Joe Satriani takes on Coldplay

anonymous_joe

jill_valentine wrote: »

You didn't think they always dressed like 19th century X Men, did you?

I'd certainly hope not. ^^

yevveh

jill_valentine wrote: »

Uh... if your source for this is the blog in my sig, it's possibly worth pointing out that the blog in question is a gag by an Arcade Fire fan. Win Butler's too nice a dude to ever do/ say anything like that in a million years.

That said:

Ha! It is actually. It was so long ago, I forgot it was a gag.

Pub07

If it was just the melody it could have been accidental but the backing track riff is the same too, that puts it beyond coincidence.

jill_valentine

Holy crap.

Well, I finally got around to listening to the other song. It's like listening to one of those weird cheap ass karaoke cover versions. Mad similar, but... I dunno, I really can't imagine Coldplay listening to it.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Has satch got an album in the pipeline?

Elle Victorine

I'll be surprised if it's not thrown out of court.

Voodu Child

Unfortunately a lot of people commenting have no musical knowledge and/or no legal knowledge.

Coldplays song has enough similarities to warrant a judge deciding the matter. That doesn't mean Joe will win or not, but it means there is certainly enough of a case there to let the matter be decided by the courts.

Mad similar, but... I dunno, I really can't imagine Coldplay listening to it.

Coldplay have name-checked Satriani in a number of interviews; he's not an artist that the average lay-person would have heard of, but most guitarists have, and that includes the guitarist(s) in Coldplay. There is nothing unbelievable about one of them listening to his albums and conciously or unconciously ripping off elements.

Actually Coldplay have joked a number of times in interviews about their plaguarising and unoriginality.

jill_valentine

Martin's joked about it, yes, but the joke was always about playing up to people's perception of him. He says a lot of stuff like that, I don't think he was ever really saying "Yes, we rip people off. We like doing it".

That said, if he has namechecked Satriani before, then that does put a bit of a spin on things, doesn't it? I just have a hard time picturing Chris Martin air-guitaring along to it going "Yeah, this is wicked. We'll take it!"

stateofflux

i think satch is looking for a large of chunk of the money earned from the song....and he should get it...its a blatant steal

how can anyone here say its not a blatant rip off....maybe you need to get your ears examined for wax

Thomas_S_Hunterson

The fact that it sounds the same doesn't mean they stole it.

The fact that the notes are the same doesn't mean they stole it.

It's a very simple riff and structure. It could very easily be down to coincidence.

Karl Hungus

Sean_K wrote: »

It could very easily be down to coincidence.

I don't believe that for a second. We're talking about a chord progession, and then a melody played over that. Those are two seperate things, but both songs share them in common, they're identical. I could believe that Coldplay came up with the progession by coincidence, or that they came up with the vocal melody, but both? At the same time? By accident!?

sham69

Have to agree with Karl Hungus its too coincidental.
I know its easy to say it now but when I first heard the Coldplay song (lets call it that) I said to one of my mates that it sounded familiar.
I didnt connect it with Satch (even though I have the song at home).
Bit surprised at the Gary Moore thing but then again he did kind of rip himself off with Still got the Blues sounding like Parisian Walkways and then every Blues album having a ballad with the same chord progression Dm7, am etc..

Voodu Child

Sean_K wrote: »

The fact that it sounds the same doesn't mean they stole it.

The fact that the notes are the same doesn't mean they stole it.

It's a very simple riff and structure. It could very easily be down to coincidence.

Joe is one of the most respected guitarists in rock in terms of his understanding of music theory, so you can be sure he has not taken the decision lightly, because he thinks the Coldplay track 'sounds a bit like it' or that it's a simple coincidence.

Here are the similarities:
-The chord progression is to all intents and purposes the same (it is not 100% identical, but to explain the differences you'd need to get into music theory, ie diatonic chord substution etc.)

-The groove/meter is more or less the same. ie you're not just talking about the same chord progression, but the rhythm that the chords are played out at, and the 'feel' of the tune.

-The tempo is the same, literally identical to within a bpm or two(this is not so relevant but is interesting nonethless)

-Joes chorus melody is strikingly similar to Coldplays.

That's it. Any one or two on their own would be incidental and not too important, but when you combine them - its not a 100% win for Joe, but like I said, it is so similar that it is definitely worth getting the courts involved to settle the matter.

He needs to demonstrate two things
-Similarity
-Access (ie that there is the possibility that they heard his tune at some stage).

He doesnt need to demonstrate that they deliberately ripped it off, in the eyes of the law it is irrelevant whether it is deliberate or accidental.

Joe has said that he has tried to talk to Coldplay and/or their people to try and resolve it outside the courts but that they basically just ignored him. I think he has a good case, and even if he doesnt, he is doing what any artist would - ie standing up for what he believes and trying to protect his work.