You are here

Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

Page 3 of 3

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:31 pm
by Sam Spoons
:clap: t'is a bit like being a musician when you grow up?

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:54 pm
by stavrakas
Hi Manhattan

Comparative analysis of the main 2 bar instrumental riff from the two pieces you posted as follows (before vox kick in):
Image

Santigold
- Key: Am
- Melodic range: E3 – A6
- Harmony (chords used in the two bar riff): Am 2nd inv / Bm 2nd inv / Dm / F 2nd inv
- Melodic rhythm on piano: Regular tuplet quavers
- Harmonic rhythm on piano: harmony (chords) change x 4 times over the two bar riff. Change of harmony happens on the off-beat resulting in a ‘syncopated harmonic rhythm’. N.b.This creates an overall syncopated groove.
- Drum rhythm: the bass drum uses a combination of syncopated quaver/semiquaver based rhythm in bar 1 whereas in bar 2 is regular using a crotchet (beat 1) and four tuplet quavers (beats 2 & 3). The snare rhythm follows a similar pattern, sounding more syncopated in bar one and regular in bar 2.
- Texture: this two bar instrumental riff consists of piano, kit (kick, snare and possibly hi hat) and sub bass. The addition of a sub base playing a counterpoint melody part against the other two instruments makes for a more interesting and varied texture (polyphonic like). Another interesting point worth mentioning here is that the sub bass on its own sounds like it’s in the key of C (play it on its own and you will see what I mean!). The notes of the sub bass can be heard more clearly if you pitch shift the track by 1 8va. This creates an ambiguous relationship with the implied key of the riff which is Am.
- Tempo: 77bpm approx.

Not alone yet
- Key: Am (implied)
- Melodic range: C-1 – C6
- Harmony (chords used in the two bar riff): Dm 1st inv / C 2nd inv / Am 2nd inv
- Melodic rhythm on piano: Regular tuplet quavers
- Harmonic rhythm on piano: harmony (chords) change x 3 times over the two bar riff. Change of harmony happens on the down beat resulting in a ‘regular harmonic rhythm’ (i.e. non-syncopated). N.b. This creates an overall regular groove.
- Drum rhythm: the bass drum uses a combination of syncopated quaver/semiquaver based rhythm and is exactly the same in bar 1 as in bar 2. The snare rhythm sounds only on beats 2 and 4 and uses a combination of regular downbeat crotchet and dotted quaver on beats 2 and four respectively.
- Texture: this two bar instrumental riff consists of piano and kit only making for a simpler homophonic texture. No bass or sub bass here.
- Tempo: 81bpm approx.

On paper then once you begin to break down and analyse the constituent elements, you realise that the two pieces are very different in many respects. The similarities, and possibly the ones that would fool some people into thinking that the two pieces are very similar, lie with:
1. the melodic rhythm on the piano right hand (i.e. the tuplet quavers which are in the same melodic range around A6 and sounding close together - 3rds & 4ths apart) and
2. the implied key in the main 2 bar riff of Am.
3. the roughly similar slow tempo

Everything else, as it can be seen from the music score, is very different, particularly the groove I would say (i.e. syncopate in Santigold and regular in yours).

Hope this helps in some way.

Stavros

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:51 am
by manhattan
stavrakas wrote:Hi Manhattan

Comparative analysis of the main 2 bar instrumental riff from the two pieces you posted as follows (before vox kick in):
Image

Santigold
- Key: Am
- Melodic range: E3 – A6
- Harmony (chords used in the two bar riff): Am 2nd inv / Bm 2nd inv / Dm / F 2nd inv
- Melodic rhythm on piano: Regular tuplet quavers
- Harmonic rhythm on piano: harmony (chords) change x 4 times over the two bar riff. Change of harmony happens on the off-beat resulting in a ‘syncopated harmonic rhythm’. N.b.This creates an overall syncopated groove.
- Drum rhythm: the bass drum uses a combination of syncopated quaver/semiquaver based rhythm in bar 1 whereas in bar 2 is regular using a crotchet (beat 1) and four tuplet quavers (beats 2 & 3). The snare rhythm follows a similar pattern, sounding more syncopated in bar one and regular in bar 2.
- Texture: this two bar instrumental riff consists of piano, kit (kick, snare and possibly hi hat) and sub bass. The addition of a sub base playing a counterpoint melody part against the other two instruments makes for a more interesting and varied texture (polyphonic like). Another interesting point worth mentioning here is that the sub bass on its own sounds like it’s in the key of C (play it on its own and you will see what I mean!). The notes of the sub bass can be heard more clearly if you pitch shift the track by 1 8va. This creates an ambiguous relationship with the implied key of the riff which is Am.
- Tempo: 77bpm approx.

