the last number one prior was a TSwift song, not exactly country, ha.

unrelated, Chesnutt has new stuff coming out and its pretty good.

Is John Ludowitz also known as Jake Kelly?

quote:

---

Comparatively speaking, Eric Church is not that bad. Sure, he has a few bro-country songs on his albums that make me cringe, but I actually like most of his stuff. He has a pretty distinct sound and style that stands out from the crowd in my opinion.

---

This. Church is world's better than most of these current idiots. And he does at least write most of his music.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Comparatively speaking, Eric Church is not that bad. Sure, he has a few bro-country songs on his albums that make me cringe, but I actually like most of his stuff. He has a pretty distinct sound and style that stands out from the crowd in my opinion.

---

This. Church is world's better than most of these current idiots. And he does at least write most of his music.

---

Agree that he's better than most of what's out there. How much of his material that he writes is irrelevant.

quote:

---

To each their own, Springsteen, Talladega, Like a Wrecking Ball, Cold One, Drink in My Hand, Guys Like Me, Smoke a Little Smoke, Homeboy, Give Me Back My Hometown.

Meh.

---

i laughed out loud the first time I heard "Springsteen" the "whoa whoa whoooooa wha whoa." Made me think "Row row row your boat, row row row your boat, rowwww rowww row"

Pretty good cover by Whitney Morgan doing Waymore Blues

This whiny Redstone's gotta go.

Never thought I'd say it, but I miss your old brand of insufferable.

quote:

---

Did they really delete the Redstone post? That was his best one in a while...


Why do some of you get so bent out of shape about Redstone? It's a shtick. And It's pretty funny when he brings his A-game. Plus you have to admire his dedication...

---

And just when you think it can't get any worse....

Backstreet Boys To Record Country

It's only fair I guess, it's been the other way around for so long...

Still no stars for my most recent prior comment?

And now this, probably the death knell for songwriting in the U.S.

DOJ Ruling

Probably time for me to either retire or find another profession. Looks like this one is extinct. Our wonderful Federal Government at work.

how does crap like this even come about? Byonce? Kanye?

quote:

---

And now this, probably the death knell for songwriting in the U.S.

DOJ Ruling

Probably time for me to either retire or find another profession. Looks like this one is extinct. Our wonderful Federal Government at work.

---

Read the article, but can you summarize exactly what it means?

sounds like they wanted digital licensing to be separate from other licensing. also, if i'm reading this correctly, any author of a song can license it, so co-writers could undercut each other for commercial licensing of music.

quote:

---

An example of how different it is now vs. when I moved here.

I remember on several occasions bringing a song idea, or even a song I had finished, to my first publisher (a veteran songwriter named Frank Dycus - wrote Unwound, Marina Del Ray, I'm Gonna Get A Life and a lot of others). I ran my idea or my song by him, and he said something like "oh yeah, that's been written...it was the B side of a George Jones single in 1963" or something similar. I always wondered how the hell I was supposed to know the B sides of ever song that Jones et al had recorded, but the point was that in his mind the song and/or idea weren't original.

Fast forward to now, where not only does everything sound the same, it has virtually the same lyrics...insert "dirt road" here, cut and paste "daisy dukes" there, and ta da! you have a song. Same titles written over and over. Same cliches used over and over. It's taken formulaic writing to an entirely new level, and I hate it.

---

I appreciate the historical perspective.

I'm currently reading "House of Hits," which focuses on the history of an independent recording studio in Houston (today known as Sugar Hill Studios of Beyonce fame). They recorded George Jones' first hit "Why Baby, Why" for the independent Star Day label. Beginning with the strength of local airplay on KIKK in Houston, it began to chart nationally, but Jones' thunder was stolen by a cover featuring Red Sovine and Webb Pierce, two established stars who took the track to #1 on the much larger Decca label.

As you've said, copycatting and similarities have always existed. But if you recreated that scenario today, instead of covering the original they would probably just rearrange the words for a "new" chart single.

BTW, I heartily recommend this book for anyone interested in the evolution of recording studio technology or the rise and fall of regional labels. A lot of the themes in this thread are discussed through historical examples.
https://www.amazon.com/House-Hits-Houstons-SugarHill-Recording/dp/0292719191

country music inception.

quote:

---

Posted without comment...

---

So is he making fun of the sellout song?

This guy?



Irony alert?

