How can you steal a band's "sound"?

[cooterbrown]

 

How to steal a band's sound? Ask Stone Temple Pilots re: Pearl Jam . . .

 

 

Worst comparison, ever.

[backtoblue]

 

Worst comparison, ever.

 

 

I'll confess that the first time I heard "Plush" I thought it was a new Pearl Jam single. I later realized that they were just being produced to sound grunge and they really came into their own on their second and third albums. "Tiny Music" still blows me away. Better than any Pearl Jam album I've heard. Too bad they imploded.

 

Anyway, another point can be made about a player's nuance and feel making it difficult to truly cop another band's sound. I think that nuance can be lost in the mix with enough distortion and effects and overblown production. For example, I think the Smashing Pumpkins sound was relatively easy to steal. Can anyone actually hear Billy Corgan's delicate nuances on most of their material?

 

Unfortunately, it seems these days that a lot of band's songs are there to serve their sound, where it used to be the other way around.

[MusicalSchizo]

I think the reason people say that Weiland ripped off Eddie Vedder (or in broader terms, STP ripped off Pearl Jam) is all because of the "Plush" video. As soon as Scott goes, "and I FEEL iiiiiiiiiiiiiiit, heah!" it sounds uncomfortable close to how Eddie sings on "Even Flow": "FREEEE-ziiinngg...rest-his-head-onapillow-made-of-con-crete.....oh yeah..."

That's a good point...even though other than that melody bit, "Plush" could never be a Pearl Jam song - it sounds (guitar and bass tones, drum sound, chord progression, etc) completely different.

I think even if some bands want to try and get a sound (like Coldplay channelling U2), they have enough of their creativity that it will still come out different than whoever they are trying to emulate.

This - 100%

It's like when two drummers try to play the exact same part - it never sounds exactly the same because they're different people.
Brian V.

[MusicalSchizo]

Ha Ha - if anyone was ripping off AIC, it was Godsmack...but anyway:

I've always thought of Godsmack as the retarded child of AIC and post-Justice Metallica.

Youre missing my point: Of course no two players are ever going to be exactly alike ----but Regardless of any of the nuances or individual performances that you are describing, all those bands formulas are identical....Thats what makes them all sound similar enough for any given listener to lump them all in one box

But you seem to be okay with the idea that STP was ripping off Pearl Jam's sound, and I demonstrated that it was really unlikely. I think you missed the point of my argument completely.

Its not like the 70s where Boston, ELO, Styx, Queen, and Fleetwood Mac could all be on Billboard's Rock charts at the same time and one would have a hard time accusing those bands having used the same formulaic approach: they all sounded nothing remotely like each other

Well, it's not a fair comparison at all. They all had very different-sounding singers. Talk about Bad Company, Foreigner, Billy Squier, Sammy Hagar...I bet there are a lot of yahoos out there who can't tell those apart as easily.

Since the 80s, Its just the way the business is: Find something that sells, figure out the formula, and clone it as many times over to sell more of it until the demand runs out

This I agree with, however, I don't think it applies to this Pearl Jam/STP argument at all. Sorry.

Sorry, dude, but the microscoping of these bands "differences" in no way shape or form justifies each as trying to do something original or unique....Pearl Jam, STP, Creed, Days Of The New, and Staind were all following similar genetic blueprints .....

Nothing to do with my argument at all.

You're absolutely right about the bands that followed in the late 90s, because they were directly influenced by these bands, but completely wrong about the hard rock/grunge bands that came out between 91 and 93. "Sound stealing" doesn't happen that quickly. There is no way in hell STP was influenced by Pearl Jam or stole their sound. That's my point.

Just because "Joe Six-pack" can't tell the difference between the bands is immaterial and completely unrelated to my argument.

STP did not rip off Pearl Jam - Period. I guess we just disagree.

Even if they sometimes sound like they did, it's just a coincidence because of their shared influences.
Brian V.

[wades_keys]

Ask Bill Monroe.

I had the pleasure of seeing him perform two different times at Bluegrass Festivals.

He was clearly the star of the show.

His sound and connection to the roots of appalachia - timeless and without peer.

