Bach or Procul Harum?

Subject: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Cool Beans
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 03:53 PM

I read where a judge in England just granted the organist for Produl Harum a piece of the songwriting rights to "A Whiter Shade of Pale." The ruling was based on the song's organ solo which is distinctive, all right, but wasn't it appropriated from J.S. Bach? Or is my memory worse than I fear?

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 04:03 PM

Yep - your memory is worse than you fear. The organ accompaniment was composed by their keyboard player - hence the case. The Bach connection is because in the bass line it bears a passing resemblance to the first 3 very well known bars of "Air on the G string", a fairly common descending bass pattern, and the harmonic structure is also very Bach-like. You could almost say "in the style of", and any keyboard player who had lessons beyond about grade 4 would recognise the general style and be able to imitate it. But Bach it aint.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Wesley S
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 04:03 PM

I'm afraid it's your failing memory. If there is a connection to an actual Bach piece I've never heard of it.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Cool Beans
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 04:24 PM

Well, then, the man certainly deserves a songwriting credit. Come to think of it, so does the guy who wrote the organ solo for Dell Shannon's "Runaway."

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Elmer Fudd
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 04:43 PM

There's a riff on the Bach/Procol Harum connection in the Tom Stoppard play, "The Real Thing," when one character puts a record of the Bach piece on the record player, and another character (a playwright, interestingly enough) comments that he likes the Procol Harum version better.

Elmer

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Dave4Guild
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 07:23 PM

It depends upon your interpretation of "Intellectual Property Rights"

I'm not a Judge, so I know little about copyright law, and I'm not a playwright, either, so I'll let others judge interesting playwrights.

But I had grade 8 on Piano when I was twelve, and personally I would back Bach. I think he had the greater intellect of any of these rather averagely talented professions.

(Name a judge from 1685 - 1750 !!) Or Rock Organists who will be known in 350 years.

Slightly tongue in Cheek!

Merry Xmas

Dave

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: melodeonboy
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 07:44 PM

I heard the Procul Harum organist (I can't remember his name) speaking on the radio this afternoon about the judgement.

He said that he was so pleased that he would now be recognised as part of rock'n' roll history (or words to that effect; I can't remember it verbatim off the radio!).

Well, that set me straight, didn't it? And all that time I mistakenly thought that he was just after the mountains of dosh that would come from the royalties!

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 11:29 PM

I vote for Harum

EVERYTHING - that I play has roots.

As "The Boatman" notes...

Anything originating in the bass has a foundation that transcends time.

Give me the address of Harum's lawyer and I can layer him with lyrics and bass-tones that will bring a civil jury to its knees...and render judgement against the ursurping songster.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: fat B****rd
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 04:05 AM

Did you know Gary Brooker (who sang WSOP) was in Evita ?. I'm with Melodeonboy on this one.
PS I loath WSOP but love lots of their other stuff.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: GUEST,Parttimer
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 04:21 AM

Dave4Guild How about Judge Jeffries, but as for rock organists the omly one I can think of who has any chance is Rick Wakeman.
Keep on Picking
Merry Christmas to you and Brenda

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: HipflaskAndy
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 11:08 AM

Matthew Fisher - that's the Procul-Harum-organist's name no one can seem to recall, even thought the recent news story was all about HIM!
Not likely (to answer the Q about which rock organists will be remembered) then that he will be,
in that thems up above can't recall him when he's a current topic! Ya gotta larf.

Rock organists?
Well, Deep Purple's Jon Lord wrote a big concerto for group and orchestra - was a live LP rec from the Albert Hall
- wi' the classic-world's reknowned Malcom Arnold conducting
- will we remember Mr Lord? Doubt it (though I can obviously recall it all at this stage!)

Keith Emerson (Emerson Lake and Palmer) - 'Pictures at an Exhibition' and all that - surely he will live on in history - mebbe not!

Aw, I give in - reckon you're right. Hugs - Dunc

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Wesley S
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 02:08 PM

I've gpt that Deep Purple LP Andy. But I havn't played it in decades. As far as rock organists that might be remembered I'd mention Booker T, Ray Manzarek, and Billy Preston. Garth Hudson too.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 02:18 PM

I believe that if you change 25% of a piece, i.e. one note in four, it is regarded as a different piece for copyright purposes.
Can't remember where I heard that!
G.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Bassic
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 02:28 PM

Here are the dots for both, the tunes are significantly different though WSP is definitely "in the style of".
Bach
Procul Harum

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 03:13 PM

But without that organ accompaniment who would remember "A Whiter Shade of Pale"? The point isn't whether the musical passage was particularly original in itself - what was original was putting it in that place, in that song. And it was made made the song noticeable and memorable. Far more than the words or the singing.

