How did Madonna and Michael Jackson write their songs?

[lermgalieu]

Respectably, you are not correct. A patent is an idea. It is intellectual property. It is an art, concept, design, advance. An idea does not have to be reduced to practice to be issued. At least in the way you are implying. Constructive reduction to practice: Occurs upon the filing of a patent application on the claimed invention. Brunswick Corp. v. U.S., 34 Fed. Cl. 532, 584 (1995). In reality, no one would willy-nilly patent without thinking it works because others could show that your idea was not well-thought out and have it nullified. Patenting an idea is a fairly expensive and complex process. Trade secrets are NOT particularly protectable, although one could be charged with espionage or theft for sharing trade secrets.

As you say, getting a patent is a long process. The biggest hurdle in getting a patent is non-obviousness and novelty. Most patents are 100% worthless and the factual content in most patents is sketchy. It does not matter unless said patent is questioned or infringed.

Unlike you, I am not a lawyer, but I hold over 30 US Patents and teach this stuff.

You are correct that the invention can be constructively reduced to practice, but it is still an invention not an idea. An idea is inchoate. I respectfully refer you to the USPTO: “...abstract ideas are not patentable subject matter.

A patent cannot be obtained upon a mere idea or suggestion. The patent is granted upon the new machine, manufacture, etc., as has been said, and not upon the idea or suggestion of the new machine. A complete description of the actual machine or other subject matter for which a patent is sought is required.” General information concerning patents

put it this way: patent rights are the rights to exclude other from practicing your invention, not your idea.

 

[Hummergeist]

One of my favorite bands. I'd suggest reading Mike Doughty's Book of Drugs for some insight on what went down. He shared quite a bit about being the young guy producing the songs, while the more seasoned musicians in the band trash talked him. There were definitely different views on how that band should function and who deserved credit held by the members.

Thanks for mentioning that book, I'll give it a try. I saw them once, in London, way back, on the recommendation of a friend who worked in radio, and coming in cold, not knowing any of the material, I thought they were great. Shame they couldn't resolve their differences.

 

[lermgalieu]

Trade secrets are NOT particularly protectable

hopefully you aren’t Coke’s lawyer

 

[monsterthompson]

Thanks for mentioning that book, I'll give it a try. I saw them once, in London, way back, on the recommendation of a friend who worked in radio, and coming in cold, not knowing any of the material, I thought they were great. Shame they couldn't resolve their differences.

Mike’s solo acoustic material after the band dissolved is quite good. A little quirky but enjoyable. Some of his later efforts with full band arrangements are also worth checking out. Based on the sound and the sounds he continued writing, I’d say he really was the driving force behind the band’s songs.

His usual bass cohort these days is Andrew “Scrap” Livingston, and the two of them seem to work quite well together.

 

[Hummergeist]

Mike’s solo acoustic material after the band dissolved is quite good. A little quirky but enjoyable. Some of his later efforts with full band arrangements are also worth checking out. Based on the sound and the sounds he continued writing, I’d say he really was the driving force behind the band’s songs.

His usual bass cohort these days is Andrew “Scrap” Livingston, and the two of them seem to work quite well together.

Nice, I also heard Sebastian recently on that last Fiona Apple album.

 

[monsterthompson]

Nice, I also heard Sebastian recently on that last Fiona Apple album.

Oooh. I'll need to check that out. His playing is some of my favorite. I loved his tone on the albums.

 

[LBS-bass]

I'll give you all an example. I'm a little over-invested in this discussion because it's impacted my life on a couple of occasions and I've had to make decisions based on what I felt was fair. The most recent was when a friend expressed an interest in working with me to co-produce some music I had written in 2014. I had demo versions that I sent to him, then I sent him tracks with certain parts removed so he could do what he wanted with them.

Here's what I originally wrote:

http://lbsterner.com/archive/music/so_precious_1.mp3

Here's what I got back from him:



I didn't ask him to write horn parts. I didn't ask him to change one of the chords on the chorus. But he did all that, and I mostly really loved what he did, though on a subsequent mix I'm changing the backing vocals on the chorus to match the one chord that he changed.

To do that subsequent mix I also had to pay a guy to recut all his tracks because the only thing I ever got from him was the mixed down MP3, and I needed backing tracks for a livestream show.

Is this now his song too?

Well, no. I wrote it almost seven years ago. He wanted to add something to it, and he came up with some brilliant stuff that I very much want to use, for which he should be credited, but he didn't write this song. To say he did would be silly. Am I now obligated to give him a songwriting credit because he created a horn arrangement and (presumably) misheard one chord in the original chorus? I really don't think so. He did some absolutely brilliant arranging, but it's the same song.

