Originally Posted By: JohnJohnJohn
Originally Posted By: Guitarhacker
Originally Posted By: edshaw
What do you call it when studio technician tweak the process and come up with a sound that could be said to carry the day?
I think Les Paul and Mary Ford's sound was the same audio track offset a microsecond -- presto, echo.
Bob Marley and Peter Tosh on the wah pedal.
The Beatles tech sretting up this long hallway in the building and getting it just right.
Or even just a way of playing, no effects, like Louis Armstrong or Eric Clpton.
All this stuff going on. We mortals find out about it when we open our first Garage Band.


Production/engineering. It can certainly be creative but it's not composing or writing. The producer or engineer is getting paid for his/her work under a producer's contract and nothing they do or create is copyright-able by them, as a result.

I disagree that it is not composing or writing. If an engineer or producer comes up with the signature riff or signature sound or some other significant creative contribution they have most certainly contributed to the writing of the song!

Of course, I understand that the music business world decided long ago that that contribution does not count as a writing credit. But that is just arbitrary. I have always felt songwriting credits should be more fairly defined and shared among the participants. If The Beatles had not spent so much time together perfecting their craft as a group I would venture to guess they might not have achieved what they did. Likewise had they not had major influence from people like Epstein and Martin they almost certainly would have accomplished much less.

When I am king everyone who contributes gets partial credit! laugh


So according to your theory... the guy who brings the coffee to the coffee machine and makes the coffee in the studio while the writers are there composing should be given writing credits too? How far do you want to take that theory that anyone who had any sort of influence in the process, no matter how small, should get writing credits?

It's ludicrous to claim someone who inserted an effect in a recorded track should get writing credits. Very few producers or engineers will come up with a "signature riff". That is usually the domain of the musicians. If the musician is a hired studio gun, guess what????? The guy has signed that away to the artist when he signed the work for hire contract. If however, it is a signature riff such as the sax lick on Baker Street, or the guitar lick on In-a-godda-da-vida, for example.... and the creator of said lick is a studio musician.... the artist owns it. The same rules apply. That is NOT, writing the song. As a studio musician, you know that anything you create is the property of the artist who's paying you.

The music world decided that such contributions are not considered "writing the song" because licks and fills and such are not necessary parts of the song. Even a so called signature lick isn't necessary for the song. The verse, chorus and lyrics are.

You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.