This topic has been on my mind for a long time, but I'm just now getting some time to talk about it, so here goes. Being somewhat of a musician, it's kindof dear to my heart, so I thought it worthy of a post here. This is not intended to bash Blizzard or offend anyone at all, but it is worth posting, I think.
It has to do with two of Matt Uelmen's compositions - one from D3, and one from D2. I'll start with "Lord" which is a newly-release 'composition' available on the new 15th Anniversary CD. There's not a whole lot to say about it except that it is a complete rip-off of one of the movements from Stravinsky's The Right of Spring. Take a listen to it for a moment. You won't have to go far, because it essentially loops the theme (I say theme here, but really it's just an ostinato):
Eulmen's 'version' is only a half-step up from the original (Eulmen's version is in E-minor and Stravinsky's is in Eb-minor):
This isn't the only time Uelmen has done this. You guys might not have noticed, but throughout all the Rimsky-Korsakoff/Wagnerian-sounding elements in Diablo 2, there's a direct quote from Wagner there:
Likewise, here's the passage to which I'm referring:
My point here is that, while I adore all of Matt Uelmen's works, I find it bizarre that he would do this. Additionally, I hope "Lord" doesn't make it into the final game for the reasons mentioned.
Well... Tho I respect your thoughts, I would hate not to see it in the game for such a reason, I like the song... and would also enjoy the song while playing diablo 3... regardless if it has a something in common with another song.
Very interesting. I wonder if the first piece was meant as some sort of homage to Stravinsky or if he just thought that no one would notice . No doubt that those pieces are very, very similar, and it's definitely more than just quoting another composer.
Bad comparison arcaneweapon. Almost anyone can think about a 1-5-6-4 chord progression by oneself, so we can eventually blame the beatles or bob marley for being lazy, but they did not steal something they didn't deserve.
Not really. Music is often based on other music. In this case, in particular, this shouldn't be though of as a "rip-off" or "stealing" but as a homage. The fact that is it SO similar without any attempt to conceal the fact just goes to prove that. I highly doubt that if you went up to Uelmen and asked him if he created Lord entirely on his own he would say "yes". He would tell you that its original form was by Stravinsky and he felt that it fit the Diablo 3 theme perfectly so he modified it a bit.
Edit: Also, I linked the video mostly because it's somewhat related and I felt that its something everyone should see as it's pretty damn funny.
As a musician myself it's perfectly reasonable for someone to like a certain sound, have no idea where they've heard it, and write it into their own music. A couple bars is hardly worthy of accusing someone of basically plagiarizing.
As a musician myself it's perfectly reasonable for someone to like a certain sound, have no idea where they've heard it, and write it into their own music. A couple bars is hardly worthy of accusing someone of basically plagiarizing.
It's not a 'certain sound' - it's a direct replication, which I showed using notational reduction in the original post. If you copy the melody and harmony from some other composition, that is plagiarizing.
As a musician myself it's perfectly reasonable for someone to like a certain sound, have no idea where they've heard it, and write it into their own music. A couple bars is hardly worthy of accusing someone of basically plagiarizing.
It's not a 'certain sound' - it's a direct replication, which I showed using notational reduction in the original post. If you copy the melody and harmony from some other composition, that is plagiarizing.
IF you claim it as your own. Otherwise it's a homage. Considering how ridiculously famous Rite of Spring is do you honestly think Eulmen thought he'd get away with plagiarizing it?
The "isolde" passages were quotations. They were small parts well woven into an originalish tapestry, performed well by a full orchestra. Totally awesome homage.
This Lord though, I agree is an abomination. Igor Stravinsky ought to be credited as writing this part of the score, with Matt as an arranger.
I'm not a musician, although I do appreciate music having played several instruments and my guitar still, but where do you draw the line with cr. Sure, I like learning riffs by bands and whatnot that don't belong to me and I may take a lick and try and do something unique with it, but I wouldn't call it my own and I'd give reference to those who inspired that from me in the first place.. not to mention if I were just taking something someone else had done, tuned it up half a step, and got paid and credited for it...
How did you run into these pieces btw, you'd just heard them in the past or did you use an android app or something.