Not alone yet
- Key: Am (implied)
- Melodic range: C-1 – C6
- Harmony (chords used in the two bar riff): Dm 1st inv / C 2nd inv / Am 2nd inv
- Melodic rhythm on piano: Regular tuplet quavers
- Harmonic rhythm on piano: harmony (chords) change x 3 times over the two bar riff. Change of harmony happens on the down beat resulting in a ‘regular harmonic rhythm’ (i.e. non-syncopated). N.b. This creates an overall regular groove.
- Drum rhythm: the bass drum uses a combination of syncopated quaver/semiquaver based rhythm and is exactly the same in bar 1 as in bar 2. The snare rhythm sounds only on beats 2 and 4 and uses a combination of regular downbeat crotchet and dotted quaver on beats 2 and four respectively.
- Texture: this two bar instrumental riff consists of piano and kit only making for a simpler homophonic texture. No bass or sub bass here.
- Tempo: 81bpm approx.

On paper then once you begin to break down and analyse the constituent elements, you realise that the two pieces are very different in many respects. The similarities, and possibly the ones that would fool some people into thinking that the two pieces are very similar, lie with:
1. the melodic rhythm on the piano right hand (i.e. the tuplet quavers which are in the same melodic range around A6 and sounding close together - 3rds & 4ths apart) and
2. the implied key in the main 2 bar riff of Am.
3. the roughly similar slow tempo

Everything else, as it can be seen from the music score, is very different, particularly the groove I would say (i.e. syncopate in Santigold and regular in yours).

Hope this helps in some way.

Stavros

Yes, that is exactly what I was looking for!

That's incredible work, I very much appreciate your efforts on this for me.

While I'm not sure what I could offer you in thanks, feel free to let me know if you think of something.

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 10:53 am
by blinddrew
Really helpful post Stavros :) :clap: :clap: :clap:

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:54 pm
by scw
Outstanding Stavros!

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:57 pm
by The Bunk
Stavros, that is astonishing!!
Post of the year 2019 already won I reckon!

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:05 pm
by CS70
Sam Spoons wrote::clap: t'is a bit like being a musician when you grow up?

Yeah I heard you can't so them at the same time :D

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 7:20 pm
by stavrakas
manhattan wrote:Yes, that is exactly what I was looking for!
That's incredible work, I very much appreciate your efforts on this for me.
While I'm not sure what I could offer you in thanks, feel free to let me know if you think of something.

You are welcome Mahattan. I am pleased I was able to add to all the other pieces of advice
you received on your very interesting post and shed some light from a music theory POV.
Copyright is a fascinating topic and a tricky one to get one's head around but I
hope you are a little bit more confident now to argue your case if need be.

I am sure you will find a way to repay the favour forward in the future by kindly sharing your knowledge and expertise with other forum members of this special music community.

All best

Stavros

Re: Music Theory and Copyright Infringement

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 7:34 pm
by Eddy Deegan
stavrakas wrote:
manhattan wrote:Yes, that is exactly what I was looking for!
That's incredible work, I very much appreciate your efforts on this for me.
While I'm not sure what I could offer you in thanks, feel free to let me know if you think of something.

You are welcome Mahattan. I am pleased I was able to add to all the other pieces of advice
you received on your very interesting post and shed some light from a music theory POV.
Copyright is a fascinating topic and a tricky one to get one's head around but I
hope you are a little bit more confident now to argue your case if need be.

I am sure you will find a way to repay the favour forward in the future by kindly sharing your knowledge and expertise with other forum members of this special music community.

All best

Stavros

Nothing to add, just 'nicely done' and a belated welcome to the forums Stavros :wave: