Why is a song more famous than a band?

Question

In a world and time very much like ours around 2000, how could I explain that all kinds of pop music strictly separate composer, author (lyricist) and performer (interpreter), just like we are used to with classical music?

CD singles should contain one song in multiple versions going beyond remixes, but there could also be competing releases. Albums would either contain a band's renditions of 10 to 30 songs by different authors or select performances of the mist recent songs by a writer.

I just need music and lyrics writers to become at least as rich and famous as performers.

Answer 1

You are basically describing opera (or other classical music). The composer, the librettist and the performer are clearly separate, and there are two separate fame-axes: one for the performer, one for the authors.

So, just keep opera popular, or let opera be more open to popular trends, so that the "low class" popular music never evolves separately.

Answer 2

As several have noted, this is in fact the normal state of affairs for some generes. I think the association of pop music with a specific performance is a rather recent phenomenon. How might that not have happened?

First, look at things like “show tunes”. The emphasis is on live performances and it’s a large scale collaboration. The lead singer and conductor change independently several timee during the original run, and then multiple troupes perform it on different tours.

Eventually people do release recordings, but the song is already famous before the specific recording makes the rounds. After a while they become “American Standards” associated with a composer, not a specific artist.

Maybe the culture is such that most interesting music comes from this, and songs produced in isolation are generally deemed empty of context.

Second, the music publishing industry might have went down a different road. They could release the same composition with different performances as a matter of course. There could be different market segments distinguished by geographical region, ethnic groups, age, or other factors. Make it other than geographical so the segments are mixed. Then, it makes sence that they make a point of releasing the same song to different segments rather than totally different pieces, so it serves as a unifying influence and drives cross-segment sales.

Some of the market segments may still have a culture of live music and local favorite performers. The publisher sells the sheet music and other tie-ins, not just a recording. People hear the recording on the radio and also the same popular songs on the street and in local gatherings.

Finally, composers may intend for different performers to put their own interpretation on the song. When a song is popular, different performers will compete with the same song.

In short, ensure that popular music (whatever it sounds like) still has essential characteristics that orchestra, opera, and musical-play has.

Answer 3

That kind of could occur if the bands would not be the ones idolized. Idolization gives the bands leverage, because they are the key resource that makes money for the producers. It is not only about the money, because intellectual property rights can easily turn it around; the fame is the problem.

It is about culture. At the time of Mozart and such, the performer was only an instrument, so it is not a far fetched idea. One thing to change is that the people would need to respect the music intellectually. They must respect the ideas behind the music and see performer as a mean to consume music.

It could be that people should be generally more technically aware. If they valued pure perfect voices that are exactly the right tone over the ones ruined with tobacco and alcohol, that are often associated with the more rock side of the performers. If the audience would prefer performers technically over another; they could easily agree that an another performer is better. It would not remove the effect of liking a voice, so there is still need for many performers.

That is only one way I see this could happen. Some other things that turn the performer an instrument may work as well.

Answer 4

I don't really see that you've any explaining to do!

The only problem you face is in that currently in the pop-music industry, the front-man/woman is valued, and they are the product that is sold. This is a usually good-looking person with personality and a good voice who performs the songs, who people will pay money to go and see. e.g. a difficulty would arise if the writer were to put on a concert as they might have different performers for each song - logistically difficult and expensive. Therefore the performer becomes the "owner" of the song in the public's eyes at least.

However with only a small change in culture, it's not at all insurmountable. Take the film industry - the leading-man or leading-lady would be like the front-man, but nowadays, the director is regarded as much as the lead actor. Pulp Fiction features Samuel L. Jackson and is directed by Quentin Tarantino - both are big names, equally associated with the film (in fact in this case the director is even more associated with it).

It's all about the brand, and pop-music promoters just happen to use the performer for the brand at the moment. But if a writer were to have several successful songs "by" different performers, they could be used as the brand just as much - giving interviews, releasing albums (with different performers), and soon you would have a cultural shift just as you have with films. As for putting on concerts, well you mightn't want to have many performers at a single concert, but perhaps a tour of concerts would have different bands (e.g. local talent) play at each one. (The writer might still have to M.C. or something to show face though.)

Answer 5

Who was lead violin for the opening night of Beethoven's 9th?

The fact that I can't even refer to the symphony without referring to the composer of said symphony kind of seals the deal. Even the biggest performers of previous eras, pianists like Rachmaninoff and Liszt are only remembered today for their compositions, and not for their performances. People like Bach, Wagner, and Beethoven never performed as musicians, they wrote and directed.

As others have mentioned, operas and musicals are another genre where the composer is remembered, but in that case the performers were probably at least as famous at the time. Puccini is mostly remembered to day for Tosca, but at the time at least as many people knew Hariclea Darclee, the Romanian soprano who headlined it. She even has her own Wikipedia page (Beethoven's lead violin does not)

So any sort of ensemble production would make for a famous composer, but musical productions without solo voice performances would make for an exclusively famous composer.

Answer 6

Communism

Well, a powerful centralized Socialist state, anyway. You want to hit these aspects:

Copyright protection is weak or non-existent

In a communist country, all production was owned by the state, including creative works. So there was no issue of authors defending "their" work from others. Neither can authors/composers claim royalties when others reuse their work, because income that does not come from labor (such as interest earned on investment, or collecting license fees) is capitalism, and is forbidden.

This allows any performer to perform any piece of music, and any lyrics. Being sued is not in the cards. But to make sure you credit the original author and composer, you need...

An emphasis on collective achievement, and crediting everyone

If you have a single diva performer, that's all everyone is going to know about. An ethic of downplaying the role of any one individual ensures that the names of all contributors are known. Sharing is caring.

It also helps if the state oversees the composition of bands for performances. They might pluck well-known people from other venues (such as a famous poet) and say "write the lyrics for a song that will be played at such and such an event."

And as long as your state is pushing people around, you can't go wrong with...

Limited range of discourse, limited audience

There are a few ways this can help you. Many powerful states focus on their own, unique culture and tradition - so even a punk rock band might take up a famous folk song or theme and remix or reinterpret it (this happens pretty much all the time in metal). Creating music for your own country can also rely on memes and references that don't exist elsewhere, once again encouraging the reuse of entities you can expect your audience to know already. And finally, the established canon is something that's already been approved by state censors, so you can reduce the amount of trouble you might run into with the police for your subversive performances!