I want to release this song this year as part of a group of songs that I'm polishing up. For that I have to use the new tracks the second guy cut, but he's been well compensated for that work. Yet I'm still paying this collaborator for his arrangement work, because I think his work is absolutely worth it, and he's also volunteered to re-cut the "trumpet" solo on it. He asked for a flat fee, plus a percentage, which is totally worth it.

Here's the thing people don't really understand: He'll get more from this song that way than he'd ever get if I just gave him a writing credit, because most songs don't make any money. The flat fee is likely all he'll ever see, and all I'll ever do is lose money because I paid him and I paid the other guy to do what they do well.

That's how this stuff works right now. You hire someone with a skill and you pay them for the use of that skill. A writing credit isn't a ticket to anything much these days. But people like me, who have more money than sense, are spending some of it to make sure musicians can keep working.

 

[Gluvhand]

And then there are folks like Elvis, who often didn't write the music or the lyrics.... but still got the songwriting credit.
Even Col. Tom got a few.
Must be nice.

Ozzy.

 

[dkelley]

What is wrong with being honest that my post contains heresy?? Do you really think that invalidates the information I'm including?

If you prefer, I could in the future state my 3rd party information as though they are facts that I personally can vouch for. In general though, I would have thought that people would appreciate honesty.

To be more specific, since that seems to matter to you, I am basing the Jackson information on his own copyright trial where he had to prove that he wrote a certain song, and he explained and demonstrated how he sang each part, note for not perfectly, to each musician.

The madonna information is collected from producers, session musicians, and from articles about her former backup singer who sued the label (and/or madonna herself) because she claimed the voice all over the specified song was hers, not madonna's, when it's extremely easy to tell what madonna sounds like compared to a fantastic backup singer.

 

[SgtHulka]

I have a friend who works at a music royalties company, in fact the top digital music royalties company, and he told me that if you write the words you own the song.

 

[Son of Wobble]

I have a friend who works at a music royalties company, in fact the top digital music royalties company, and he told me that if you write the words you own the song.

Bernie Taupin would presumably be delighted if that were so. But it's not.

 

[LBS-bass]

Bernie Taupin would presumably be delighted if that were so. But it's not.

Haha, you beat me to it.

 

[jamro217]

Wow. I didn't know that Morris Levy played an instrument.

 

[jamro217]

I've always thought Bowie was another interesting case - from what I can tell, his guitar playing was never really stellar, more like strum-along folkie, and he tinkered on piano, but he had a very clear vision of what he wanted to make musically. And not just "simple pop stuff" either, he got quite sophisticated at times, theory-wise. I wonder if any video of any of his recording sessions survives...

Bowie had some musical talent. He played the saxophone as well as guitar, percussion and a little piano. Just because someone is the frontman, doesn't play an instrument live and chooses studio aces to record their songs, doesn't mean they're incapable of doing the work themselves. Bob Seger played lead guitar on his first albums and decided to concentrate on vocals after that. He'd still play rhythm guitar live occasionally but he's known primarily as a singer. Had he chose to go the other way he may have been more of a Keith Richard. Known for songwriting and solid yet not flashy guitar work. He plays piano, too. Dr. John started out as a guitarist but after a left hand gunshot injury switched to piano. His prowess as guitarist never is mentioned. Bobby Caldwell had a big hit in 1979 with "What You Won't Do For Love". He is known as a crooner, but he played guitar for Little Richard and played most of the instruments on his demos (using studio musicians for the records). There is a video of his band live in 1979 on a Florida beach with him playing lead on an old Strat. Kenny Rogers got rich singing/talking his way through corny stories. He played bass better than a lot of us do. Most people have no idea that's true. Anyway, the point is just because somebody isn't featured in the spotlight performing every trick they're capable of doesn't mean that they're unable to.

 

[LBS-bass]

So anyway, to get back to the actual question, you write based on the tools you have available to you. If you're a fair instrumentalist who can record a demo and get an idea across, that's how you do it. If you're Michael Jackson and you have a tremendous head for music but no instrumental training, you sing the parts and get that across to your producer. Being a stellar instrumentalist is not a prerequisite for being a competent songwriter. The only thing required is figuring out a way to get your musical ideas across to everyone who can help you realize your vision.

