Discussion of the Week #6 (2011/12/18)

[Champ213 1858]

The Discussion of the Week!

How it works:

- Each sunday a staff member will start a thread with a new music-related question. They can range from broad to specific, but they are usually more in-depth than just asking for your favourite band.

- The discussion will be featured as announcement on the front page to get as many people involved as possible.

- People should put some effort into their posts, ie. not just write a few words and leave, or quote a sentence from a previous poster without adding anything to it. At least 2-3 well-worded sentences are not too much to ask.

- Other than that it's just like a normal discussion: you can discuss posts made by other users, but try to stay on topic and, of course, be civil.

The thread will stay open even after the week has passed, so the discussion can continue, but it will be replaced in the announcement center by the next featured question.

(Btw: you can also submit questions for the Discussion of the Week by sending them to any staff member.)

Got it? So here's the new question:

What do you think of artists that don't write their own songs?

[TheBistroButcher666 228]

What do you think of artists that don't write their own songs?

One word: Lame

I know there are rumors of ghost writers in VK, even when that bogus interview "with an ex-VK exec" popped up, I had already suspected that some labels and artists may use ghost writers. However, this is all pure speculation and just uttering an artist you might suspect just starts a bunch of e-drama so I tend to keep it to myself. Especially because there are people that would love to use that as the basis to an argument just to discredit an artist or band they don't like.

In any case, I don't like it and it generally makes me lose interest in an artist. What's the point of listening to music from someone when they don't even write their own songs? They're not the person that made the song I like, it's that John Doe not the soulless front man and that John Doe deserves my respect and admiration for creating something I enjoy.

[miyuu 40]

i don't consider them as artists or musicians

i think them just as showmen/women or entertainers

&i don't think there is much to discuss here

they are just different types of entertainment

[Masamune 72]

Well i don't think too badly of them at all, for example lets say there's a singer who loves music deeply

and has a freaking awesome voice but there's one problem, he can't write music no matter how

hard he tries, so he gets someone to help, i see no problem with that at all.

[miyuu 40]

ok but then the team that makes the music all together are the musicians.as a group.

above i was talking about people like some boybands/pop artists usually etc who have everything ready for them , been told exactly what and how to do it and their job is to entertain.you can have a talent as a great entertainer too.but you didn't create anything

i think to be an artist you have to create something. also a great vocalist who can perform with emotion

[Number Girl 48]

I have no problem with artists who do not write their own songs. In some cases in may help to do a well-written song justice - especially if you have a performer or musician who frankly sucks at writing a decent song or a song-writer who probably sucks at performing. Giving life and emotion to a song through a good voice, etc is part of what makes good song-writing worth mentioning. The kind of artists I don't respect are the kind that don't write their own songs, yet lie or pretend that they do to elevate themselves. When appropriate credit is given, I see no issue.

[Yasupon 18]

^ explains how I feel better

For me it's much more important if the band composes their own music rather than writes for me. If they both write and compose their music (Which I would expect of an indies VK band) then that's only better.

[TheBistroButcher666 228]

Well i don't think too badly of them at all, for example lets say there's a singer who loves music deeply

and has a freaking awesome voice but there's one problem, he can't write music no matter how

hard he tries, so he gets someone to help, i see no problem with that at all.

Ahhh yeah, thinking about it. I'd be okay if other people wrote music for Satsuki but at least he tries.

[Zeus 7997]

What do you think of artists that don't write their own songs?

It depends on how the artist presents themselves to their listeners. I know that plenty of my favorite musical artists are not gifted with the ability to compose but they are gifted with the ability to sing or play notes that are placed in front of them. If these artists are forthcoming about their inability to compose and give due credit to the composers then I have no problem with it. Less commonly, there are bands that compose music specifically for another band to use or they come up with a song that doesn't "fit" with their musical concept so they give it to another band in exchange for royalties. If no one is getting slighted, then it's all fine in my book. In hip-hop especially, some of the greatest acts out there hook up with a lot of producers who play beats for them and they pick the ones they like. As long as they give a nod to that composer and say "yeah, he helped me out here with giving me these crazy beats" then that's fine too. I also know a lot of artists bounce ideas and lyrics off of friends and family and they have input too - it may not be on the same level but I'm sure at one point or another someone said something to a composer or lyricist that they thought was good enough to include. That doesn't make something 100% theirs but that doesn't mean that they should automatically have that song discounted. Even for solo artists, creating music is all about teamwork and collaboration. The creation of an artist doesn't have to be 100% authentic for me, but an artist should be 100% authentic when it comes to acknowledging who helped them with what if they are asked.