[DevilRaysFan]

Well, it's not a fair comparison at all. They all had very different-sounding singers. .

 

 

Its a perfectly fair comparison because you just made my point: Those bands back then didnt follow the same formula for success...........

[MusicalSchizo]

You missed my point completely You obviously missed my earlier post Post 4 on the previous page where I said "sound stealing" has less to do with the artists than the label, production, and management behind them.....My guess is that STP didnt originally try to sound like Pearl Jam at all but the powers-that-be in their label/PR-organization recognized enough raw similarities in them and did everything they could in production to throw them on the then-money-making Pearl Jam bus: Its STP using the Pearl Jam formula, more than likely by way of label/management/production as opposed to the artists themselves

No, I got that. I didn't bother mentioning it because it didn't have anything to do with the argument.

My point was that Pearl Jam was barely even out there when STP was signed to Reprise. Core came out a mere nine months after Pearl Jam had their first play on MTV (during Headbanger's Ball, IIRC, weirdly enough), and Pearl Jam really didn't get big until Summer of '92, mere months before Core was released...you think they really gave a {censored} about Pearl Jam at that point, while the record was being mixed and mastered? I seriously doubt it.

A better argument could be made that the slick-but-gloomy sound of Nirvana's record inspired Core sonically, since that one at least had been out for a while and Nirvana got huge in late '91.

You can almost hear the executive producer saying: "OK, keep the vocals out of the high register-have him change that melody-line.....Absolutely no "happy" songs: Dont use "happy" chords, like a Maj7th, unless its a passing chord. I want the mood of this album dark and somber.....You, engineer, dont gate those drums: let them sound more raw.......Take out those guitar solos: absolutely no shredding: If there needs to be a 'musical passage' have the guitarist play something rhythmically. Tell him to use double-stops......The bass is too clean: Double track it and use tube overdrive on the "dirty" channel and mix that into the clean channel for more 'growl'....Etc...ad nauseum"

I get your point, and I don't necessarily disagree that it happens on a regular basis...I just don't BUY it regarding STP, but certainly I get it.

I dont think any of those bands sound alike by mere 'coincidence' this has been my point all along

But lumping the ones who CREATED that sound, like STP and Pearl Jam, in with the ones who STOLE it, like Days of the New, Creed, etc., is foolish, and that's my point on that particular issue.

Its a perfectly fair comparison because you just made my point: Those bands back then didnt follow the same formula for success...........

You just THINK I made it. I don't disagree with that part of your point, but you're just setting up strawmen and not arguing the real issue:

Did STP steal Pearl Jam's sound?

Give a straight answer to that one.

I maintain that the argument that Pearl Jam's sound was stolen by Brendan O'Brien and STP is utter bull{censored} and foolishness. The time frame is too short between Pearl Jam's relevance and STP's writing and recording of their debut.

Nits picked.
Brian V.

[DevilRaysFan]

Did STP steal Pearl Jam's sound? Give a straight answer to that one. I maintain that the argument that Pearl Jam's sound was stolen by Brendan O'Brien and STP is utter bull{censored} and foolishness. The time frame is too short between Pearl Jam's relevance and STP's writing and recording of their debut. Nits picked. Brian V.

Who knows? More than that: Who cares? I do know that that they didnt go out of their way to veer away from that 90s formula....and that those bands sound more alike than a lot of other bands do from other decades........ Thats really all I need to know to place those bands in the "Trendy bandwagon" category for myself. This is neither good or bad, depending if I like the music or not....... I like STP's early stuff, but I appreciate their later material for trying to find their own way.........

[New Trail]

 

.....Did STP steal Pearl Jam's sound? ......Give a straight answer to that one......

 

 

As an outside unaware of the innerworkings of the Seattle music scene in the 90's, yes. Pearl Jam came out, they sounded like they sounded, then STP came out and they sounded like Pearl Jam. Maybe they were all working in and around a primordal swirling mist of intertwining music influences and just happened to independently come up with the same band line-up and practically the same sound, but it didn't seem that way. But who cares, and it doesn't matter anyway. I know people who hate, or maybe don't hate, but are apathetic about PJ and other Seattle bands, but love STP. Personally, I think Nirvana is the only one of those bands that matters, anyway, since they influenced all of the others. Also, to me Creed and the other newer bands mentioned were second wave. They took what Nirvana, PJ, and STP did and watered it down yet again, which directly led to Daughtry and some of the other post-grunge bands of today. It all leads back to Nirvana anyway.