 

[LBS-bass]

Just be prepared that when Jose Feliciano covers your composition, you're going to give 25% of the publishing to Jim Morrison, who contributed by one couplet, and is only going to drink the money away in any case. "Funeral pyre" indeed

The second example of how this impacted my life was similar. I wrote a song, gave it to a guy I knew on a demo tape (along with a bunch of other songs on that tape), then he enlisted me to sing in his band, that band co-wrote lots of material together with shared songwriting credit, then the band decides to co-opt a song from my demo tape and they write a new "bridge" in said song to solo over so we could all have "shared credit" for said song, then the band asks me to give up my writer credit for the greater good.

Once again, I never asked them to do any of it, I was blindsided when I walked into a rehearsal and heard they had worked up one of my songs with a new bridge to include on the album. No other song on that record or our other record was written that way; everything else was written in a group setting. But peer pressure being what it is, I told them I wasn't happy about it but I allowed a group songwriting credit for it, even though I actually wrote the effing song.

Once again, nobody made any money on it anyway, so it kinda doesn't matter. I can post both versions of that song here too, if anyone wants to hear them. But to me it will never be anything other than the simple truth that they stole the song from me.

 

[Son of Wobble]

The second example of how this impacted my life was similar. I wrote a song, gave it to a guy I knew on a demo tape, then he enlisted me to sing in his band, that band co-wrote lots of material together with shared songwriting credit, then the band decides to co-opt a song from my demo tape and they write a new "bridge" in said song to solo over so we could all have "shared credit" for said song, then the band asks me to give up my writer credit for the greater good.

Once again, I never asked them to do any of it, I was blindsided when I walked into a rehearsal and heard they had worked up one of my songs with a new bridge to include on the album. No other song on that record was written that way, everything else was written in a group setting. But peer pressure being what it is, I told them I wasn't happy about it but I allowed a group songwriting credit for it, even though I actually wrote the effing song.

Once again, nobody made any money on it anyway, so it kinda doesn't matter. I can post both versions of that song here too, if anyone want to hear them. But to me it will never be anything other than the simple truth that they stole the song from me.

I thought your previous music post was a good example how an "arranger" can enhance a song -- the horns deliver an amplification of the attitudinal swagger literally conjured in the lyric. But the attitude originates with the first version. Definitely the same essential song in that case.
Are you singing both vocal parts? Nice harmonies.

Do post the the examples you mention in this post, please

 

[LBS-bass]

I thought your previous music post was a good example how an "arranger" can enhance a song -- the horns deliver an amplification of the attitudinal swagger literally conjured in the lyric. But the attitude originates with the first version. Definitely the same essential song in that case.
Are you singing both vocal parts? Nice harmonies.

Do post the the examples you mention in this post, please

Yes I do all my own vocals.

Since you asked. Here is my original version of "Desire" with me playing and singing all parts:

http://louiethelovemuffin.com/music/mp3s/Desire 2 mix.mp3

And here's the band version:



The drummer was singing harmonies on that version.

They did a nice job with the song, but I don't see any reason it isn't my song. They added the bridge specifically to fit the criteria that everything we recorded together get group credit.

 

[oZZma]

You clearly have bias against the man’s music. Based on grooves? While his songs generally have very strong grooves, they are driven by his vocals, and other melodic hooks.

"Based on grooves" may be an exaggeration but "driven by vocals" is an exaggeration as well. When you hear MJ's hits (Off the Wall/Thriller era, don't know the rest) it's difficult to say what was written first, if vocals or the instrumental stuff, because the arrangement is so creative/distinctive it's as prominent as the vocal line. So not giving it authorship dignity IMO is totally wrong.
Just to say how arrangement is not a minor issue in the writing. It's not like a cherry you put on a cake when it's ready. It's an ingredient of the cake.

 

[Hummergeist]

The second example of how this impacted my life was similar. I wrote a song, gave it to a guy I knew on a demo tape (along with a bunch of other songs on that tape), then he enlisted me to sing in his band, that band co-wrote lots of material together with shared songwriting credit, then the band decides to co-opt a song from my demo tape and they write a new "bridge" in said song to solo over so we could all have "shared credit" for said song, then the band asks me to give up my writer credit for the greater good.

Once again, I never asked them to do any of it, I was blindsided when I walked into a rehearsal and heard they had worked up one of my songs with a new bridge to include on the album. No other song on that record or our other record was written that way; everything else was written in a group setting. But peer pressure being what it is, I told them I wasn't happy about it but I allowed a group songwriting credit for it, even though I actually wrote the effing song.

Once again, nobody made any money on it anyway, so it kinda doesn't matter. I can post both versions of that song here too, if anyone wants to hear them. But to me it will never be anything other than the simple truth that they stole the song from me.

And there’s the old saying - ‘write a word, get a third’. That’s why an artist will insist on a seemingly trivial lyric change when recording a song from a less influential writer.