Who Was Pink Floyd's Chief Songwriter?

[Real Pink in the Inside]

So what... Pink Floyd as a band were great I don't care who did what.
To downplay or diminish Gilmour, Mason, and Wright's rolls in the band is childish, IMOH.
And to question Water's roll is stupid.
Not giving Syd Barrett credit for being the founder just isn't right.

What Creek said. The contributions are what they are, trying to exaggerate or diminish the roles and contributions of any member is silly.

Nobody is exaggerating or diminishing anybody's role in the songwriting department by posting a list of who wrote what. It's about as objective as you can get.

[mosespa]

Point one makes a completely different point than point two.

Point one points out that you yourself first say that you don't consider Waters to have written a "vast majority" of the material...then you go on to admit that his contribution nearly adds up to that of everyone else combined.

Point two makes the point that Waters most likely has the greatest number of individual songwriting credits...but doesn't say that it's probably equal to everyone else's combined.

[Annoying Twit]

Nobody is exaggerating or diminishing anybody's role in the songwriting department by posting a list of who wrote what. It's about as objective as you can get.

I don't think missing out AMLoR and TDB was being objective

[Annoying Twit]

Point one makes a completely different point than point two.

Point one points out that you yourself first say that you don't consider Waters to have written a "vast majority" of the material...then you go on to admit that his contribution nearly adds up to that of everyone else combined.

I don't see the problem here. Sticking with the numbers, Rog wrote 43%, which is the highest individual contribution. Sticking to the classic lineup, Dave wrote 23%, Rick 15%, and Nick 7%. 23 + 15 + 7 = 45%, just a bit more than Rog's contribution. So, saying that Rog didn't write a majority of their material (since 43% is less than half) but that his contribution (43%) nearly matches the contribution of the other three put together (45%) seems simple and straightforward. How is it not?

Point two makes the point that Waters most likely has the greatest number of individual songwriting credits...but doesn't say that it's probably equal to everyone else's combined.

I really don't get this comment at all. Could you rephrase and/or give more detail?

[Real Pink in the Inside]

Overall, Waters wrote 43% of the material, which is not a majority.

It is an overwhelming plurality, almost twice as much as Gilmour and almost three times as much as Wright. In addition, the number bounces well over 50%, a clear majority, if you exclude the albums Waters has nothing to do with. Over 50% is quite significant when you have two other prominent songwriters. How can somebody write approximately two and three times more than the band's other two top songwriters and not be considered the chief songwriter?

Put all of this aside and look at it from your own viewpoint. If you contributed two and three times more to a project than each other member on your team, whether it's in work or in a band or whatever, do you really think it's ultimately an overall team effort and you were not the chief contributor?

Clearly Waters is the most prolific songwriter in PF, helped by The Wall being a double album.

He is the chief songwriter with or without The Wall, one of the band's most popular and famous albums.

It's also interesting to note that Waters is not the most prolific songwriter for these PF albums:

momentary lapse of reasaon
the division bell

What a shocking surprise.

[Real Pink in the Inside]

So, 40% for Waters here.

In other words, still almost 50% more songwriting than each of the other two prominent songwriters.

[Real Pink in the Inside]

The number of songs that Waters wrote is only half the story. There's also the matter of who arranged the songs, who wrote the guitar solos etc. To my ears anyway, none of Waters, Gilmour or Wright have ever managed to make solo albums which are a patch on what they did with Pink Floyd. When they collaborated, they made better music.

I agree with this to a large extent and certainly feel that it's not Pink Floyd without the contributions of all four members. The best work was usually, but not always, a collaborative effort between Waters/Gilmour or Waters/Wright or Waters/Gilmour/Wright. However, to my ears Roger Waters' solo material, especially Radio KAOS and Amused to Death, sounds the most LIKE Pink Floyd thematically and musically with PACOHH/TFC being their own separate siblings.

