Bands with different pay for members

[ArtParrott]

but yeah in an ideal world contributions like that would always have the writer saying "yeah that's actually a pretty crucial part of the track now, better credit you" this must happen here and there, can anyone chuck in an example or two??

Tbf I think it would take some incredible foresight while divvying up the royalties to identify that bass line or the Be My Baby drum beat as the enduring parts of those songs, let alone that lots of people would still be listening to these songs 50-60 years later.

The old way of doing things kind of makes sense when music was composed by people like Duke Ellington or Quincy Jones, incredibly gifted people who could do anything with a few chords and a melody. It starts to fall down as things get more low brow, musically speaking. E.g  the Television situation mentioned up thread, with 3 chord songs that stripped back to their bones are significantly less than the sum of the whole.

[greenman]

The songwriting vs. arranging thing has always bugged me. If you play the guitar solo from Bohemian Rhapsody, for instance, Freddie Mercury's estate will get the publishing royalty, despite the fact that Brian May clearly came up with it.

Whenever I see a credits list and all band members are credited equally it makes me like the band more. Yes, the bulk of the song might be the main melody and chords, but there's a very good reason bands have bass and drums, and thus I think they should be rewarded as such. The song itself might not rely on them, but the version of the song that the songwriters are hoping to release does, so let's just share the money out equally eh?

I'd guessing it could partly be a bit of an outdated concept? established more back in the 40's/50's were arrangement would be somewhat less important were as popular music has clearly evolved since then towards arrangement being just as if not more important. Copywrite generally is I spose going to be biased towards bigger more established labels and songwritters though, if arrangement counted for more then tthey would get significantly less for cover versions which could claim to have altered it.

Queen you could argue I spose balances out a bit in that all the members wrote big hits at various points so there was probably alot less income imbalance, maybe why they lasted so well with a single lineup.

Led Zeppelin do have a rep for lifting other peoples songs but actually in band Jimmy Page seemed rather more generous than was the norm at the time, John Bonham got a songwritting credit on quite a lot of stuff that likely evolved though jaming, Whole Lotta Love, Heartbreaker, When The Levee Breaks, etc.

A band like Can taking that to the extreme I spose with tracks evolving almost entirely from jaming and everyone credited as a writter, at least until Czukay wasnt involved in some of it near the end.

[buzby]

Whenever I see a credits list and all band members are credited equally it makes me like the band more. Yes, the bulk of the song might be the main melody and chords, but there's a very good reason bands have bass and drums, and thus I think they should be rewarded as such. The song itself might not rely on them, but the version of the song that the songwriters are hoping to release does, so let's just share the money out equally eh?

That was exactly the reasoning behind Rob Grettion's thinking when he drew up Joy Division's first publishing agreement. Split everything equally and get on with writing songs rather than worrying and arguing over who was being paid what. As Joy Division (and later New Order) primarily came up with songs through jamming where everybody contributed, it was a sensible decision.

Prior to Republic, when they all had an equal split, the songs were credited to 'Joy Division' and later 'New Order'. From Republic onwards, after they set up Centredate Ltd. to handle the licencing of their music to Polygram and collection of royalties and the split was changed more in favour of Sumner, the songs were credited to their 4 names (Gilbert/Hook/Morris/Sumner). They all still got something, but it was evident that behind the scenes something had changed.

[The Culture Bunker]

but yeah in an ideal world contributions like that would always have the writer saying "yeah that's actually a pretty crucial part of the track now, better credit you" this must happen here and there, can anyone chuck in an example or two??

Nick Lowe cut in the rhythm section he'd got to play on 'I Love the Sound of Breaking Glass' (Andrew Bodnar and Steve Goulding, from the Rumour) in on the songwriting in appreciation of their contribution.

[phantom_power]

Where it gets particularly tricky is when we start looking at session musicians contributions. For me, Herbie Flowers absolutely deserves more than a session fee for Walk On The Wild Side: the bassline is the first thing you think of. Similarly Hal Blaine deserved some kind of recognition for the drum beat that launched a million lovesick hearts on Be My Baby. Although I don't necessarily like it, I can see the point that they're essentially acting as a contractor and their work is owned by the person who hires them. Surely if you feel enough companionship with people to have started a band with them its only right that you're all on the same level. Surely the reason you're playing with them is because they're doing things you're not capable of: unless its some kind of Prince / Trent Reznor situation and they're simply people you have facilitate you playing live. The Madness deal Brundle mentioned is the fairest way I think

I suppose the question with session musicians is whether they came up with their parts on the song or were just playing bits that were written by someone else. Those are the sorts of things that only the people in the studio would know at the time, and maybe not even then depending on how the songs came about.

[Brundle-Fly]

Suggs has said in interviews that the songwriters get 50% and the rest of the band get the other 50%. He said without the other members the songs wouldn't sound like Madness.
No wonder Mike Barson was able to chuck it all in and live out the rest of the 80s on a barge in Amsterdam as he wrote most of the early (biggest) hits.

True, and because of that high expectation on Barson's hit rate, it was the thing that allegedly drove him to a complete nervous breakdown. No wonder he fucked off to Holland with his then Dutch wife. He's an interestin one, Mike. The most musically gifted in the band but the only member not to have produced any music outside of Madness bar a couple of bits with Suggs.

[DrGreggles]

but yeah in an ideal world contributions like that would always have the writer saying "yeah that's actually a pretty crucial part of the track now, better credit you" this must happen here and there, can anyone chuck in an example or two??

Maybe not "crucial"...

[The Culture Bunker]

Maybe not "crucial"...

Paul Morley got his name on the writing credits for 'Moments in Love' and other early Art of Noise songs by coming up with the titles. 

[thecuriousorange]

Aside from writing credits, does anyone have examples of certain members earning more for gigs/appearances because they are the "attraction"? Or chummy with the right people.

[JesusAndYourBush]

I've heard stories of Andrew Eldritch staying in the hotel (while touring in the 80's) while the rest of the band had to sleep in the van.

[SteveDave]

I remember hearing that Liam and Noel stayed at the St Davids Hotel down the Bay, when they played in Cardiff but the other members of Oasis stayed at the hotel across the road from the CIA.

[mrClaypole]

True, and because of that high expectation on Barson's hit rate, it was the thing that allegedly drove him to a complete nervous breakdown. No wonder he fucked off to Holland with his then Dutch wife. He's an interestin one, Mike. The most musically gifted in the band but the only member not to have produced any music outside of Madness bar a couple of bits with Suggs.

Mike is a bit of an enigma. I get the feeling that he would rather be at a Buddhist retreat inbetween the odd lucrative Madness tour than sat in a studio.

[The Culture Bunker]

The impressive thing with Madness is that (I think I'm right in saying) all seven members of the band have their names down as writing/co-writing a top ten hit.

[iamcoop]

I remember reading in John Lydon's first autobiography that he insisted from the start that the Pistols publishing was to be split equally between everyone (I haven't bothered to check whether this is the case) as any other agreement could only result in acrimony along the way.

I agree completely with the comments about Andy Rourke earlier in the thread. How anyone can say the bassline to Well I Wonder isn't a crucial part of the song's overall composition is beyond me. He deserves a co-write credit on a fair few of their songs I'd say.

The arguments get loads of bands in the end though don't they?

It's pretty much agreed that Nirvana were on the brink of splitting before Cobain died and a few sources have said relations particularly soured after Cobain had insisted on claiming retroactive publishing increases on the stuff the band were credited to as a whole (Teen Spirit being the biggy) meaning the rest of the band would've ended up owing him money, let alone losing out on future income.