[MusicalSchizo]

Who knows? More than that: Who cares?

When people make ignorant proclamations like STP ripping off Pearl Jam, it's appropriate to the discussion. You kept talking around it making some pet "anti-music-industry" points (which I agreed with in principle if not in application) instead of actually addressing the topic.

 

I do know that that they didnt go out of their way to veer away from that 90s formula....

Or is it the formula that was a stew of the bands they loved? Was there a "90s formula" when they recorded that record in 1992?

 

and that those bands sound more alike than a lot of other bands do from other decades........ Thats really all I need to know to place those bands in the "Trendy bandwagon" category for myself. This is neither good or bad, depending if I like the music or not....... I like STP's early stuff, but I appreciate their later material for trying to find their own way.........

Well, they dried everything out sonically after that first record...he started using a Telecaster and smaller amps a lot more, and on a lot of tracks, they got weirder and less "traditional rock"...which was really good for them.

 

And Pearl Jam got Brendan O'Brien for Vs.

Brian V.

[MusicalSchizo]

As an outside unaware of the innerworkings of the Seattle music scene in the 90's, yes. Pearl Jam came out, they sounded like they sounded, then STP came out and they sounded like Pearl Jam. Maybe they were all working in and around a primordal swirling mist of intertwining music influences and just happened to independently come up with the same band line-up and practically the same sound, but it didn't seem that way.

 

I'm sorry, how many guitarists are there in Pearl Jam? How many in STP? Not the same band line-up. And they were all big classic rock (The Who, Zep, Stones, etc.) and proto-punk (MC5, Stooges, etc.) fans. Of course there's going to be a similarity.

 

 

But who cares, and it doesn't matter anyway. I know people who hate, or maybe don't hate, but are apathetic about PJ and other Seattle bands, but love STP. Personally, I think Nirvana is the only one of those bands that matters, anyway, since they influenced all of the others. Also, to me Creed and the other newer bands mentioned were second wave. They took what Nirvana, PJ, and STP did and watered it down yet again, which directly led to Daughtry and some of the other post-grunge bands of today. It all leads back to Nirvana anyway.

 

 

I do agree in part about the Nirvana thing, and I think that a band that sounded like STP got signed in '92 more because they ALREADY had something that reminded Atlantic of this new sound and maybe some sounds from their past they hadn't heard in a while, and was appropriate to the new direction rock music was taking, rather than being specifically tailored to fit this "new world"...Brendan O'Brien was pretty much only slightly known as a producer when he produced Core.

 

Brian V.

[DevilRaysFan]

Or is it the formula that was a stew of the bands they loved? Was there a "90s formula" when they recorded that record in 1992? .

 

 

I think that the corporate-rock industry-at-large was well aware way before 1992 of the impact the Flanel-Seattle scene (as one of many possibilities) could have on the music industry to fill the void that would be left by the hair-band era...Yeah, I think its definitely possible that they saw what was happening there, and were preparing the strategies/formula(s) for the grunge-movement as a possibility for rock's next big thing, perhaps even 'cultivating' it for the masses. ....and, yes, this is just speculation

[wades_keys]

I think that the corporate-rock industry-at-large was well aware way before 1992 of the impact the Flanel-Seattle scene (as one of many possibilities) could have on the music industry to fill the void that would be left by the hair-band era...Yeah, I think its definitely possible that they saw what was happening there, and were preparing the strategies/formula(s) for the grunge-movement as a possibility for rock's next big thing, perhaps even 'cultivating' it for the masses. ....and, yes, this is just speculation

 

Agreed.

 

I still remember seeing Mudhoney and Sonic Youth get glowing write-ups in the trendy rags well before the grunge movement really got mainstream.

