#1
Hello,

Let me explain myself first.I was told when the bands are signed the agreement with production companies they let them to their arranger edit the band's music.Because company needs to get money.OK i understand that ofcourse its a job company need that but changing the music...I searched a little bit and what i saw is every musicians did that and keep doing.I don't understand what the f is that,i mean its your music why do you let them edit your music.I cant really understand that.It seems things are going some way which i dont understand.I discussed that with some musicians and they reacted like that was so normal and i thought wrong.So they told that was normal,that was a job like other things so they make albums according to listeners.

btw i dont know arrangers are editing too much or not,but still i cant accept that.I think that is offense to musicians,but all band which i know did that.

What do you think about that? I really wonder what if somebody try to do that to
mozart or beethoven or another classical musicians,what would them do.Would they say "oh its ok" or they would refuse all of them.btw classical musicians also composed music when they ordered from someone for money.But i dont think they did let somebodies edit their music.

What are your thoughts?
Last edited by clanthee at Sep 27, 2013,
#2
Vai once said in an interview.

Vai: From Flex-able on I’ve owned everything. And if I can give any advice to anybody, it’s keep your publishing. That’s what Frank [Zappa] told me. Never let anybody take your publishing. Of course if you do a publishing deal with somebody where you get an advance and they take half your publishing and they work your catalog, there’s nothing wrong with that. But, as far as, like, going to a record company and having them tell you that they need your publishing, or if a manager tells you that – just say no!
#4
I think it depends on how invested you are in the whole process. There is benefit to having someone help arrange your music, especially if you're bringing in instruments you're unfamiliar with or something like that. It's not really editing the musical content so much as expressing the material in the best way possible (of course, your idea of what the best way to express the idea is might be different than the arranger's).
Last edited by TheHydra at Sep 27, 2013,
#5
danny,

oh im glad you wrote that.i didnt ask that but i also wondered that.

koslak,

i guess you may right.e.g im really amateor at composing.i have a band and i compose for that.these days i have been thinking about that.so now i think i can actually accept advice from person who got many experience.at last we are composing not him,he is givin advice for make better music.i mean as amateors we can learn many things from them.that may increase our music skill.yes i think thats ok even good for a certain time.But i also meant some people do that only for make more sell so whatever i got what i need.
Last edited by clanthee at Sep 27, 2013,
#6
I would just be happy if somebody tried to make my songs sound better. That's why I like collaborating with people. Though I wouldn't let them edit my music without asking me first and showing me their ideas (though that's not going to happen because they need a band to play it first). I'm pretty sure the guys would throw some ideas and ask if you like them.

Who cares who writes the songs? If the songs sound better when somebody arranges them, why not let them arrange the songs? I'm pretty sure you can tell them that that's not what you were really after and maybe explain what you were after. It's not like they are going to change your song so that it becomes a four-chord ABABB song - I think it's more like they are giving you ideas how to improve your songs. And again, if you don't like the ideas, you can always tell them what you think and maybe they get more ideas when they understand better what you are after. And as said, not every song needs tweaking.

It's also a good thing that somebody outside of your band listens to the song and sees which parts could be improved. Sometimes some parts sound really messy and they just need a different kind of arrangement (sometimes a band doesn't think about what different instruments do in the song - everybody writes their own parts and they may not fit together that well - and this happens in our band too, though we have started talking about it a bit more).

Also, when you release an album, don't you want it to sell well? If the guys can make your songs sound more appealing to wider audiences, isn't that a good thing (unless the songs lose their original idea)?
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#7
As soon as you let someone tell you what to do with your music, that is the point when you have become a sellout. Keep true to yourself, not the record company.

If music is being made for commercial appeal, then that to me is not music.
..I was watching my death.
#8
Quote by koslack
Most bands, needless to say, are not Mozart or Beethoven.


Neither are any of the people the record companies will be hiring to edit their music. The record companies wouldn't want those guys anyway, too many notes, not enough hooks.
.
#10
Quote by timbit2006
As soon as you let someone tell you what to do with your music, that is the point when you have become a sellout. Keep true to yourself, not the record company.

If music is being made for commercial appeal, then that to me is not music.

"Sellout"... OMG.

"Not music"... OMG.

I hate these terms. Not all music is good, you have to accept that, but it's still music.

If the record companies give good ideas, why not listen to them? For example IMO Kiss made their best album "Destroyer" in 1976 when Bob Erzin produced the album. He wrote many of the songs with Kiss but IMO those are the best songs of Kiss. And they do sound like Kiss on the album. You can still stay true to "your style" and add some more "commercial appeal" to the music. And I don't even get this "I don't let anybody touch my music" things. If it sounds good, who cares who the writer is? What if you like the ideas the record company gives you?
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#11
Quote by koslack
Record companies do that so they can put out the best product possible. If the band is as talented as Mozart or Beethoven, then their music won't need editing or changing. Most bands, needless to say, are not Mozart or Beethoven.
Don't like it? Don't sign a record deal. It's pretty simple.

Question: Even if a band is as talented as the famous classical composers, how would we know? Even today, not many people are able to appreciate classical works.
#12
You must accept the fact, that listening to music is just as much of an art as writing it, and maybe even more so.

It's also a psychological thing, and they often change the song to make it as communicative as possible, for people with even the least amount of ability to understand the essence.

It's pretty much either a intellectual disability, an emotional disability, an inconvenient disability, or simply not enough experience to hear all the details present in the music.

This may sound degrading, but I just mean this objectively.

Basically if you want to write songs to please other people, you must accept that your purely aural art form now also became a partial "linguistical-pseudo-science", and there are certain things that have proved to be more effective in reaching bigger amounts of people.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
Last edited by xxdarrenxx at Sep 28, 2013,
#14
Quote by timbit2006
As soon as you let someone tell you what to do with your music, that is the point when you have become a sellout. Keep true to yourself, not the record company.

If music is being made for commercial appeal, then that to me is not music.

Like when Johnny Cash listened to Rick Rubin when Rick told Johnny what he should do with his music in the American Recordings??? What a sell out Mr Cash

Or when the Beatles listened to George Martin?

You can keep true to yourself and still listen to good suggestions from a talented professional whose job it is to capture the essence of your band.
Si
#15
Quote by koslack
I don't understand the question.

I think what he's saying is that it's hard to compare musical skill between different genres.