[markburgle]

Song length is also rarely accounted for. Pink Floyd's Dogs was co-credited to Gilmour and over 17 minutes long. Roger Waters otoh wrote the 3 minute Pigs on the Wing, then decided to divide it in two, meaning two separate songs and two separate royalties. He netted 4 times as much for those 3 minutes as Gilmour did for writing half of 17.

[markburgle]

I remember reading in John Lydon's first autobiography that he insisted from the start that the Pistols publishing was to be split equally between everyone

Yeah they even saw to it that Sid got a quarter of the songs written during his time in the band, although really they were Lydon/Jones tunes

[Brundle-Fly]

The impressive thing with Madness is that (I think I'm right in saying) all seven members of the band have their names down as writing/co-writing a top ten hit.

I believe that might be the case now.

[Ignatius_S]

I remember reading in John Lydon's first autobiography that he insisted from the start that the Pistols publishing was to be split equally between everyone (I haven't bothered to check whether this is the case) as any other agreement could only result in acrimony along the way....

According to Matlock, they took a vote on it and three of them voted for that arrangement.

In the last day, it's been reported that Cook and Jones are taking Lydon and Matlock to court, claiming they haven't received the correct amount of royalties.

[Ignatius_S]

Yeah they even saw to it that Sid got a quarter of the songs written during his time in the band, although really they were Lydon/Jones tunes

After Lydon's legal victory over Glitterbest, IIRC, the arrangement was that income was split four ways - he, Cook and Jones got 25% each and the remaining 25% was split between Vicious's estate and Matlock.

[iamcoop]

After Lydon's legal victory over Glitterbest, IIRC, the arrangement was that income was split four ways - he, Cook and Jones got 25% each and the remaining 25% was split between Vicious's estate and Matlock.

That seems ridiculously unfair on Matlock. He wrote the music for all their most notable songs didn't he? Sid couldn't even fucking play.

[The Mollusk]

Song length is also rarely accounted for. Pink Floyd's Dogs was co-credited to Gilmour and over 17 minutes long. Roger Waters otoh wrote the 3 minute Pigs on the Wing, then decided to divide it in two, meaning two separate songs and two separate royalties. He netted 4 times as much for those 3 minutes as Gilmour did for writing half of 17.

I find this sort of stupid shit absolutely hilarious. Doubly so since it's Floyd, what a bunch of fucking melons.

[holyzombiejesus]

Didn't Sharleen Spiteri do something quite twatty with the royalties when she was in Texas?

Also, think I read that songwriters are often forced to add pop star's names to songwriting credits if they want them recorded by the million-selling artists?

[buzby]

Also, think I read that songwriters are often forced to add pop star's names to songwriting credits if they want them recorded by the million-selling artists?

Yeah, that's pretty standard for singers like Beyonce, Adele, Katy Perry etc. to get a co-writing credit for affording the writers the privilege of using their songs. When looking for songs for a new album, teams of producers and songwriters will be flown in to attend writers camps, where they will put in separate rooms and the artist will go around them  so they can pitch their songs, which can then be worked up into demos by the producers.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/31wrjnzD1lWpnPB4rLxpkr9/5-songwriters-who-spilled-the-secrets-of-working-with-superstars

[DrGreggles]

Didn't Sharleen Spiteri do something quite twatty with the royalties when she was in Texas?

Also, think I read that songwriters are often forced to add pop star's names to songwriting credits if they want them recorded by the million-selling artists?

Happens all the time.
The songwriter knows that 50% of one of his songs "co-written" by Beyonce on her latest album is worth far more than 100% of nothing if she doesn't record it.

[markburgle]

Yeah or sometimes the artist makes some derisory alteration to justify their cut - "add a word, take a third".

Supposedly the huge drop-off in quality of Elvis' records was that as soon as his manager started insisting on a third of the publishing for "his boy" on every song he recorded, most of the really great writers took their goods elsewhere and he was left with the dregs. I think Dolly Parton had some massive dilemma over whether to let Elvis record one of her classics because of it