If you read his comments about the song, it's not targeted at individual artists just a song about laughing at yourself

Hunting and fishin

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

And now this, probably the death knell for songwriting in the U.S.

DOJ Ruling

Probably time for me to either retire or find another profession. Looks like this one is extinct. Our wonderful Federal Government at work.

---

Read the article, but can you summarize exactly what it means?

---

It's a complicated issue, but I'll try to explain. Songwriter royalties (radio airplay, performances, etc.) are collected and paid by performing rights organizations (PROs), the two major ones being ASCAP and BMI. These royalties are controlled by the Federal Government, and the rates are set by two Federal Courts in NY, one for ASCAP and one for BMI. These courts operate independently of each other, and so BMI and ASCAP often don't get the same royalty rate. Back in the '40s, the Feds were all concerned about monopolies, so ASCAP and BMI were placed under consent decrees that made that happen.

In the case of a song co-written by a BMI writer and an ASCAP writer, historically a license was required from both PROs (this is a very common practice, I'm a BMI writer and I have many ASCAP co-writers). Under this ruling, now the person or company seeking than license can effectively choose which PRO they want to get the license from (they would choose ASCAP because they have a lower rate). My share of the song would have to be licenses by ASCAP, meaning ASCAP would collect my money, charge their fee, then send it over to BMI, who would collect THEIR fee, and I would wind up getting paid substantially less money AND get it at least one quarter later than my ASCAP co-writer.

The on-the-street impact of this is that it will probably dissolve many long-term co-writing relationships. Publishers will most likely either encourage or demand that all of their writers only co-write with writers who are affiliated with the same PRO. It's also likely that some publisher will no longer sign writers who are affiliated with one or the other, opting to be a 100% ASCAP or BMI shop.

Under this ruling, Don Schlitz and Paul Overstreet probably would not be able to co-write together. If that had been the case in the past, there would be no "When You Say Nothing At All", "Forever And Ever Amen" "On The Other Hand" or "Don't Close Your Eyes". It's a stupid, stupid ruling that is entirely intended to make it easier for those requesting a license with no consideration for how it affects the creators. That's a very abbreviated version, and the net result that writers, who are already the lowest paid people in the food chain, will get even less. Extremely discouraging.

---

The fallout from this horrific ruling has already begun. Talked to a number of writer friends (all who have written hits), and they're updating their resumes and applying for jobs in the work force. The effect from this will be devastating.

In the past, I've blasted Google on these forums and I've been scoffed at by some for doing so. It's worth pointing out that the lead DOJ official on this issue is Renata Hesse...she is the head of the DOJ's anti-trust division. Prior to landing that job, she was an attorney for a law firm who represented Google...in anti-trust cases, including with Yahoo. So now Google owns the DOJ.

It's a morally bankrupt, despicable corporation that is rotten to the core. It's the Baylor of the IT world.

This piece below was written by my friend Reggie Hamm, and posted with his permission and blessings. Illuminating much better than I have in my posts on here the challenges we currently face in my profession.



