Guitar Solo's in Song Credits

LONGRD

Why don't Pearl Jam give Mikey songwriting credits for his guitar solo's?
in particular, NAIS, Alive, a few others I can't think off my head.

How does it not include in the song credit? I'm not a guitarist so I don't know if you write a solo or just play it...

if not, then should the guitarists get credited for his solo's.

Explain this to me! Thanks

DOSW

That's a good question. I would think that solos aren't really part of the songwriting process, so they're not credited. Kind of like drumming parts... drummers throw in their own fills and flair and stuff but it doesn't mean they helped write the song.

LONGRD

DOSW wrote:

That's a good question. I would think that solos aren't really part of the songwriting process, so they're not credited. Kind of like drumming parts... drummers throw in their own fills and flair and stuff but it doesn't mean they helped write the song.

You're absolutely right about the songwriting process, however the song isn't complete yet and when it's done with a guitarist's signature solo in it, should he/she get credit for it as well?

Some bands choose to give ALL members credit because they count the studio sessions as part of the writing process. i.e. Radiohead, Incubus, even Korn and a few others share writing credits.

Pearl Jam did the same for Vs. and most songs off Vitalogy. I mean look at Bugs, it's just Ed and his accordion but the rest of the guys get credit for it.

So you see my point in questioning this?

DOSW

LongRd. wrote:

So you see my point in questioning this?

Yes sir, which is why I said

DOSW wrote:

That's a good question.

JordyWordy

or REACH DOWN.

Mike should have had his own album sleeve on TOTD for that solo.

and now to answer the question:
as said in some cases all band members get credit....but then on the flipside take No Code, Yield, and the albums since...where the lyrics are (usually) Eddie and the music by one band member....

there's typically 6 musicians on PJ songs now, but only 1 or maybe 2/3 (eg: Unemployable) get songwriting credit.

I Think its an Intellectual Property categorisation of Writing versus Performance.

each category has different rights and the performers arent listed in album sleeves is all.
Mike would have interests and copyright protection for his solos im sure under Performers rights ....i think anyway!

LONGRD

JordyWordy wrote:

or REACH DOWN.

Mike should have had his own album sleeve on TOTD for that solo.

and now to answer the question:
as said in some cases all band members get credit....but then on the flipside take No Code, Yield, and the albums since...where the lyrics are (usually) Eddie and the music by one band member....

there's typically 6 musicians on PJ songs now, but only 1 or maybe 2/3 (eg: Unemployable) get songwriting credit.

I Think its an Intellectual Property categorisation of Writing versus Performance.

each category has different rights and the performers arent listed in album sleeves is all.
Mike would have interests and copyright protection for his solos im sure under Performers rights ....i think anyway!

Interesting point you got there. Is the "performance rights" similar to the way some artists regulate their bootlegging live concerts? Or is it totally different?

Rhinocerous Surprise

Same reason Ed doesn't take writing credits if he changes a few words in Stone's or Jeff's lyrics. It's about who had the idea - a lyric change or guitar solo is just adding to it, or refining it, or perfecting it, or what have you.

JordyWordy

LongRd. wrote:

Interesting point you got there. Is the "performance rights" similar to the way some artists regulate their bootlegging live concerts? Or is it totally different?

actually thats pretty much it.

well in Irish law anyway (which is close to UK law i think on this area - dont know about USA)... the Performer's right is very similar legally to a full Copyright (just categorised as a separate right within the same legislation) -You are afforded a right to allow / prevent other parties from copying your "performance" of a work (song, written composition, sculpture, design, etc).

ie this means that the songwriter can..
(1) recover royalties from people who legally cover performances of the song under Copyright Law, AND/OR
(2) that he/she can pursue those try to profit from the song without their consent under Performers Rights.

even montages are covered. i studied it 2 years ago so i should remember it better, but basically you hit the nail on the head - this section of copyright law is specifically designed to give artists protection from bootleggers, imitators (ie people who distribute their performances without their permission)

LONGRD

JordyWordy wrote:

actually thats pretty much it.

well in Irish law anyway (which is close to UK law i think on this area - dont know about USA)... the Performer's right is very similar legally to a full Copyright (just categorised as a separate right within the same legislation) -You are afforded a right to allow / prevent other parties from copying your "performance" of a work (song, written composition, sculpture, design, etc).

ie this means that the songwriter can..
(1) recover royalties from people who legally cover performances of the song under Copyright Law, AND/OR
(2) that he/she can pursue those try to profit from the song without their consent under Performers Rights.

even montages are covered. i studied it 2 years ago so i should remember it better, but basically you hit the nail on the head - this section of copyright law is specifically designed to give artists protection from bootleggers, imitators (ie people who distribute their performances without their permission)

Thanks for the good post there!

