Bob Dylan, “Ballad of a Thin Man”, released August 30, 1965
Stephen King (as Richard Bachman), “Thinner”, published November 19, 1984
“Ballad of a Thin MAN”
“Richard BachMAN”
“THINner”
The plagiarism plot thickens.
Being a long-time Spirit fan, I just had to enter this discussion.
Suppose someone writes a song that becomes a colossal hit and he earns big bucks, huge fame, legendary rock status, etc. Then someone claims the song has some similarity to a folk song that is traditionally sung by a tribe in Samoa. As others have said in this discussion every song will no doubt sound like some other song. Maybe that’s true. Now, let’s suppose the author of that song spent the first 30 years of his life in Samoa? Does the appearance of plagiarism become just a tad stronger?
Heck, the song “Taurus” was written in 1968. Led Zeppelin toured with Spirit in 1968 and 1969 and Led Zeppelin were quite aware of Spirit’s first album on which the song “Taurus” appears. A few years later Led Zeppelin releases a song that sounds very similar to “Taurus”. Well I guess every song is bound to sound like some other one.
Gee I just saw the posting by aceplace57
Gee, it’s nice to see that even though Robert Plant despises that song, he somehow manages the courage to sing it so as not to disappoint his fans.
Heck, Mr Plant, would you rather be “singing” “you want fries with that?”
Other than the StH guitar intro (which, imho, is vaguely similar to Triumph) there doesn’t seem to be much similarity between the two songs. To claim that California deserves a full songwriting credit on StH ignores the fact that StH has lyrics the other doesn’t, that StH has multiple distinct sections and the other doesn’t, etc.
I’ll accept* that the intro guitar of StH was inspired by the Spirit song, but all the other elements of StH that makes it the anthemist of anthems… none of that is in Triumph. So to claim “LZ stole StH from this poor band” means that you have to ignore every element of StH that is not the guitar riff.
*Like my acceptance means anything, but still…
This is one of the most hollow (not to mention clichéd) musical arguments going.
Here’s a challenge (which I’ll lay money you won’t accept). If “there’s nothing new or original in music,” tell you what you do:
-
Pick your favorite year in rock or pop music
-
Pick 50 songs at random that were reasonably good-sized hits that year.
-
For each of those songs, find one or more previously released songs that correspond musically with them to even a fraction of a degree that any of the well-documented Led Zeppelin thefts do.
Remember, we’re not talking about a short sequence of notes that happen to have the same relationship to each other in both songs — we’re talking whole, lengthy passages that correspond musically (and lest we forget, often lyrically as well).
For each of these songs, point out the specific actionable passages — those which the composers of the earlier songs could cite in a lawsuit without getting laughed out of the courtroom.
Fact: hundreds of thousands, probably millions of songs, have been composed, an undetermined number of which became widely popular. Of that undetermined number, only a tiny percentage have ever had such an exact correspondence with an earlier one as to constitute grounds for a court case.
And of that tiny percentage, an even more infinitesimal percentage have risen to the standards of thievery set by Led Zeppelin.
Looking through his setlists, I don’t see Stairway at all.
John T
I’m assuming that when you stated “Triumph” you were referring to the song “Taurus”?
I agree. Page took the A minor-based descending chromatic chord sequence, fiddled with it a bit (that D major chord in the fourth measure; emphasizing the F major 7th, which is basically Am/C)…and then changed its function, into a subtle foreshadowing of the entire song.
One way to analyze the song is by seeing it as having three parts:
- The A minor-based sequence we’re talking about
- The C Major-based sequence (with lots of G major, its dominant) – first heard at “There’s a feeling I get…”
- The A minor - G Major - F Maj7 thing at the end
Part 1 foreshadows Part 2 with the C major chord in the third measure (as well as parts of this chord in that Fmaj7, and in the second measure as well).
The bridge to Part 2 is handled by emphasizing it’s other chord, G Major. Page emphatically strums a G chord (he really lets it hang there to build tension in live versions), then creates a whole “refrain” (“makes me wonder”) to drive it home, basically just with A minor and G Major.
The bridge to Part 3 is famously handled differently: with a tangy new chord, D Major. It has things in common with the rest of the song (it’s the dominant of G, etc.), but it feels new enough to be exciting.
But wait…it, too, was foreshadowed, way back in Part 1! Remember, the fourth measure? So, every chord in that sequence this thread is about serves to introduce, in correct order, elements of the large-scale sections which make up the rest of the song.
All I’m saying is, function can be a way to differentiate a series of notes common between one song and another. As others have said, compared to some hitherto uncredited ripoffs (Dazed and Confused, Black Mountainside…), the Taurus thing is weak sauce.
Yes, I was. :smack:
I had a typical 10 hour work day followed by 3 hours of walking. Was a bit tired when I wrote that - hell, even had the YouTube video of Taurus open in another tab while typing and still got it wrong.
Understandable slip. Triumph was a near-contemporary of Zep which demonstrated a similar knack for heavy-light guitar-god gradual-buildup anthems when they composed “Magic Power.”
