Defining Original Compositions
Posted in Original Compositions
Original Post
Ronak R. said
Original Composition, the group’s name uniquely defines itself and the members that are involved in. There has been discussions and arguments on defining an original composition. On some of the artist communities, I recently noticed and participated in one such discussion. The debate was however deep and analyzed not only the way the music is made, but each of the elements used within, especially by electronic composers. Like me.
There’s no doubt on the technical aspects involved in composing the live tracks and live recorded. But, the question arises about the presets, the samples, the loops and the ideas utilized, which are many-a-times not so original. Many artists just pick a few samples or presets from the collection, mess a bit, and then come out with the song or music which doesn’t involve any unique contribution, and even though it gets great response, specially due to the elements used which were mostly stolen from somewhere. Check a sampling example here
I’d like to know your opinion here. What instruments, samples, presets and recording techniques do you use? And how unique they are? Do you get inspired from some song or music and then utilize it in your composition in any way?
Telling about my way, I generally use only basic samples, a simple ‘hits’ that are altered in the required way to come out with unique sound. Ideas come randomly, sometimes while riding, sometimes in serenity, sometimes in bathroom too. :P But then I try to figure out, picture the idea properly, make it sound the way I want and so it comes. And believe me, its the best way to grip on the composition techniques.
Most of the times, I try to explore the sounds and music on my gear, and come out with the stuff that entices me and others. Simply stated, I love what I compose, and the journey is most of the times a great learning experience.
Shout out. Your turn now.
~ Ronak R. / RokZRooM
Posted 5 months ago
Replies (11)
Related Discussions
I partly agree with you…but mostly Disagree…
using Presets and Sample won’t decrease the creativity in compositions…If you go by your theory…Nobody can play Keyboard as almost all sounds on Keyboard are taken from Original instruments…
For Ex.. If you play saxophone on Keyboard then its not a Original melody as You should play Saxophone on Saxophone…
If we go to Preset and Loop taken from somewhere…I agree with you about Big part stolen…But disagre about not using Presets…this just saves time…and add more accuracy in music…
You see No machine can create Creations as beautiful as Man can do…So until we have to think of creating songs, writing lyrics….I am OK with using Presets and Loops…as I need not to put my head in that….its as simple as it is…
Man, Loop and Presets can not create Great creations in itself…You have to put something on top of it…and ‘that’ is your creation…
And that something is what I’m (and probably most of us, may be djs are exceptions..) all after. And when it comes to such “hardcore” instruments, well you either need to be a maestro or have a master with you in order not to use the presets. So I agree on that part. What inspired me to put forward was especially the two case..
1) deadmau5, an artist based in canada/US has developed a musical loop, fantastic enough to be stolen and reused.. and it so was. If you have seen musafir, there’s a music playing in the club in somewhat middle part. Totally copy pasted.
2) There was another music in the fruityloops software earlier, titled RainDrops by Toby Emerson, which was used in a desi pop album, and got good response as well.
Both the tracks were actually part of the software and were usable in such manner. My point is, to what extent such use can be termed fair? Isn’t it close to cheating? May be there’s a line that segregates both, but its thin enough to crossed as per convenience.
Subjective views. :)
I think looping and presets are acceptable as creativity, so long as they are in fact “created”. And to be able to call that person an “Artist”, the first priority is that it IS CREATED , two, we as critics should be able to interpret what the “artist” tried to convey through that in the first place.
Also, looping and presets are widely used in commercial music, which I believe is not in any way “ART”.
As for the examples you have stated, Ronak, I believe that thats not “creation”, and definitely not “original”.
Creative Commons Licences bring a lot of fairness into sharing creative works. I think attribution .. giving credits to the creator is key. Its like acknowledging wat has been “lifted” so ppl are able to judge ur part of the work. Any self-respecting musician would have put in enough creative work that can b acknowledged by ppl listening to it, provided you do it by fair means. As long as the original creator’s rights and interests are safeguarded, it is okay to use the same. And like creative commons puts it, by fairly sharing ur creative works, you are encouraging collaboration across the world, without hindering ur rights.
its like shoppin thru gift vouchers that a shop has authorised. its not shop-lifting. u can get fruits n a juice maker and sell fresh fruit juices. the amount of sugar and the discretion to select “fresh” fruits is ur contribution. lame example .. i know. :D
The creative effort involved in photography is a prime example. Its not that you painted the picture. But u had the vision to get the right frame.
That would not always imply that a good photographer makes a good “painter”. Similarly, it would not imply that a good DJ is a good composer. The reverse also applies, i guess.
No.. its perfect answer, Vikram. I totally agree and am a big fan of CC. So, level of creativity would be ultimate judging element. True.
ronak, here is the thing man. you can argue this at multiple levels.
for example, I find that AR rahman almost always plagarizes production techniques from artistes like BT and other varied sources. He has also directly lifted and resused presets and loops. here is an example:
A R Rahman Stole this
ARR used this loop as an integral piece in his song nenjam ellam/baadal jo aaye from the movie aayutha ezuhthu/yuva. Its a garage band loop actually which he just drag dropped.
would this categorize as plagarism?
an more funny example is the story of raj(k)esh roshan vs ram sampath and the krazzy 4 riff. sampath used that for his cell phone add thump… Rajesh roshan copied it and replayed it ina ghaati way.. sampath successfully sued the roshans for plagarism.. the irony is sampath himself used commercial loops.But he was on sound legal ground.. by using licenced copies of the loops and layering his own stuff on top of that, he could claim creative ownership of what he created.. very ironic right? the bitch of this all is all raajesh roshan had to do was to himself by the original loop library and use it for krazzy 4 and he woulda been in the clear :)
coming back to resus eof samples, what do u think is the granularity beyond which u think its not plagarism?
1 meaure?
1 bar?
1 beat? half a beat?
what about a one shot sample…
like a snare?
or piano tone?
thats basically the basis of all sample playback workstation keyboards.
the tone that comes out of ustaad zaakhir hussains fingers cannot be recreated, as he is the master. So i take a bunch of his CDs, and painfully and skillfull chop them up to have umpteen individual oneshot samples, and then make a library out of it. And then i use it… would that be infringement of the ustaad’s creative rights? <—this is a grey area btw and it could go eitherway in US courts.
what about non sampled but synthesized tones..
would u give credit to a person who uses the presets that come with these advanced synthesizers today.. a lot of people do not respect such musicians, me included.. but you could argue why should everyone keep reinventing the wheel again and again from the scratch.
then leaving sound design and synthesis aside, if we focus on the pure musical aspect of the composition…
first lets take something thats alien to indian musical senses, as they care only about melody (we will come to that). for now lets focus on chord progressions
there are so many common chord progressions
i mean blues music is essentially I IV V
or lets take a common chord progression like I VI IV V …
papa kahtein hain to every breath u take to dyer maker to zillions of other songs share the same progression… would that be considered plagarism? obviously not.. around here.. we will also enter the murky psycho acoustic domain of what makes music sound musical to human ears.. at this level we wil find that same progressions and cadences have been used in western classical music for centuries now.. jazz and rock musicians have a slang .. hooks.. riffs.. which they learn and reuse…add thier own touch to it.. all of this has been accepted to be ethically ok.
coming to indian music, u can apply the same argument i made for western music here..
this is a melody based system. and melodies are contrained by an elaborate raaga system.
There are 72 parent raagas, or scales which have 7 notes. and there are umpteen children raagas. resuing a raaga is not considered plagarism.. in fact it forms the sole basis of any music in india. usually when someone copies a melody blatantly, along with the cadences, nuanses , phrasing etc etc
only then people in india perceive the song to be plagarized. if i were to lift an arrangement, but change the main melody, i can mint money in india. I dont know if i answered your question, but i think i have added some points to think about and ponder..
cheers.
Please check my song
Lal Subah(female version) – An original composition
My Other Uploads:
Click Here For—>My Latest Uploads
Click Here For—>My Top Rated Uploads