I only have a problem with it if the artist has "ghost writers" that they do not acknowledge and they like to pretend that what they released was 100% theirs but that doesn't happen very often so it's not something I find myself having too strong of an opinion over.

[LIDL 692]

I tend to think the label "artist" and "musician" are only belong for those that compose

and direct or at least co-direct their musical directions.

Someone that have clear visions about their things and what they want to do with it.

For those who don't,

i will rather to call them singers, boy/girl groups that can play instruments

or even recording labels products.

I am very anal with this kind of thing.

How can one call themselves an artist while they didn't

actually help to contrive either lyrics, ideas or how the sounds should sounds?

And just give all these dirty works to their labels and producers and paid musicians.

Even to the degree where these paid musicians will make the music notes to notes

for the guitarists, bassists and drummers. Making it sounds too polished.

It's just like fast food, you know. It will slowly make one sick.

And the difference truly shows,

those who make their own music will sounded sincere and original.

While the record labels products mostly will

sounded so uniform, boring, mediocre, dated, carbon copy and so out there.

Since the songs was made to sell records not to speak their minds.

A bunch of posers trying to be kicking.

Doesn't mean they're bad. Since the music will still good and sells.

I may still listens to them for the sake of it.

But it does makes them not as reputable as those who did their own songs.

This opinion is not limited to bands,

but also soloist and groups/duet of any genres.

[Jigsaw9 6783]

Interesting question!

My opinion is dependent on genres: if we're talking about rock/metal music where the artists in question come off as people who can play instruments more or less competently (hopefully xD), then I would expect them to write their own songs as well. I mean they as a group have a shared vision probably, so that's what I'd expect (unless it's just some bunch put together by a record company). Since they present themselves as a band (like a somewhat autonomous entity/group of people), I immediately associate that 'bandhood' with writing their own songs - if they don't, they come off as kinda 'fake' for me.

In pop music I'm totally okay with artists not writing their own stuff, since that practice seems to be the most in currency. I look at these artists more as 'entertainers' than 'legitimate musicians' (eventhough they might know how to play some instruments; that's just my perception of them). Plus, most of these pop acts/artists have to learn other stuff like dancing to keep people entertained, so I understand that they work a lot too, just not in the same way a typical rock/instrumental band would. That's why I appreciate pop artists who (more or less) write their own music, but it's not a prerequisite of enjoyment for me.

In short: I'm okay with an artist not writing his/her own songs in pop. In rock, uhmmm, not so much.

[Champ213 1858]

if we're talking about rock/metal music where the artists in question come off as people who can play instruments more or less competently (hopefully xD), then I would expect them to write their own songs as well.

I think it would be also interesting to know what people mean by "they" (as in: the band). In a band you often have a main composer. In some bands, all the music is written by one guy. The other band members may give some imput on it, but we don't really know the whole extent of that. For all we know, one person could be writing all, and the rest of the band just performing his or her compositions. But it seems the perception is hugely different. A vocalist performing the song his band mate wrote seems to be fully accepted, but if the writer is not a member of the band, but a ghost writer, the opinion seems to be quite different.

A band that doesn't write their own songs is often considered talentless, no matter how well they perform songs written by others. But wouldn't that make a band with one song writer and four "performing" members" at leat 4/5 talentless?

Maybe we are automatically assuming that in a band there is always some sort of cooperation and equal status between members, and that a band would never perform a song written by one of their own if they didn't like it, or couldn't identify with it (whether this is true or not). Whereas with ghost writers we usually accociate labels that force bands to play something they don't really want. At least that would be my theory.

[miyuu 40]

A vocalist performing the song his band mate wrote seems to be fully accepted, but if the writer is not a member of the band, but a ghost writer, the opinion seems to be quite different.

that's very interesting in society. and indeed.

why a vocalist who has the looks gets more famous ,earns more money and appreciated more than the writer who we can't see his face. most of the times that's what happens. people care more about the person infront. and many times don't give a shit or even know about the others.

also if they don't want the credits to go to all the band members they shouldn't call themselves band. i mean many artists do it.

it's clear that is their personal work more and not the band's. for example

yasu

Janne Da Arc

acid black cherry

if they don't clear this up it's their choice.

(also i know maybe when you start it's difficult to do this and maybe they can take advantage of you)

and some boybands/girl bands do look like puppets

[sai 868]

Well i don't think too badly of them at all, for example lets say there's a singer who loves music deeply

and has a freaking awesome voice but there's one problem, he can't write music no matter how

hard he tries, so he gets someone to help, i see no problem with that at all.

Ahhh yeah, thinking about it. I'd be okay if other people wrote music for Satsuki but at least he tries.

HAHAHA classic!

Personally I prefer not to know if my favourite artists do or do not write their own music. I agree with Masa on the point of not being able too, but I also think it would be a big letdown for me, seeing as every emotion that seems to be in the song was not produced by themselves.

[Des 289]

I don't care at all.

Why wouldn't someone else compose the music if he/she's better at it? What difference would it make if you found out that band X doesn't write all of their own songs? Does it change the music? No, it's still as good (or as bad) as before.

In the end it's just the result that matters, not the path they took to achieve that result.

[miyuu 40]

because you don't know who/what the fuck you admire.

if you like a song only to dance and have a good time ,like a random song you hear on a club of course it doesn't matter.

but if an artist inspires you and you admire him.his work means something to you. of course it matters.

[evilcoconut 109]

Tbh I don't really think of it at all, lol. I suppose, somewhere, I'm probably more impressed with pop artists who compose their own songs vs those who don't, but it's not exactly a criteria I'm actively looking for. So I guess I'm pretty ambivalent. =/

[JustIronic 1]

It's always nicer to know that they write their own songs, somehow. At least lyrics, or something. I don't know, I used to be very keen about it, but ever since I ventured into JE I really don't care as much anymore lol.

But I love it when I hear that even some jpop artists write their own songs and lyrics. It makes everything more personal somehow, and I just like that.

Now, if a song is good and I like it, it doesn't really matter who wrote it, to be honest.

[KJI 6]

I want to say I don't like it but, it actually depends.

At a certain point you can just consider it part of the artist's identity. Look at bands like Perfume, AKB48, and Morning Musume or American artists like Rihanna and Britney Spears. Each of these have their own (somewhat) unique identity, their own style, their own personality, and their own fans. Do they write their own music? Probably not. But that doesn't stop people people from writing stuff that fits their style, doesn't stop them from picking what they think actually fits their style, and doesn't stop them from performing it using their talents.

In fact, there are also many musicians out there that got famous performing other people's works... even if the original artists of it did not.

[Pretsy 1343]

It's just easy - if you're not able to compose well (typical problem for some bands, for instance: Ruki from Gazette) or you are not specialized in some new, specific genre, then there's nothing bad with hiring a so-called "ghost-writer" - I am fine with this as long as composer doesn't get crazy with his/her experiments all of the sudden (for instance: RES' wacky composer roles)

[Pandabear 414]

Yeah I pretty much don't care as long as the performer gives credit where credit is due. And I'm much more tolerable of the practice with pop artists than anyone else. I mean with a rock band, I feel they should know how to make music. They spend a crap ton of time perfecting their playing and then they can't write decent music? That seems highly unlikely since most musicians will learn about music theory during the course of playing or curiosity will eventually lead them down that path. And it also depends if its simply lyrics or the actual music. I'm totally fine with someone in the band writing the lyrics to a song and then having the singer sing it. Maybe the singer can't come up with decent lyrics, or someone else in the band is a really good songwriter but doesn't have the voice to sing his songs.

[miyuu 40]

i wrote that before and my message disappeared :/

so i am gonna write it again. i wasn't going to , but i see some answers and it bothers me.

because you don't know who/what the fuck you admire.

if you like a song only to dance and have a good time ,like a random song you hear on a club of course it doesn't matter.

but if an artist inspires you and you admire him.his work means something to you. of course it matters.

don't you want to know who you admire

[Peace Heavy mk II 7200]

I don't care at all.

Why wouldn't someone else compose the music if he/she's better at it? What difference would it make if you found out that band X doesn't write all of their own songs? Does it change the music? No, it's still as good (or as bad) as before.

In the end it's just the result that matters, not the path they took to achieve that result.

More or less how I feel about this. There's a difference between having someone write songs for you, which is how most of the popular music industry works, and having someone write your songs and then take full credit for it. I don't believe that people who pay others to write their songs are stealing or should be looked down upon: they still have to have the ability to actually play the music being written.

There are some instances where it can be a problem though. I'm under the assumption that Katy Perry doesn't write her music, at least not her most recent material. She currently has a song on the radio about a boyfriend she lost and still misses. That's cool and all, but she was married last year and went on and on about how happy she is. Why is she singing about some 18 year old who was smart enough to high-tail it away from her if she's happily married? I guess the consistency doesn't matter to most people so long as it sounds relate-able and has a nice beat to it.

[sai 868]

That's the same impression I had, concerning Katy Perry. I'm pretty sure she wrote her first album, One of the Boys, completely by herself. It tells about her boyfriend and the break-up and everything around it. But that album was pop-rock and this is 100% pop, so it could be they are doing it for her since she can't really get it to work with 100% pop yet. I miss her old days