Why do video games (Guitar Hero, etc) use covers of songs?

I currently own Guitar Hero 1 and 2 as well as Elite Beat Agents. With the exception of a song or two, they use cover versions of the songs instead of as performed by the original artist. I’m wondering what the reason would be.

I mean, they already had to secure the rights, so wouldn’t that include the usage of the original artist’s version?

I was thinking also that it may be for technical reasons since the games require you to act on certain beats of the music and that the originals may not be ideal for it.

You’re talking about two sets of rights.

There’s the rights a songwriter (or the person/corporation that owns those rights) sells to the videogame people to use the song.

Then there are performance rights, the rights a performer owns to a performance of said song.

So two different sets of rights would need to be procured.

But I also think you’re right about the notes being closer to the beat. Many performers have a certain “swing” to their performance, making their solos be not exactly on the beat.

Rico is exactly right.

I remember reading about Prince wanting to re-release 1999 (the song) in 1999 (the year). He had the rights to the song, and could re-record it, note for note, with the exact same people singing the other vocals if he wanted to. But Warner Brothers (I think) owned the rights to the original recording and would not let him sample from it.

I didn’t realize there were two different types of rights in the music biz.

Ignorance fought! :slight_smile:

There are more than two types:

Thanks for the link!

More importantly than they being separate rights to secure, one is a whole lot easier to secure than the other. Songwriting is compulsorily licensed. There’s a law that says it costs this much to make a cover of a song. All you have to do when you make covers is make sure that each reproduction of your work is properly paid for.

The rights to an individual performance, on the other hand, have no such required legal structure. You’d have to negociate for every single one of those songs with the owners individually.

The reason for this difference, historically, was that physical reproductions of songs (on player pianos) were around before physical reproductions of performances could be captured, and only the first was covered by the license law at the time.

And, as Smitty has alluded to, it’s not necessarily the performer who owns the rights to the original recording.

I think David Gilmour had a similar problem when Pink Floyd released “A Collection of Great Dance Songs.” He couldn’t secure the rights to the recording of “Money” and had to record it again.

There are two rights holders, but the difference is not between composition and performance, but between the owner of the composition and the owner of the sound recording.

(1) The copyright in the composition, which is held by the composer and which includes both duplication/distribution (CDs, etc.) and performance (radio) rights.

(2) The copyright in the sound recording, which is held by the record company (recording artists themselves usually sign away such rights by contract) and which come with only a duplication/distribution right. Neither the record company, nor the recording artist holds any performance right.

So, when radio stations play a song, they pay royalties only to the composer, not to the record company or the performer.

Movies and other media might implicate both if (1) they are shown in public (such as in a theatre) and (2) if they are sold individually to consumers (on DVDs or CD-ROMs, for example). I doubt that public performance of video games is very common, so my immediate guess is in that case it’s only the duplication rights (for both the composition and the sound recording) that are relevant.

Which songs are which? I swear i remember reading an interview with sound engineer from Red Octane (GamerPro mag?) and he said they had to remix all the featured songs. I’m not sure if that included the bonuses.

It’s no wonder the music business is so f’ed up & sliding downhill…

Stupid people shot themselves in the foot.

:dubious:

I take it this is just a driveby, or I would ask you how exactly that list supports your conclusion. There are many rights associated with copyrights. It only makes sense that a copyright holder would have the right to license those rights individually.

Okay, I’ve read through this thread, and the answers here are all very interesting. The stuff about performance rights is all true, however it’s not the reason.

I’ve been lurking the straight dope message boards for years, but only today have I actually signed up and registered so that I could post. The reason? Setting you folks straight on this very question. Congratulations, you’ve got a new doper.

Okay, on to the explanation…

If it were simply a question of rights issues, then the Dance Dance Revolution games would also use covers of the songs instead of the originals. Yet DDR and its ilk, for the most part, simply get the mechanical rights and put the real songs into the game. So why is guitar hero different?

Because when you make a mistake in DDR, all of the instruments keep playing. Your score suffers, but the music keeps playing as it always did.

When you make a mistake in guitar hero, the primary instrument (lead guitar, rhythm guitar, or bass, depending on the song and play mode) stops playing and a “mistake” sound is played instead.

In order to implement this in the game code, the makers of Guitar Hero needed original multitrack sources for every song in the game. When I say multitrack, what I mean is that the drums are one track, the vocals are another track, the lead guitar is another track, the rhythm guitar is another track, the bass is another track, etc.

This allows the game programmers to mute the track where the player made a mistake, and allow all the other instruments to keep playing.

It also has some other advantages. In multi-player mode, it allows them to pan the instruments to left or right of the audio field, to match the onscreen positions of the two players. When things are moving very fast and furious in a multiplayer game, you can hear both your chosen instrument, as well as the mistakes, appear to come from the side of the screen that your avatar and “fretboard” graphic is on.

Additionally, it allows them to control the relative loudness of the tracks, so that, for instance, when you are playing in the bass+guitar cooperative multiplayer mode, they can turn up the bass and the guitar a bit more in relation to the other instruments, so you can both hear yourselves play.

There are other advantages, such as was previously mentioned: being able to control whether the notes fall precisely on the beat. Oh, and it lets you have real-time control of the pitch of the note via the whammy bar.

And did anyone notice the little RJ-11 jack on the bottom of the Guitar Hero 2 Xbox360 controller? I’m guessing that’s for a future pedalboard upgrade. To implement this, they’d definitely need the original multitrack recording so they could change the amount of effect on the instrument depending on how you step on the pedals.

So why don’t they just get the original multitrack masters from the original artists? Believe it or not, it’s actually easier for them to just record really precise covers of the songs than try to go through all the trouble that would require. Many of the songs were recorded on very old equipment, many of the master tapes are very old and fragile or perhaps even missing altogether, many of the artists would refuse to give out the original multitrack recordings, etc.

Some of the tracks in the Guitar Hero games ARE from the artist’s original multitrack masters, and in some cases, expanded versions of same (Trogdor, anyone?). But for the most part, they are the tracks from recent indie artists who are closely allied with the game developers and could deliver the tracks in nice neat easy to edit digital files.

How do I know all this? I actually have no sources to cite on any of the above information. I’m simply someone who knows a thing or two about music production and game production, and it is the only possible logical explanation. It’s also very obvious from listening to and analyzing the game.

Now, if I could just talk to the game programmers about improving the way it tracks my hammers and pull offs…

Welcome, tfabris!

Pull up a chair, Sit a spell.

Glad to have you with us! Very nice explanation!

Thanks, Rico!

I got that from the Guitar Hero 2 wikipedia. According to them, the “John the Fisherman” by Primus and “Stop!” by Jane’s Addicton (PS2) are the originals. I’m not familiar enough with their works to verify this.

I always wondered if music ‘n’ rhythm games did something along the lines of what tfabris said, but your explaination really makes sense.

My question: If you want to use a sound for background music in your game that isn’t original, what happens then? I know it happens, but I’ve never played such a game so I don’t know if they use covers there either.

…Am now off to YouTube videos from PaRappa…

Awesome post tfabris! It makes perfect sense.

I’m glad you decided to register.

… As well as the dozens of indie-band titles found in the “store” that you can “purchase” with the “money” you “earn” in the game’s carreer mode. According to Wikipedia, those are all the original tracks, too.

Speaking of purchasing things with money, thanks for linking that wikipedia entry. I didn’t know (until reading it) that they had already released downloadable song packs last April. They cost 500 MSP ($6.25US) for each 3-song pack, but I’m looking forward to playing them in the game.