Does it really matter if it was Plagiarised or Sampled?

[Reilly]

Does it? I mean, does eht?!

 

Everyone seems to be considering that Coldplay sampled the original song, possibly because it's slightly less embarrassing, but the song (Ritmo de la Noche) that sampled the original sounds exactly like Coldplay's, the original doesn't, it's similar but I think not quite enough to say Coldplay had sampled it. As for Ritmo de la Noche, it's exactly the same with synth on it, can people hear properly?

 

And now I've found another thing that annoys me about Coldplay, they've thrown open a debate about what is 'credible' sampling, and to generalise, there are basically two typical points of view I've seen so far today:

 

Point A: Sampling is part of the progression of music and an artist has the freedom to improve on music from the past by stamping their own influence on it and making their original mark, it happens all the time and besides, because Coldplay have paid a tiny fraction of their earnings to credit the original this means its NOT plagiarism and for some reason this makes stealing music inexplicably fine.

 

Point B: FUCK THIS they stole music again how dare anyone make music that isn't theirs why not just give up and stop making us listen to recycled garbage! D:

 

But both opinions are pretty null-void, though the first is pretty reasonable I suppose if you like the song. There really isn't anything wrong with sampling a song, there's many examples of when an artist samples to make a really interesting twist and makes you forget about the original and look at the hook successfully from a different point of view, so I feel that if an artist hears a part of a song, and develops a new, original take on it, and they feel that it sounds SO good that it's actually worth going into that often grubby world of "sampling" (Stealing), and it turns out they were right to release it, then fine. In fact even if it turns out horribly, at least if they tried to make a twist on it, then that's something, you can't say that about Coldplay on this song- and I'll get to that in a minute.

 

There's nothing wrong with what "unoriginal hiphop tits" do, there's many examples of great samples (word?), Kanye's "Touch the Sky", Jay-Z "Hard Knock Life", and countless examples of horrible samples (I DARE you to go listen to Akon's "Lonely" I FRICKEN DARE YOU). So I don't think that just because it's a sample it should be instantly dismissed, so I instantly dismiss Point B above.

 

As for Point A, there is no original twist on it, there's a sample, and then there's Chris Martin horrifically trying to sing along to the exact same tune and fit words around it (Which is why the lyrics are so bad and flow terribly), they didn't just sample a part of a song they used that part to copy-paste vocals along with it and build half the song around it, until the build-up that goes absolutely nowhere. So not only could they not think of an original shitty dance beat (Which any retard from Basshunter to Cascada to a million other euro-dance artists do on a regular basis) they couldn't think of something to add to that, apart from a riff that could only sound more out of place if Jonny had set his guitar effect to "Nyan".

 

So for me, I can see what people mean by saying it's perfectly fine to sample, but where was the invention from that exactly? Chris just sings the exact same notes (Or in-between notes as it is Chris) as the sample, and it sounds truely frightening.

 

Therefore Point A doesn't apply either, and on top of that especially the point that for some reason because they credited the original and therefore not officially plagiarism that this is fine. It doesn't matter, Coldplay are worth millions, so it's not like moneys an issue (As it is with new artists who actually do plagiarise) and they have an audience of millions, they know that people will quickly pick up on a track they have stolen, so they or their legal team are not stupid enough to try and 'steal' music, whether it's plagiarism or not doesn't matter.

 

There's nothing added, they just took a sample and lazily slapped a vocal over it, with some horribly generic lyrics and buzz words about "The kids dance" and "Rebel song" to give this impression that Chris is thinking on another level- Chris is a fucking idiot.

[RunForTheHills]

.

[Lore]

Plagiarised, sampled, original or whatever, it's still a mediocre song, if they won't write original music at least they could put some effort in the lyrics.

[Italian Plastic]

i can't be bothered reading this

 

 

is it funny?

[Famous Old Painter]

Don't care.

[2GreenEyes]

Seriously, there's just no need in insulting the people that worked hard to make this song

 

Have you any idea how much it hurts to read someone claiming you suck at what you do and calling you an idiot, just by listening to a piece of music you made and put your heart and faith in and you took a risk with by not doing what people expected.

[TimBou]

Well I like the song a lot... enough said! :)

[Lore]

Seriously, there's just no need in insulting the people that worked hard to make this song

 

Have you any idea how much it hurts to read someone claiming you suck at what you do and calling you an idiot, just by listening to a piece of music you made and put your heart and faith in and you took a risk with by not doing what people expected.

 

I understand that but when you are an artist you need to get used to criticism because even if your art is perfect, not everyone will like it. (this is far from being perfect in my opinion though, I think I'd call Amsterdam perfect or maybe I Ran Away, but not this.)

[Reilly]

i can't be bothered reading this

 

 

is it funny?

 

No. But Eddilly, nonetheless.

 

Seriously, there's just no need in insulting the people that worked hard to make this song

 

Have you any idea how much it hurts to read someone claiming you suck at what you do and calling you an idiot, just by listening to a piece of music you made and put your heart and faith in and you took a risk with by not doing what people expected.

 

Like, seriously?!

 

I don't think there is any heart in this song, he took a sample, technologicalified it, and simply repeated the same tune as the sample, with his voice, because that's very easy to do, and very lazy. My point was that they didn't just take a sample and build a song around it, the sample is basically the song.

[coldplay_is_louve.]

Plagiarised, sampled, original or whatever, it's still a mediocre song, if they won't write original music at least they could put some effort in the lyrics.