I’m not going to go through all those steps, but let’s just look at the Top 40 now:
John Legend’s All of Me sounds a good bit reminiscent of Coldplay’s The Scientist.
Pharrell Williams’ Happy sounds similar to “Happy” by Velvet Hammer.
Katy Perry’s Flame is simlar to Joyful Noise’s “Joyful Noise” (listen to the hooky synth in the background)
Ariana Grande’s “Problem” has a slew of songs she draws from.
And that’s just going through the top five right now.
Assuming:
- No chords
- A boring 1 note every second (60 notes a minute)
- A three minute “song”
- Composed in a single line of music (no harmony, nothing. Just one guy singing by his lonesome)
You have 12^180 possible combinations. If you allow pauses, he has 13^180 possible combinations. When you add harmonies and chords… I don’t have the math skills to even begin to compute that number.
Now this number will be reduced, of course, to the number of “pleasing” combinations, but still - the math strongly suggests that while Bach and Mozart might have used the same “notes and chords” as Page and Plant (and California!), there is plenty of room for variation.
Music doesn’t lend itself well to this sort of this analysis. If you’re really going note-for-note and pause-for-pause, then Taurus and Stairway are not going to end up looking as similar as they really are. They are similar, but, as I’ve said before, I feel that the progression is fairly obvious and the note that make Stairway so readily identifiable are not present in the Taurus song. For example, I think the Foo Fighters “Pretender” example before is almost note-for-note bang-on for the first seven or eight notes (the only missing part is the G# in the bass) and instantly calls to mind Stairway, while Taurus, to me, merely sounds reminiscent of Stairway. It doesn’t have the color notes/character that turn a simple, repetitive, meditative arpeggio into the more complex and interesting (IMHO) Stairway to Heaven.
I agree with this statement completely, which is why I haven’t made any reference to the “Taurus”/“Stairway to Heaven” bit. (And I say this, by the way, as a HUGE fan of Spirit’s debut album…geez, I played the hell out of it when it came out, and have returned to it faithfully so many times in the ensuing decades.)
There are more than enough far more damning LZ ripoffs.
Yes, absolutely. There are certainly a good number of LZ songs that are clear rip-offs and cross the “inspiration” line to wholesale reappropriation/stealing. Taurus happens not to be one of them for me. “Rock and Roll” (as a little Richard “Keep A Knockin” rip-off) is another one that doesn’t qualify for me, either.
I don’t know if I can hold my nose long enough to listen to any of these. But “reminiscent of” and “sounds similar to” are a long way from “previously released songs that correspond musically with them to even a fraction of a degree that any of the well-documented Led Zeppelin thefts do.”
I’ll repeat my question: in which of these cases would the composer(s) of the earlier songs have a basis for a court challenge? Which of these cases would you put up next to the magnitude of the “Dazed and Confused,” “Whole Lotta Love” or “How Many More Times” thefts?
Once again, I am not challenging those thefts. I have said as much in my previous post. I am talking about the Taurus-Stairway connection. I think the two “Happy” songs might be lawsuit worthy, though. I’d argue there’s enough of a difference, but there’s a good bit of similarity, even the same title. To me, it’s a similar amount of similarity as “Blurred Lines” and “Got to Give it Up” have, and that one was settled out of court. (I personally am also on the side of those two being substantially different.)
We’re more or less on the same page as far as “Taurus”/“Stairway to Heaven.”
I was responding to aceplace57’s post, in which it seemed to me he was taking Led Zeppelin’s side overall — while also stating “There’s nothing new or original in music.”
Both positions are facile and more than a little ridiculous in the context of this thread.
Well then, I guess it’s all settled, and we agree. 
I’m always a little bit cautious about these types of musical ripoff threads. I don’t know where I draw my personal line between “inspired by” and “ripped off,” but it’s fairly generous. I think anyone who has done a reasonable amount of songwriting has experienced it in their own work, in both directions: you’ve written a song, only to realize a similar song has been written before (so either you subconsciously borrowed from it or coincidentally happened upon a similar pattern of melody and harmony), or you’ve written a song, only to realize a similar song playing on the radio years later, where there is obviously no possible way to link the two songs together. Now, the Led Zeppelin example is a bit different, with a high likelihood/almost certainty of them having heard “Taurus,” but there are substantive differences.
Pulkymell
PRE-cisely!! That is my contention about this discussion.
LZ starts out touring with Spirit in 1968. A few years later LZ releases a tune that sounds very similar to a Spirit song released in 1968. Just a coincidence? I don’t think so.
JohnT
As far as your posting error regarding the song (Referring to “Taurus” as “Triumph”) you’re not the only one to have made a mistake regarding this story.
A few days ago, while searching the internet for news about this story I found an online time.com article which stated “You may have never heard of the band Taurus even though Led Zeppelin has.”
The article went on to state “Taurus has now sued [Led Zeppelin] for allegedly lifting what may be one of the most famous riffs in rock history.”
Why didn’t I just post a link? Well, this Spirit fan sent an E-Mail to that article’s author notifying her and things got changed rather quickly.