it was subconscious influence.  Too close, perhaps, but still not conscious rip-off.]

You seem to have made a "personal vendetta" out of this issue: taking Vander's side "on faith"; not considering any possibility that Vander might have an "agenda"; and not considering any possibility that Oldfield is "innocent" of any "plagiarism" - even if he was in fact influenced by Vander's theme.  What is sad is that you have taken this so personally that you seem unable (or unwilling) to appreciate Oldfield and his music in any regard, perfering to see him simply as someone who "ripped off" an artist you do appreciate.

None of the above is said in judgment or "admonishment."  I am just sorry that you feel so strongly about this - based on "circumstantial evidence" - that you cannot (or seem not to be able to) appreciate a very fine musician, writer and performer.

Peace.

I think the points I was making were somewhat missed. Maybe my writing style is to blame...

While I used strong words such as "steal", the thrust of my point was towards my final summary. I don't think Elvis was a music thief really, but others were producing similar music at the time, and the MAIN reason for Elvis' success was his media presence - his phenomenal charisma - not his musical ability. That he packaged up the Black man's music into a form digestible by white people is pretty much incontrovertible, from the small amount of research I have done. One of Elvis' biggest early influences was the legendary Ink Spots - whose music I love.

As someone who has been composing (and playing) music for 36 years, with just about every qualification imaginable, I am deeply interested in the roots of various modern styles of music, and how they initially came about. Plagiarism is both a curse to artists and a blessing to progressive music;

Mozart was a terrible plagiarist. He went to a mass in the Sistine chapel, heard sacred music that had never been written down in the many centuries it had been performed there, and promptly wrote it down afterwards. No doubt, he added many of his own embellishments, in the belief that he could improve on the original. He also completely re-wrote Handel's "Acis and Galatea".

If Oldfield was lucky enough to sit in on the recording sessions for Magma, then some of the music was bound to rub off. Every time I go to a concert or hear a performer that truly moves me, I try to work out in my mind exactly what it is about that performance or piece of music that has that effect. Luckily I have perfect pitch (not simple relative pitch, which is a learned technique), and, like Mozart, can transcribe anything I hear onto paper, because I read and write music like most people read or write words.

If I use a device - a 2-bar, a 16-bar phrase or even an entire section of a movement - in my own work, and do not credit the original author, am I a plagiarist or a clever so-and-so if I not only remember the lot, but embellish it with my own style?

I agree wholeheartedly with maani - you CANNOT separate technical components of music from the overall effect - if the building blocks are bad, the structure falls over. The phenomenon of "immersing oneself in music" consists of three main elements;

1) Listening HARD and tuning in to the music that is playing and living in your soul.

2) Transcribing that music into technical building blocks that will create a solid structure not only for your ideas, but acts as a "sponge" for other's input. This second element is VERY important, as without it, others will find it hard to interact with your creation - namely other musicians in the band, recording engineers and the record-buying public.

3) Polishing the facade. Once you have your overall structure, it is usually fairly rough. There are very few Mozarts who can write down their intentions first time. Beethoven struggled over every phrase - his manuscripts contrast sharply with Mozart's in the huge numbers of crossings out. A good technical structure will not only stand up to, but be enhanced by a good polish. Sadly, modern technique is focussed on the polish to the detriment of the structure, with modern record producers seemingly intent on disproving the phrase "You can't polish a turd".

One of the other points I was getting at was that music is almost necessarily inherited rather than created. Something that the "Free-formers" tried to get around, but couldn't avoid the fact that most "free-form" music sounds rubbish to most people, no matter how much "feeling" you put into it. The basic I-IV-V-I structure has been in use for centuries in Western music, and you can usually weed out this fundamental from the majority of music.

Therefore it's often hard to distinguish between plagiarism and influence, direct copying and writing in a particular style.

The Magma track, immediately reminded me of some music I have performed by the French composer Poulenc, an astonishing composer who started writing at a very early age, despite the lack of formal musical training. It also made me think of Satie, and a little of "Carmina Burana" (Carl Orff) - so it's not without its roots. In other words, it does not seem to have been immaculately conceived, as is the suggestion here, rather it borrows ideas that were already in the composers' mind and goes from there.

In short, although I hear similarities - and some of the basic "building-blocks" are the same, Oldfield has stamped his own personality and sounds on "Tubular Bells". The overall sound is less French - there is a brittleness and contrast of textures that simply does not exist in the Magma track. Also, Oldfield takes the basic ideas elsewhere with his arrangement. To me, the essence of both tracks sounds similar, but the surface (which is where it matters to most end-listeners), is completely different - my mind naturally follows different patterns within the music. It's only when I pick it apart analytically that I begin to hear the similarities in the building blocks.

Maybe he should have credited his inspirations, but then not everyone does.

BTW, I wrote "Stairway to Heaven" a dozen times before I discovered that Jimmy Page had already done it..."

WITHOUT ANY INTEREST

Tauhd Zaïa wrote: 4: Si j'avais pu savoir que cette histoire ferait un tel fromage, je me serais bien gardée de la relater ici. Objectivement elle n'a qu'une importance très relative dans le fond. C'est du passé et juste de la musique. C'est drôle de voir à quel point les esprits s'échauffent lorsque, d'une manière ou d'une autre, on ose toucher à des figures emblématiques de la musique progressive (cf review sur Wakeman). Si cela doit être considéré comme hérétique ou blasphématoire j'ai bien peur que le monde de la musique progressive glisse subrepticement vers le sectaire ou le dogmatique. Des phénomènes transférentiels unissent le fan et son idole et, en dépit des réactions souvent observées, il faudrait avoir bien à l'esprit que critiquer ou attaquer une idole n'est en aucun cas une atteinte personnelle à ses fans. Prendre de la distance par rapport aux choses, prendre de la distance que diable. Amen.

It's true that people are very sensitive, even protective about "their" musical idols, but in this case I think maani is simply responding to the seriousness of the charge of plagiarism rather than a devotion to Mr. Oldfield. After listening to the two compositions several times, my ears don't know what to think; the similarities are pretty strong, but I can also imagine both inspirations occurring simultaneously and independently. Comparing The Manor with Sun Records, there's a lot of similarity between Elvis, Carl Perkins, Jerry Lee Lewis, etc.

Let's get Mike to release his rough drafts (like the Beatles' Anthology)- not only would it help settle the argument, Oldfield fans would be in heaven

Certif1ed wrote: While I used strong words such as "steal", the thrust of my point was towards my final summary. I don't think Elvis was a music thief really, but others were producing similar music at the time, and the MAIN reason for Elvis' success was his media presence - his phenomenal charisma - not his musical ability. That he packaged up the Black man's music into a form digestible by white people is pretty much incontrovertible, from the small amount of research I have done. One of Elvis' biggest early influences was the legendary Ink Spots - whose music I love.

Don't forget- Elvis was just as much about the Country & Western as he was about the Rhythm & Blues; there was as much Jimmie Rodgers in his sound as there was Junior Parker. I know most rock fans regard country music the way vampires regard a crucifix, but it's a fact: country music is just as fundamental to rock and roll (especially the Sun Records crew) as blues / R&B. The 'British Invasion' focused more on delta blues influences (credited or uncredited), and most current ethnomusicologists, amateur and professional, seem to prefer to emphasize non-caucasian influences.

Dick Heath wrote: Certif1ed wrote: BTW, I wrote "Stairway to Heaven" a dozen times before I discovered that Jimmy Page had already done it..." I should take the lead from the maestro JP and steal it straightaway, but transcribe it for piano as: A Steinway Too Far. BTW Certif1ed do you listen to I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue, especially the round  where the lyrics of one tune are sung to the notes of another - have you ever tried singing the words of Smoke On The Water to the tune of Stairway? (Something for expansion in the Trivia section???)

I only listen to the radio when I'm driving to or from work - and then I try to find stuff I'm not going to pay too much attention to! Generally I listen to Crapital, Virgin or XFM, as the wallpaper is usually acceptably beige.

The words/music thing is an interesting idea - it's worth a try; I wonder if the lyrics for "Grendel" would fit to "Supper's Ready"

Certif1ed,

Can I just say your lengthy post above is one of the most informative and interesting pieces of writing I have read in a long while.

Loved your later comment about "Grendel" too, but I think it may wind some people up! The reviews of the "Market Square Heroes" EP for example have differing views to say the least.

Easy Livin - Thanks for your kind words - I know I tend to waffle off the top of my head sometimes, and it's really cool to be appreciated for it!

As one of the biggest Marillion fans I know (6' 4"), and one of the founders of the "Marillion DO NOT sound like Genesis" club, I feel I can make comments like that about their music in a fond dig-in-the-ribs type of way and hopefully not upset my fellow Marillion fans!

Especially when "Grendel" is the only piece Marillion ever wrote that sounds even remotely like Genesis...

Tauhd Zaïa

Next time I "go off on one", I'll try to make it a bit more interesting!

You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all the people all of the time... (Abraham Lincoln/Bob Marley)

Pity that Tauhd Zaïa (the Kobaïan name of Stella Vander, Christian Vander's wife) deleted most of her posts in this thread. I'm almost certain this French-speaking poster is Stella Vander, from the posts she made in this thread and elsewhere in the Prog Archives forums.

The repetitive nature of Tubular Bells is not a million miles away from the MAGMA's music, and I can certainly see Oldfield being inspired or influenced, intentionally or otherwise, by listening to MAGMA generally, and 'Mekanik Kommandoh' and 'La Dawotsin' in particular. There is enough of a difference to make the claim of plagiarism open to question, but I'm not sure how the claim would have fared in court because such a case would have taken circumstances into account too, such as Oldfield being at The Manor when Vander was recording, and Vander having played his music to Oldfield. But there is enough of a difference between the two that I suspect the layman would favour the inspiration theory rather than the plagiarism theory.