 

This.

 

 

And for me it does matter a bit, because I see it as them getting lazy. The lyrics being another part of my beliefs.

[Debs Wild]

I haven't read past first post admittedly but for your info guys:

 

Chris was inspired to write Every Teardrop Is A Waterfall after hearing some chords in a nightclub scene in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's film Biutiful (2010).

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biutiful

 

The chords in the film are part of a track that is based on "I Go To Rio" written by Peter Allen and Adrienne Anderson, released by Peter Allen in 1976.

 

YouTube it. It's way before the clip being banded around and... the song HAS credited the ORIGINAl composer (Allen, not the latter dance tune).

[LoryABjerre]

I listen and that is typically Ireland folklore with U2 - I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight

 

now it's Scottish dances, folklore, wedding, classic with the original of sound of Coldplay with the new song

[Reilly]

Well the main point is that it doesn't really matter if it's been credited or not, I don't really get why people, when they hear it's been credited are like "OH! Phew its not plagiarism! So that makes it not suck!".

 

And I mentioned this earlier, it sounds a little bit like the original, but exactly like Ritmo de la Noche. I really think they heard the shitty embarrassing version first, found out it was sampled from something slightly more respected, and pretended their cultured.

 

Doesn't really matter though, just a hunch.

[ceader'schild]

Plagiarised, sampled, original or whatever, it's still a mediocre song, if they won't write original music at least they could put some effort in the lyrics.

 

Well said Lore.

[Debs Wild]

Sorry but that's a) ridiculous. b) not true.

 

 

Well the main point is that it doesn't really matter if it's been credited or not, I don't really get why people, when they hear it's been credited are like "OH! Phew its not plagiarism! So that makes it not suck!".

 

And I mentioned this earlier, it sounds a little bit like the original, but exactly like Ritmo de la Noche. I really think they heard the shitty embarrassing version first, found out it was sampled from something slightly more respected, and pretended their cultured.

 

Doesn't really matter though, just a hunch.

[PianoRocker]

No plagrism.. that would be very stupid for a first single release.... it w'd be stupid at all to steal songs or parts.

 

As the credits say, it's sampled because they do credit the originals artists.

 

But the basspart at the end sounds close to Firestarter from The Prodigy :lol:

Not that it's a hard and a bass part everyone could come up with.. the rhythm is exactly the same! :P

[Reilly]

Sorry but that's a) ridiculous. b) not true.

 

I haven't heard the song from the film you mentioned, but as I said, why does it sound kindof similar, not in chord progression but in timing, to the original but exactly, precisely, like the song that sampled it? I find that really strange.

[cheeseman66]

Was forced to listen to this god awful song by emp today. What has been heard cannot be unheard. ever.

 

On a side note why would the coldplay PA bother coming here if she was A) not going to make any real valid point or B) pick up on ANYTHING relevant or being said.

 

Stop disputing the plagerism and start explaining the lack of creativity or effort in the song, if you cant justify those points i suggest you go and make PA magic else where.

[Reilly]

I was kindof mystified, it's been cleared up a dozen times today that the original artist has been credited, so that really has nothing to do with what I wrote, there's already a Plagiarism thread which claimed it was plagiarising, not sure why she couldn't clear it up in there.

 

My point is, plagiarism or credited or not, focus on the fact that they've used another artists work and simply copied a vocal over it to the exact same tune instead of putting a new dimension on it.

[thetak1]

At first I hated the song (Especially the line 'I turn my music up, I put my records on'), but now it has grown on me. A lot.

 

Coldplay are never lazy. If you don't like a song, it doesn't mean the band is stupid enough to release a 'lazy' song as the first single, it just means that you don't like the song.

[MeriCri]

basically I don't like the song ... and the lyric as well (except the first sentence), it's too "simple" I think; but I love Chris when he sings,anyway. And the drum at the end is great! :D

[Reilly]

Coldplay are never lazy. If you don't like a song, it doesn't mean the band is stupid enough to release a 'lazy' song as the first single, it just means that you don't like the song.

 

Why did Chris sample a song and then just apply his voice to the notes in the exact same way?

 

Imagine sheet music infront of you, and simplify it to basic notes, the sample and Chris' voice would follow exact correlation and timing, so he used a sample and just sung over it to the exact same tune. That's freaking lazy.

[roche714]

im curious where you hear that the whole coldplay song sounds like Rio.I only hear the beginning seems the same..The rest of it has a beautiful melody..

[Dan 6N]

The way I see it is like this:

 

Coldplay wrote ETIAW and after doing so they realised that the chord progression/sequence they used was very similar to one in I Go To Rio by Peter Allen. They then decided that they should get permission to use the chord progression to avoid any ridiculous court cases like the Joe Satriani/Viva one. While they were asking for permission they thought "why not actually sample the original to avoid confusion". That's just my theory but it makes sense in my head lol.

 

No I don't think it matters in the slightest that they sample another track. We all know that Chris is more than capable of writing far more complicated music than that of which they have sampled so it's not like it's a case of struggling to come up with anything decent and deciding to use that....

[Debs Wild]

Well I had never heard either song and only heard the '76 original in the studio as point of reference (erm, and it's just a couple of chords). As for the other version. never heard that until just now. Not strange at all. Look at the history of music...

 

 

I haven't heard the song from the film you mentioned, but as I said, why does it sound kindof similar, not in chord progression but in timing, to the original but exactly, precisely, like the song that sampled it? I find that really strange.