Does Clare Torry deserve a writing credit for GGITS?

[mosespa]

So now the question becomes whether or not she's any good at it.

If she is, then it's composition in real time.

If she's not, then she was just blowing shit to be arranged later by someone else.

Maybe we should make her do it again and see what happens?

Or is she dead now?

[Real Pink in the Inside]

It was Alan Parsons who suggested Clare Torry.

Yes, but did he suggest adding female gospel vocals or did he suggest Clare Torry after somebody else suggested adding female gospel vocals?

[Damn!t]

suggest Clare Torry after somebody else suggested adding female gospel vocals?

that.

[Annoying Twit]

In the same way, Roy Harper should charge something then by singing Have a cigar...

In terms of songwriting credit and royalties, only if he contributed significantly to the lyrics, melody, or chord progression of the song.

[snifferdog]

If she's not dead, I'd personally shoot her for that wailing sh!t she did on GGITS. Ruined a perfectly good album.

She waited til she'd retired before she sued, didn't she?

[mosespa]

Well...if you listen to the live versions, Waters' interpretation of the melody is more staccato than Harpers.

It's a significant difference to me...but if we're going to give Harper a songwriting credit for that, then Gilmour needs to get one for "Money" as well.

See where all of this could be headed?

Because Clare Torry felt shafted by the TOTALLY NORMAL AND ROUTINE arrangement of "sing and get paid one time" which is the norm for a session singer, the whole of creation could come undone and even Nick Mason could end up with a credit on every song he played on (for playing) or even for songs that he didn't play on (providing that the decision to have no drums was left up to him.)

[Damn!t]

In the same way, Roy Harper should charge something then by singing Have a cigar...

In terms of songwriting credit and royalties, only if he contributed significantly to the lyrics, melody, or chord progression of the song.

Roy Harper added his unique sound to the song. Same way as that Torry woman did. ...Should he be credited for his contribution?
Well, he was... but not as a cowriter.

[Annoying Twit]

Well...if you listen to the live versions, Waters' interpretation of the melody is more staccato than Harpers.

It's a significant difference to me...but if we're going to give Harper a songwriting credit for that, then Gilmour needs to get one for "Money" as well.

See where all of this could be headed?

Because Clare Torry felt shafted by the TOTALLY NORMAL AND ROUTINE arrangement of "sing and get paid one time" which is the norm for a session singer, the whole of creation could come undone and even Nick Mason could end up with a credit on every song he played on (for playing) or even for songs that he didn't play on (providing that the decision to have no drums was left up to him.)

Well, yes, it is a very difficult task deciding what constitutes arrangement or normal "interpretation" during performance, and what constitutes "composition". That's why Torry had to go to court. If Torry had been given a lead sheet listing the notes to sing, then that would be the TOTALLY NORMAL AND ROUTINE task of singing and she would have no case. However, the court found in her favour, which is evidence that she made a contribution well over and above the TOTALLY NORMAL AND ROUTINE task of singing a pre-written part.

Giving Torry a credit on GGITS is not ever going to lead to musicians being given writing credits for everything, because the specific circumstances of her case will not apply to a random drummer playing an inconspicuous part.

[snifferdog]

I assume that the courts found that she'd added something unique and new to the song. She went into the studio, wailed for a while, making it up as she went along. The wailing was then laid on top of Rick's chord progressions and it became the melody. That's my take on it anyway.

[Annoying Twit]

Roy Harper added his unique sound to the song. Same way as that Torry woman did. ...Should he be credited for his contribution?
Well, he was... but not as a cowriter.

If Harper only added his unique sound, then he doesn't deserve a credit. If he added significant new words and/or melody, then he does. The two cases are very different, so bringing Harper in as an example adds nothing.

[Keith Jordan]

She got her name written down on dark side of the moon. That should be enough.

In the same way, Roy Harper should charge something then by singing Have a cigar...

There is a difference between composing and performing! He just sang it as none of the others could I think.

[Massed Gadgets]

But it does unfortunately open the doors for any session musician who was paid to do a solo on any song going back who knows how many years to sue the band for money and composing credits. Session musicians have chosen to be session musicians and they get paid for what they do (as Clare Torry was and did, according to the contract she signed before she did the work). I don't think the courts made the right decision, personally. It would make me now very wary as a composer and musician of ever hiring anyone to perform anything on my music. What if, x number of years down the road they are not satisfied with the contract they agreed to or the money they were paid at the time and decide to sue? Pink Floyd hired Clare Torry as a session musician to do a vocal improvisation, not to help them compose the song. The song was already composed.

[Annoying Twit]

So now the question becomes whether or not she's any good at it.

If she is, then it's composition in real time.

If she's not, then she was just blowing shit to be arranged later by someone else.

Maybe we should make her do it again and see what happens?

Or is she dead now?

She did, she says, two and a half takes of the song. And the description of the recording session on Brain Damage mentions her being given quite general directions, use longer notes, be more emotional.

So the proof should be in the pudding. Is the vocal melody from GGITS any good or not?

I vote yes. Very much so.

BTW: She was a working and published songwriter before she did the GGITS session.

[mosespa]

She did, she says, two and a half takes of the song. And the description of the recording session on Brain Damage mentions her being given quite general directions, use longer notes, be more emotional.

Sounds to me, then, as if she didn't actually COMPOSE anything. She sang according to instructions provided to her by the people who DID compose the song.

[Annoying Twit]

But it does unfortunately open the doors for any session musician who was paid to do a solo on any song going back who knows how many years to sue the band for money and composing credits.

That door was already open. She hasn't changed the law in any way. Any session musician who made sufficiently significant contributions has always had the option to sue for songwriting credit and royalties.

The Torry case does become a legal precedent. But it in no way becomes a legal precedent for any session musician to sue for any contribution. It only becomes a precedent for session musicians who have made similar contributions to Torry's contributions to GGITS. Which excludes the huge majority of session musicians and their contributions.

Session musicians have chosen to be session musicians and they get paid for what they do (as Clare Torry was and did, according to the contract she signed before she did the work). I don't think the courts made the right decision, personally. It would make me now very wary as a composer and musician of ever hiring anyone to perform anything on my music.

It should only make you wary of getting other people contributing significant melodies and/or lyrics to your songs without you giving them credit. Which doesn't seem a bad thing.

What if, x number of years down the road they are not satisfied with the contract they agreed to or the money they were paid at the time and decide to sue? Pink Floyd hired Clare Torry as a session musician to do a vocal improvisation, not to help them compose the song. The song was already composed.

You say "the song was already composed", but it wasn't finished. The song as recorded, and frequently performed, includes significant and distinctive melodies created by Torry. If they didn't want Torry to help them compose the song, then they should have composed it themselves and given her music on a piece of paper.