 

They saw it coming for sure.

[DevilRaysFan]

Agreed. I still remember seeing Mudhoney and Sonic Youth get glowing write-ups in the trendy rags well before the grunge movement really got mainstream. They saw it coming for sure.

 

 

In Seattle, the grunge-thang had taken form by 1988/89...........plenty of time for the industry to study its $ potential. The city of Seattle's indie movement had already test-marketed the grunge movement (with positive results) without any expense to any corporate labels...So, why not?

 

By 1992, it was impacting the mainstream (Which, to the rest of the country that was not familiar with the Seattle scene, werent clones but actually something 'new and fresh' ). In circa 1993 - and having survived the 80s, the Nirvana/Mother Love Bone (Pearl Jam) formula seemed new and fresh to me: living in Florida, I had no idea that sound had been going on during the late 80s-years in Seattle....This is why I think STP followed that formula. A 1992 debut release date means nothing to prove any 'originality' of that sound if the industry had been tracking the grunge-movement many years before and were now setting newer acts into motion (such as STP) to capitilize on it

 

In all fairness, I think STP are a great bunch of players, and probably the best of that bunch IMHO (along with Soundgarden)...but I really think management and label were guiding the artistic control on their early stuff and had them stick to that formula: hence the "sound-stealing" arguments.

[MusicalSchizo]

In Seattle, the grunge-thang had taken form by 1988/89...........plenty of time for the industry to study its $ potential. The city of Seattle's indie movement had already test-marketed the grunge movement (with positive results) without any expense to any corporate labels...So, why not?

But the corporate labels were still signing a lot of bands who looked and sounded like Winger and Warrant in 90-91. I guess they were hedging their bets. But none of those "previous-edition" hard rock bands changed their look until 1993 or so. I guess I just have doubts that corporate labels were on the front edge of this in any way. I think they were dragged into it kicking and screaming because Nirvana turned out to be such a success...even though for rock radio and MTV, Alice In Chains came first...

Ah, the rise of "The Alternative Nation." Ha ha ha

By 1992, it was impacting the mainstream (Which, to the rest of the country that was not familiar with the Seattle scene, werent clones but actually something 'new and fresh' ). In circa 1993 - and having survived the 80s, the Nirvana/Mother Love Bone (Pearl Jam) formula seemed new and fresh to me: living in Florida, I had no idea that sound had been going on during the late 80s-years in Seattle....This is why I think STP followed that formula. A 1992 debut release date means nothing to prove any 'originality' of that sound if the industry had been tracking the grunge-movement many years before and were now setting newer acts into motion (such as STP) to capitilize on it

I think STP was MARKETED as the next Seattle band not from Seattle, but I seriously doubt it had an impact on their songwriting or production, so musically, I don't think they're thieves in any way.

But their look was appropriate for the time they came out, even if some aspects were a little ahead of the curve. Not many people in hard rock had short hair slicked back like a gangster in 1992 or dressed like a lost member of the rat pack on vacation in Palm Springs like Robert DeLeo did. As I recall, there weren't a lot of lead singers with short hair at that point, either, even in grunge bands.

In all fairness, I think STP are a great bunch of players, and probably the best of that bunch IMHO (along with Soundgarden)...but I really think management and label were guiding the artistic control on their early stuff and had them stick to that formula: hence the "sound-stealing" arguments.

I clearly see where you're coming from now.

I appreciate you discussing this with me and not being a dick. It seems rare on here these days. It almost always takes a turn down "Asshole Rd.".

I guess it's because the adults are discussing it, rather than the children.
Brian V.

[RobRoy]

Well, "stealing" might not be the best term, but... Taking one or two very distinctive sonic elements from one band and and blending with a few distinctive sonic elements from another band can be a good way to create a cool sound of your "own", especially if you add something of yourself into the mix. It's when you take a whole bunch of signature sonic elements from ONE band, without counterbalance, that you open yourself up to "stealing" accusations.

 

Sheryl Crow's song Steve McQueen has some very clear "Steve Miller Band" stuff in it.

[The Slasher]

Kidnapping their producer and stealing their gear would be a start