You know what to think about it, kinda sad to think that...when we're kids we all dream of being in a band or actor or an athlete, we all started the desire for the love of it and joy of these things.

Then when yuo're older and are seeking these professions, there's shitload of laws, rules, regulation and politics to deal with. Kinda takes the fun out of it!

JordyWordy

LongRd. wrote:

Thanks for the good post there!

You know what to think about it, kinda sad to think that...when we're kids we all dream of being in a band or actor or an athlete, we all started the desire for the love of it and joy of these things.

Then when yuo're older and are seeking these professions, there's shitload of laws, rules, regulation and politics to deal with. Kinda takes the fun out of it!

haha! very true! the thread wuda taken off & been really enjoyable if i hadnt said anything!!

ive turned into the nark from the simpsons with my realistic answers ....*sheds a tear for losing sight of my dreams*

Julien

the solo comes after the song is created. if you put the guitarist under credit for his solos, then you could put the bassist because he creates a bass line , he drummer because he makes the drum part, etc.
A song is always a combination of all members' creativities.
I think PJ just puts the member who had the original "idea" in mind, who wrote the general melody.
my 2 cents.

IDgotI

Well, there's also the matter of what the members of the band agree to. In the case of Alive in particular, I believe Jeff and Stone had the music for this prior to actually playing with Mike. Chances are it was presented to Mike as their song when they asked him to play on it, and he agreed. When Ed wrote lyrics and changed the focus of the song it's probably understandable that Jeff and Stone saw that as a writing contribution, and again this is probably all stuff that Mike agreed with. It's really up to the band members to decide who wrote what. I wouldn't be surprised if decisions sometimes involve band politics, and "keeping the peace" at the time the song writing credit is assigned.

LONGRD

IDgotI wrote:

Well, there's also the matter of what the members of the band agree to. In the case of Alive in particular, I believe Jeff and Stone had the music for this prior to actually playing with Mike. Chances are it was presented to Mike as their song when they asked him to play on it, and he agreed. When Ed wrote lyrics and changed the focus of the song it's probably understandable that Jeff and Stone saw that as a writing contribution, and again this is probably all stuff that Mike agreed with. It's really up to the band members to decide who wrote what. I wouldn't be surprised if decisions sometimes involve band politics, and "keeping the peace" at the time the song writing credit is assigned.

Alive is credited to Stone and Ed; Stone for music and Ed for lyrics respectively.

Ledbetterman10

LongRd. wrote:

Why don't Pearl Jam give Mikey songwriting credits for his guitar solo's?
in particular, NAIS, Alive, a few others I can't think off my head.

How does it not include in the song credit? I'm not a guitarist so I don't know if you write a solo or just play it...

if not, then should the guitarists get credited for his solo's.

Explain this to me! Thanks

more often that not, when a song is written, the writer will leave bars open for the solo to go there.

TDMize15

Songwriting credits are given to a composer of a significant portion of the melody and/or a significant portion of the lyrics.

So, as stated before, if Ed changes one line of lyrics, then he will not get songwriting credits. But when someone writes the verse melody, and someone else writes the bridge and chorus melody, they would both get songwriting credits.

The reason Mike doesn't get credit for his solos, is because this is not part of the melody or lyrics. The bass line, drum line, guitar solo, etc. is considered to be "arranging". There is a very fine line between writing, and arranging.

Think of it this way, if someone sits down and plays and sings a song solo acoustic... the melody of the guitar line (the chord progressions, riffs, etc.) would be a songwriting credit, and the lyrics he is singing would be a songwriting credit. When everything else is added (lead guitar, bass, drums)... they are simply arranging the song, not writing it.

I hope that came out clear. Peace.