[mosespa]

1. I don't see the problem here. Sticking with the numbers, Rog wrote 43%, which is the highest individual contribution. Sticking to the classic lineup, Dave wrote 23%, Rick 15%, and Nick 7%. 23 + 15 + 7 = 45%, just a bit more than Rog's contribution. So, saying that Rog didn't write a majority of their material (since it's less than half) but that his contribution (43%) nearly matches the contribution of the other three put together (45%) seems simple and straightforward. How is it not?


2. I really don't get this comment at all. Could you rephrase and/or give more detail?

1. I think it's odd that you only consider a "majority" to be ONLY greater than (apparently,) seventy-five percent.

While that IS a "pure" majority in just about any other situation, we're not dealing with the same sort of thing here, I feel.

If Waters contribution is almost equal to the other three guys put together, that seems an indication to me that within the context of those four guys, Waters was doing the VAST majority (vast because it's nearly equal to the effort of everyone else combined...and majority because it's more than everyone else combined was doing,) of the work.

2. To me, "songwriting" doesn't mean "adding a guitar riff to a keyboard part that someone else has come up with."

To me, "songwriting" means writing the words AND the music.

Now, I'm not talking about "collaborative songwriting," either. I'm talking about one individual person sitting down and writing words AND music (after all, as PI pointed out, without lyrics, it's not a song, anyway.)

For example: "Money" has a credit for Waters only. This means that Roger Waters wrote the words AND the music.

By "music" I mean the he decided which chords would be used, what order they came in, what the overall tonality of the song was...etc. etc.

Apparently, Waters even wrote the riff.

I contend that Waters wrote more SONGS by himself than anyone else did by themselves and that that's what makes Waters the Chief Songwriter in my book.

Waters seems more apt to sit down and write a whole song while Gilmour and Wright seem more apt to just toss bits back and forth to each other until someone declares it a song.

[Real Pink in the Inside]

What is person A wrote 90 % of the songs by themselves and each and every one of them were rubbish. Then person B wrote 10% and they were number one all over the world.

Number one all over the world? You must be talking about "Money" (Waters) and "Another Brick in The Wall (Part II)" (Waters), right?

Roger Waters Is God though.

No, he is just the chief songwriter of Pink Floyd

[mosespa]

The number of songs that Waters wrote is only half the story. There's also the matter of who arranged the songs, who wrote the guitar solos etc. To my ears anyway, none of Waters, Gilmour or Wright have ever managed to make solo albums which are a patch on what they did with Pink Floyd. When they collaborated, they made better music.

But arranging and soloing are not part of writing.

Sorry, but when it comes to songwriting, NONE of that means anything.

I've argued for a long time and still believe that Clare Torry DOES NOT deserve a songwriting credit for GGITS anymore than Eddie Van Halen deserves a songwriting credit for Lost Boys Calling, or Dick Parry for Money.

Also...when it comes to arranging, all that is is moving the (already composed) various parts of the song around for maximum effect.

It may be "creative" but it's certainly not "writing."

[Real Pink in the Inside]

Nobody is exaggerating or diminishing anybody's role in the songwriting department by posting a list of who wrote what. It's about as objective as you can get.

I don't think missing out AMLoR and TDB was being objective

I stressed only the albums with Waters/Gilmour/Wright/Mason on them, so that's why PATGOD, MLOR and TDB are absent. I even made a special notation excluding The Final Cut due to Wright's absence.

[Annoying Twit]

Overall, Waters wrote 43% of the material, which is not a majority.

It is an overwhelming plurality, almost twice as much as Gilmour and almost three times as much as Wright. In addition, the number bounces well over 50%, a clear majority, if you exclude the albums Waters has nothing to do with. Over 50% is quite significant when you have two other prominent songwriters. How can somebody write approximately two and three times more than the band's other top two songwriters and not be considered the chief songwriter?

As I've said many times before, it depends on your definition of "chief songwriter". I've posted my definition (which Roger does not meet) several times, and I won't waste bits by doing it again.