What puzzles me is the motivation of Gary Brooker and lyricist Keith Reid in trying to make out Fisher's contribution wasn't the key to the song's success. Well, money, I suppose. But the must have known they were very likely to lose the case, and in the process lose more money than ever. And look like fools in the process.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Elmer Fudd
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 03:45 PM

Felix Cavaliere of the Rascals, aka the Young Rascals, was no slouch on the organ either.

Then there was Al Kooper, who didn't know how to play the organ but whose playing is nevertheless immortalized on "Like A Rolling Stone." Works for me.

Elmer

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:05 PM

Dave4Guild said, in part:

But I had grade 8 on Piano when I was twelve, and personally I would back Bach. I think he had the greater intellect of any of these rather averagely talented professions.

This has nothing whatever to do with which musician had the greater intellect. Nor has it anything to do with which is the better piece of music.

Bach's piece is long, long in the public domain. Certain editions published within the appropriate recent time frame may be copyrighted, but it's the physical representation, and any editorial liberties taken with Bach's music (publishers do it all the time) that's copyrightable.

Mathew Fisher's piece, regardless of its musical value or lack thereof, is an original piece even if inspired by Bach, or even if some bass figure is literally quoted from Bach.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:21 PM

Here is Procul Harum doing it. With singalong words along the bottom. Procol Harum - A whiter shade of pale

Just try to imagine it without the organ line. It's a pity the song's now got this creepy court case colouring it, with lawyers pawmarks and with musicians' moneygrubbing fingers all over it..
..........................
I always loved the scene in The Committments where the young priest is playing it on the church organ. Leading to the exchange:
- "Great intro, uh?"
- "They nicked it from Marvin Gaye."
- "He nicked it from Bach!"

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: fat B****rd
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:15 AM

Thankyou Mcg of H. I will get out my Procul Harum Compilation very soon. Courtcase Shmortcase ! Gary Brooker is still in fine voice.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Ross
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:17 AM

Manfred Mann had a big organ

Still does

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:45 AM

It wasn't as big as the one in the Royal Albert Hall though.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: GUEST,Johnmc
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 07:02 AM

Never mind the legalities, what about integrity? I would be too emabarrassed to claim a piece was my own when it clearly is just an elaboration or variation on the essential progression Bach created.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 07:42 AM

A sequence of three bars is not a song or a tune or a "creation", I think, Johnmc. We are talking about more than just a variation on a theme, here. Let the Procol Harum onanist have it, I say.

But, as most of us could not remember his name, does that make the piece "traditional"? And therefore out of copyright?

Just funning of course.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 07:54 AM

Wesley, Fisher himself acknowledged his debt to the Bach piece.

Melodeonboy and Fat Bastard: Most of the royalty income to be earned from Whiter Shade of Pale has already come in. Fisher lost his claim for backdating his entitlement to a share in those royalties. He also had to meet his own legal costs in the case, which came to about £500,000. Cynicism is a predictable reaction to any case involving big numbers, but I think you can rest easy in the knowledge that Fisher won't make much money out of this one.

If I'd made the kind of contribution to a song's success that Fisher did, I'd want my name attached.

By the way, wasn't it a spat over the credits for House of the Rising Sun that drove a wedge between Eric Burdon and Alan Price?

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: fat B****rd
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 09:07 AM

Point taken Peter. I believe Eric Burdon has rants regarding that song especially as he has to sing it every night.
A case of Trad. Arr I think.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 09:27 AM

Yes, I believe it was credited as "Trad. Arr. Price" due to a misunderstanding (I don't think it was Alan Price's fault this happened from what I recall - I believe it was an error by someone at EMI). The other members of the band, including notably the guitarist Hilton Valentine, could probably have claimed a share of the royalties for their contribution to the arrangement.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:06 AM

I imagine the media attention round the court case will probably bring in some more sales by drawing attentiion to the song.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:38 AM

It does get in ome from ads of course, and I suppose that could be appreciable.

Subject: RE: Bach or Procul Harum?
From: Scrump
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:53 AM

Not to mention it being on umpteen compilations of 1960s hits (which always seem to have the same handful of songs on, in spite of the huge number of good 1960s pop songs available to choose from)