"THE PROFESSION THAT NEVER WAS
As I was getting breaking news (on my 2008, used Mac Book Pro) about a new twisted decision being enforced on songwriters, I was in the middle of reading a news story about the Attorney General and a former president meeting on a private jet for 30 minutes.
There are legal ramifications and propriety issues involved in that story depending on whether you're a Democrat or a Republican. But honestly, the thing that struck me the most was the idea that these two public servants each had their own plane and entourage paid for by the people.
I understand that former presidents require security. I understand the same is true for the top lawyer in the nation. But something about that image bothered me. Especially, when I read the ruling that had just come down from that same Attorney General's office. A ruling that essentially told the people in the songwriting community to "eat cake."
Since the advent of sound recording, creators of music and creators of listening devices have been doing a delicate dance, trying to stay in concert with each other (if you'll pardon all the music metaphors). In the middle of this dance, the government of the United States has stepped in at every turn, to dictate which moves can be made, how high the jumps can be and how low the dips can go.
The professional songwriting community is the ONLY trade group in the history of the United States that has never been allowed to negotiate its own rates and its own terms. We've been subject to arbitrary laws, made by people who essentially know nothing about what we do, since 1909.
I was confused as to why the DOJ would have anything to do with songwriting in the first place. Something from the DOJ smacks of criminality. We're not criminals just because we write bad songs. But the way it shakes out is this
The latest ruling from the DOJ is based on a precedent set in 1941. The government deemed ASCAP (the country's largest performance rights organization an organization designed and created to collect broadcast, radio and television royalties for songwriters and composers) a monopoly. I don't know how a non-profit can technically even BE a monopoly. Could the American Heart Association or the NFL (both monolithic non-profits that filter billions of dollars through their coffers) be considered monopolies? What about the Clinton Global Initiative? Oh never mind. At any rate, another organization called BMI was created as fair competition (although a FOR PROFIT organization, SESAC, had already been created in Europe and was already competition).
A "consent decree" was issued from the Justice Dept. And ASCAP and BMI were placed under the rules of this decree in exchange for not being broken up as monopolies. The details of the decree were created with no sunset clause. Meaning, no matter what is happening in 2016, 1941 rules will always apply always like, forever.
The rules of this decree are so tedious and detailed that it will make your head explode. But it comes with things like "rate courts" (yes I said RATE courts) that determine what one play of one song is worth on any given device. That's where we've gotten phrases like "micro-penny" (I'm really not kidding, here). And the rules that determine THAT are based in what some other government agency deems fair, based on completely arbitrary things made up by people a million miles away from the business of songwriting. It's all so tedious that I. Can't. Even.
Then, there are copyright laws and mechanical royalty rates ALL determined by elected or appointed officials in the government NOT by any of the people actually earning a living in the business in question. There are some places in the music world where free market negotiation can take place. But not in the songwriting royalty and fair payment sector.
In the recent DOJ ruling, 100% licensing is now the new precedent. That means that anyone wanting to license a song for use only has to contact ONE of the performance rights organizations even though one of the other two (BMI/SESAC) might represent the other half or third of that song. This ruling dictates that you don't have to come to terms with all parties just one. And the other parties might not even know what's happening. For a community based on collaboration, this is madness and chaos and it flies in the face of the autonomy of creators and their representatives. It also represents pretty much the end of the line for professional songwriters and their trade. Because it is completely unworkable.
But as Lee Thomas Miller, president of NSAI put it, "Precedent is a big deal in the law. Law makers and public officials look to precedent above all. It's easier for them to stick with precedent than it is to see what's happening in our community and how they're directly affecting it."
This is what you get when the state takes care of you from beginning to end.
There are laws pending that could possibly help. I have several good friends (Lee Miller being one) who regularly storm Capital Hill with information and graphs and facts and figures. They are good people and probably much smarter than me. But they come back to Nashville, more often than not, shaking their heads and reporting less than positive news or NO new news. Or, the most frustrating news of all, "If THIS happens and THAT doesn't happen then we have a shot at this or that."
This seems to be true no matter if Democrats or Republicans are in charge. The fact is simply the business of songwriting is so specialized and the nuances are so impactful that the lawyer from Missouri who thought becoming a U.S Senator would look good on the resume, will never truly understand it.
Is there a solution to all of this? Well, I'm not the smartest guy in the room I'm probably not even the smartest guy in my own house. But personally I think it's time to vacate every single ruling and overturn every single law that pertains to professional songwriting. Then, a songwriter's guild might not be a bad idea. Our business is essentially over anyway. It might actually be time to just start all over again. This time, allowing writers and publishers to actually sit at the table and negotiate freely their own rates and have a say in what they believe their product to be worth.
It's a completely different world than it was in 1909 or 1941. Especially, in the world of media. As monopolies go, yesterday's ASCAP might look today more like oh, I don't know Google? Of course the lawyer who handed down this recent DOJ ruling was hired away from Google. I'm sure that is a mere coincidence.
Is there a chance what I'm proposing could put streaming services out of business? Yep. Is there a chance it could turn radio and iTunes upside down? Yep. But creators want their voices heard and we have a market incentive to create fair rates. It might be shaky for a while but content creators, content providers and device manufacturers would finally have to sit at the table as equals and work together. And all we would ask the government to do would be do what it was designed to do in the first place enforce the contracts.
It's easy to look at Justin Timberlake or Taylor Swift and think, "The music business looks like it's doing fine." Well, the SUPERSTAR business is always fine. JT could announce a tour where he sits in a rocking chair for 2 hours and pets a cat and it would be sold out. Because people always want to see a superstar. But the framework of the music business; how created works are protected, how they are paid for, who gets paid and how has been held together with rusty bolts and duct tape and rotting wood for years. Now, it is completely imploding and coming apart.
It's either time to start all over or we are going to have to concede that this profession is essentially an amateur sport not a profession at all.
I just re-negotiated my three-year songwriting contract for the third time in three years. For less money every year. A prominent entertainment attorney told me a couple of years ago that EVERY SINGLE songwriting contract she had written that year had been breached because the publishers were going out of business so fast nobody could finish a full term.
People who are better at what they do than 99% of the population is at ANYTHING ..are taking minimum wage jobs to survive and re-inventing themselves as other things. Because their profession basically doesn't exist anymore. And the very nation that tells us to chase our dreams and create our own destiny, is failing us at every turn.
Congress holds a sit-in to banish the bringers of darkness. Inspiring. But they yawn toward the bringers of light and let our livelihood die.
And two private jets met on a tarmac, in Phoenix with one public servant in each.
I believe in laws. I believe in the United States of America. And contrary to what many of my friends think about me, I even believe in government regulation. But until songwriters and publishers are able to declare their own value and negotiate it in the marketplace, we will always be waiting on the state to fix our problem most of the time a problem they caused in the first place.