Besides, if you exclude AMLoR and TDB, Rog's contribution rises to 51%, which is a marginal majority, not "well over 50%". But if you're not including the albums that Rog didn't contribute to, then it seems a bit unfair to include The Final Cut where Roger did not allow any other members to have any songwriting input to. If you exclude TFC as well, then Rog's contribution falls to 48%. But calculating the numbers on various subsets of PF albums is only of minor interest. The most interesting numbers are for the complete output of PF. And these are the numbers I give below.

Put all of this aside and look at it from your own viewpoint. If you contributed two and three times more to a project than your team, whether it's in work or in a band or whatever, do you really think it's ultimately an overall team effort and you were not the chief contributor?

I would think that I was the biggest contributor. But if I'd contributed 43% of the total, I don't think I'd insist on being called "chief contributor".

He is the chief songwriter with or without The Wall, one of the band's most popular and famous albums.

As before, that depends on your definition of "chief songwriter". It seems silly to keep on debating the meanings of the terms, as it's clear that everyone is interpreting them differently. And unless we're prepared to actually enter into a proper discussion of the terms, which I don't think anyone wants to, then we might as well stick with the numbers. I'll repeat them.

Code: Select all

CONTRIBUTIONS FOR : overall
==============================
        wat (18731 seconds) [43%]
        gil (10193 seconds) [23%]
        wri (6443 seconds) [15%]
        mas (3129 seconds) [7%]
        bar (2045 seconds) [5%]
        sam (987 seconds) [2%]
        moo (802 seconds) [2%]
        ezr (382 seconds) [1%]
        gee (285 seconds) [1%]
        lai (234 seconds) [1%]
        leo (224 seconds) [1%]
        man (155 seconds) [0%]
        tor (128 seconds) [0%]
        car (98 seconds) [0%]

Do you have any dispute with this?

[Annoying Twit]

I don't think missing out AMLoR and TDB was being objective

I stressed only the albums with Waters/Gilmour/Wright/Mason on them, so that's why PATGOD, MLOR and TDB are absent. I even made a special notation excluding The Final Cut due to Wright's absence.

Then it would have helped if you'd titled your thread "Who was Pink Floyd's Chief Songwriter for the period 1968-1980".

[Annoying Twit]

The number of songs that Waters wrote is only half the story. There's also the matter of who arranged the songs, who wrote the guitar solos etc. To my ears anyway, none of Waters, Gilmour or Wright have ever managed to make solo albums which are a patch on what they did with Pink Floyd. When they collaborated, they made better music.

But arranging and soloing are not part of writing.

Sorry, but when it comes to songwriting, NONE of that means anything.

I've argued for a long time and still believe that Clare Torry DOES NOT deserve a songwriting credit for GGITS anymore than Eddie Van Halen deserves a songwriting credit for Lost Boys Calling, or Dick Parry for Money.

Also...when it comes to arranging, all that is is moving the (already composed) various parts of the song around for maximum effect.

It may be "creative" but it's certainly not "writing."

I think the distinction between arranging and writing is a complex one. In the case of adding a solo which is not a major part of the song, then it's not justified to expect a writing credit. But I believe that Torry's contributions to GGITS are significant enough that she does deserve a credit.

But we really need a different thread for this.

[snifferdog]

I'm not saying that song arrangment/solos are the same as who wrote the songs. I don't think there is anybody who's posted on this thread who doubts that Roger Waters wrote most of the Pink Floyd songs. He also sang lead vocals on most of the songs.

However, I do think that the contribution of Gilmour and Wright to the finished article shouldn't be discounted. I am not saying for one second that they deserve a writing credit. Clearly if they don't write a song, they don't get a credit. However, who knows how much they did in the studio? Perhaps they made minor tweaks to the melody or made suggestions to Roger? Collaboration and all that.

I've noticed the original poster rates Roger Waters far far above all other Pink Floyd members and wants to hammer home the point that Rog is Pink and not the others. Maybe Rog is Pink...who knows? Who cares? Nick Mason is the true creative genius behind Pink Floyd.