I may be one of the few people that are alone in this (is that sentence even right?) – but I just have to comment on a recent “phenomenon” that has been making waves on the internet about the credibility of Nickelback.
For those of you who don’t know, Nickelback has recently been attacked, accused of “recycling music” – hence are “ripping-off” the fans by feeding them with material that has already been used.
Before I even go any further in my commentary, I suggest you listen to the NPR article about it.
First of all, I’m not a Nickelback fan. I do like some of their songs, and I think they have really good rhythm guitar sound as far as “heavy” goes. 1 I even went as far as setting up one of my patches on the GT-8 to have a Nickelback-esque sound – which I haven’t had the chance of using for my songs yet. But I feel no obligation to defend them.
In fact I’m not even defending them in this post – what I am pointing out though is that the “mentality” that relates to this “phenomenon” is unfair to judge any musician with.
For any person who makes music – we know there are a lot of factors that constitute a song. Lyrics, melody, chords, song-structure, treatment, etc. etc.
If you listened to the NPR segment, take note of the the set of discussions from 4:01 all the way to 6:22. I think the forensic musicologist hits the nail right on the head – so I don’t think I need to explain more in detail with regards to that.
What happened with Nickelback is that their verse chords were indeed, very much alike if not the same progression. The over all feel of the song and its structure also seemed to follow a formula similar to:
- Open verse with minimal instruments (preferably guitars).
- Increase tension on verse by introducing drums, bass, etc.
- Do a quick pre-chorus that transitions between the light (verse) and heavy (chours) feelings
- Insert “heavy chorus” here.
- Shift gears at the end of the chorus and return to subdued verse (to contrast the two).
- Do #2-4 again.
- Continue on to a possible “instrumental/solo”
- Revisit #1 to add more drama in preparation for last chorus.
- Let all hell break loose in last chorus till end.
Aside from the fact that a lot of songs follow this formula, the chorus, while you can interchange the lyrics of one song with the other – they’re not the same! Even the chords at the chorus are different (although they have the same “feel” which made it possible to line-them up).
If I would go with this notion of “perceived similarity,” I can probably claim that the Nine Inch Nails’ single The Hand That Feeds is a rip-off of the Ghost-Busters theme just because you can mash them up together if you tried hard enough. 2 Or we could probably say that for all “mash-up-able” songs for that matter. We all know that that obviously isn’t the case.
We even haven’t taken into account how often and in what intervals this “fraud” occured. I myself will only acknowledge Nickelback as fraudulent if “this” phenomenon happens too often and consecutively. I mean christ, the guy is making it seem that all Nickelback songs are re-hashes. Even if you spot 5 pairs of songs that are similar – considering how many songs/albums they’ve put out – I think accusing them of purposely reusing material is weak argument.
We have an awesome band in the Philippines called the Bloomfields. Their “niche” is that they play only 50’s (or was that 60’s) music. And just as the musicologist said, (and as you will definitely hear when you listen to the band) most of the songs during that era sound similar as far as song structure and basslines are concerned. Does this mean that the bands from that era were ripping each other off? Does that mean if the Bloomfields come out with an original song that’s true to the era’s sound (and will most likely sound like the rest of the songs during that time), that they were stealing material? OF COURSE NOT!
You can even probably apply that argument to Blues, which to this day has a tendency to sound similar. My friend who studies music says that blues, in and of itself, tends to follow a specific structure across the board. That structure (among other things) is an integral part of what makes the music “blues” and not funk, jazz, or any other form. Having said that – does that mean that blues artists have a tendency to recycle material? OF COURSE NOT!
Listen to John Mayer’s Comfortable… take the chorus chords, slow it down and put in a different groove on it – then try singing it with chorus of his other song Something’s Missing. Yes that’s right – they’re the same exact chords! Does that mean John Mayer is a fraud? OF COURSE NOT! In fact, if we probably took the time to research every instance that could apply to this bonehead mentality, we’d probably end up calling every single musician a fraud at one point or another.
The guy who created the comparison track submitted a demo CD which they play a song of his at the end of the NPR segment. Suffice to say it’s an awesome song. I wish I had made it myself. However, if I tried, I could sing the chorus(es) of the Nickelback songs he was slamming on his own song’s chorus as well. So all I have to say to the guy is that – while I do see your point and respect your opinion. You really have to do better than that kiddo. Try to lessen the hate. All these artists, no matter what our personal opinion of them are, just want to share their music to the world (and get a few bucks while they’re at it) – there’s no need for all this “hate.”
At best, we could be disappointed in Nickelback for not being “inspired” enough to break from their “mold.” They found their formula, and while it’s not a sin to stick to that “formula” (wether intentionally or not), their fans would appreciate it if they actually try to evolve to something better.
So I can see the guy’s frustration – but to call a fellow artist out as a fraud the way he did – that’s just low.
I’d really like to hear what other musicians think about this issue – if you’re there and are reading this, tell me what you think.
A lot of 80s metal bands did this. Pare-parehong chord progressions, iba-ibang key lang. Firehouse comes to mind immediately.
There was also a song by Skid Row called “Sweet Little Sister” that sounded an awful lot like another song by a relatively unknown band called Roxy Blue. (I may be mixing the 2 bands up. “Sweet Little Sister” may have been Roxy Blue’s, but you get the point.)
The main melodic theme of a guitar instrumental by Gary Moore, the title of which I can’t remember right now, is almost note-for-note the chorus of Asin’s song “Pagbabalik”.
And the most recent one I’ve discovered is yun palang isang version ng “Lamb of God” na kinakanta namin dati sa Claret is based sa melody nung Peter, Paul and Mary song na “The Cruel War”.
I guess what it all comes down to is, if you have enough time to waste, you can pretty much call any artist a “rip off” of someone else, including themselves. There’s only so many notes in the chromatic scale to begin with anyway. Eventually, some things are going to sound the same. It’s how you manipulate those notes into a coherent (or incoherent) melody that makes a song stand out. All in my opinion of course.
AC/DC, of course, have long been proud of making essentially the same music over and over again. I think what brought this particularly to light was that:
(a) a lot of people, especially musicians, dislike Nickelback’s pre-fabish hard-rock sound and think their songs all sound the same anyway, and
(b) as noted in the NPR documentary, Nickelback were quoted as saying something to the effect of, “We’re moving in a new direction with this new album.”
Which they weren’t, and no one really expected them to. But that’s fine. It’s not a fraud by any means, but it is amusing because at least in the abstract, and these days, musicians are supposed to be reaching for originality. And if you don’t like Nickelback, it’s a great way to rub it in.
I’ll have a funny story about this on Inside Home Recording episode #41 next week, by the way.
Ey Arjay, Derek.
You’re right (Derek), they did shoot themselves in the foot by claiming they “pushed the envelope” in their music.
Looking forward to it!
It isn’t “FRAUD”. The word is “POP.”
Hahahaha
Touche my good man! Touche!