Wow. Excellent and heart breaking post. Thanks for sharing.

rb, what's your take on Brent Cobb. Got a lot of buzz right now.

quote:

---

rb, what's your take on Brent Cobb. Got a lot of buzz right now.

---

He's signed as a writer at Carnival (I believe), and I have a lot of respect for their roster and the guy who runs it (Frank Lidell, he was my A&R guy when I had my 15 minutes on Decca).

Having said that, I'm not terribly knocked out. To me, he's someone who would've gotten some attention 20 years ago but probably wouldn't have gotten signed as an artist. I think everyone is so desperate for something different, something better than what's on country radio that the bar keeps getting lower and lower. I feel the same way about Sturgill Simpson...his records sound good and interesting, but the songs don't hold up at.all.

Good not great, that's the short version. Just my opinion of course.

ok.

As has been mentioned, I love Sturgill and know you don't. I don't want to get into a pissing match, but can you tell me from a 'technical standpoint' why you don't feel his songs hold up? I'm looking for something objective rather than you just don't care for him, which is certainly within anyone's right.

I appreciate your answer. That's the type of thing I was looking for.

And it does go back somewhat to the subjective point you made because I can listen to a song that has a great groove or I love a particular guitar lick and not pay as much attention to the lyric.

Do you attribute some of what Strugill does to being the writer and performer? For example, much of country is performed by people that do not write what they perform. As you have said, your job is to write a good song; the performance aspect is up to someone else.

I'm sure you would have some similar criticisms with rock musicians that write and perform their own music? I suspect there are not very many artists that are both EQUALLY good at writing and performing?

There are a great many singer/songwriters who are able to pull off wearing both hats. Merle Haggard wrote the majority, though not nearly all, of his material and was tremendous. Willie, clearly, although he too has recorded a great many outside songs. In other genres, Paul Simon and Billy Joel have done it brilliantly; the Eagles, Aerosmith, the Beatles, the Stones...on and on. There's also been a number of artists who insist(ed) on only recording songs they wrote, and it eventually bogged them down career wise. I think it's a fair criticism to say that Larry Gatlin and Clint Black may well have been better served to record some outside songs later in their respective careers. The more successful an artist becomes, the harder it is to find time to write. It's different in other genres, because Adele (for example) goes on a tour, and then comes off the road for a while. Country acts generally don't have that type of tour, they work almost constantly. Back in the 90s when I was writing with Randy Travis, he shared with me that one year he was on the road for 310 days.

I think the tough part of doing that is forcing yourself to be completely and harshly objective about your own material. It's much easier, for example, for an artist to hear one of my songs and turn it down than it would be for that artist to listen to their own creation and judge it by the same criteria, and do it fairly. The one part of the creative process I really have never been comfortable with is when I have to pick songs of mine to perform in shows. I have some that are personal favorites that never seem to be well-received, and I have some that go over like gangbusters that I almost loathe singing.

I certainly admire and respect the artists who can write their own material and do it well. I do get annoyed with some of the ones who really can't write well (or at all) and yet insist on "writing" their own material, usually with a pro writer in the room to do the heavy lifting creatively. And there is absolutely a difference between being a great writer and being a great interpreter of songs. Frank Sinatra, George Strait, George Jones, Tony Bennett, etc. - they aren't known for their writing, they're known for their amazing renditions of great songs.