As a musician myself it's perfectly reasonable for someone to like a certain sound, have no idea where they've heard it, and write it into their own music. A couple bars is hardly worthy of accusing someone of basically plagiarizing.
It's not a 'certain sound' - it's a direct replication, which I showed using notational reduction in the original post. If you copy the melody and harmony from some other composition, that is plagiarizing.
2 bars of what amounts to quarter notes going up a scale on the low end and constant pitch quarter notes on the high end isn't necessarily plagiarism. He didn't take a melody or harmony, at best it's a basic rhythm. If it wasn't for that rhythm being repeated so much by an orchestra you wouldn't even notice.
It's just like Queen's "Under Pressure" vs. Vanilla Ice's "Ice Ice Baby." It's one riff, and if you don't want your song to sound just like someone else's you probably shouldn't base it off one riff using less notes than I have fingers on one hand for the whole song. Mathematically there's only so many sounds you can make before it all sounds the same again. Monkeys typing Shakespeare and all.
I'm just playing this devil's advocate because it pisses me off when people always claim plagiarism. Plagiarism implies intent, and if someone legitimately writes the same scrap of music as someone else, they didn't plagiarize.
Both are beautiful for sure. I am a bit of a classical music fan myself. If I understand you correctly in what you are saying, do you feel that Igor Stravinsky should be given credit for his music having a direct influence on the piece that Matt Eulmen is performing in his recording for "Lord"?
Both are beautiful for sure. I am a bit of a classical music fan myself. If I understand you correctly in what you are saying, do you feel that Igor Stravinsky should be given credit for his music having a direct influence on the piece that Matt Eulmen is performing in his recording for "Lord"?
Wagner "influenced" the Worldstone piece. The whole expansion was very Wagnerian but it was also largely new. Matt just copied one small but extremely famous phrase and worked in into his own Diablo theme.
Igor Stravnisky didn't "influence" Lord. Lord is an arrangement and minor variation on Rite of Spring.
For those without music experience, arranging is like when someone looks at John Williams "Imperial March" for hollywood orchestra and adapts it to be played by a football marching band. The assigned instruments change, the repeats, tempo, lead-in, volume, etc. all changes. Sometimes some new transitions are thrown in if you're merging a suite of songs. But when you look at the sheet music, the composer still says "John Williams" and the guy who did all that work is just credited as an arranger.
I'm really shocked at people commenting that he just stole the cord progression or something. It's like a few drum fills are distracting people from it being the exact same melody, with the exact same dramatic 2nd part that follows after some added repeats of the first.
Both are beautiful for sure. I am a bit of a classical music fan myself. If I understand you correctly in what you are saying, do you feel that Igor Stravinsky should be given credit for his music having a direct influence on the piece that Matt Eulmen is performing in his recording for "Lord"?
Wagner "influenced" the Worldstone piece. The whole expansion was very Wagnerian but it was also largely new. Matt just copied one small but extremely famous phrase and worked in into his own Diablo theme.
Igor Stravnisky didn't "influence" Lord. Lord is an arrangement and minor variation on Rite of Spring.
For those without music experience, arranging is like when someone looks at John Williams "Imperial March" for hollywood orchestra and adapts it to be played by a football marching band. The assigned instruments change, the repeats, tempo, lead-in, volume, etc. all changes. Sometimes some new transitions are thrown in if you're merging a suite of songs. But when you look at the sheet music, the composer still says "John Williams" and the guy who did all that work is just credited as an arranger.
I'm really shocked at people commenting that he just stole the cord progression or something. It's like a few drum fills are distracting people from it being the exact same melody, with the exact same dramatic 2nd part that follows after some added repeats of the first.
I'm not sure if I could possible make myself any more clear. The "Lord" piece directly copies the:
Melody
Harmony
Orchestration
... and transposes it up a half step. What else is there left in a piece of music?
I JUST discovered today (friggin a decade after game release) the Tristan and Isolde reference in Diablo 2 Lord of Destruction's soundtrack while running through Worldstone Keep. It was marvelous. You guys are f**ing ridiculous. It's an homage, not plagiarism. Below, I explain why the naysayers fail at logic:
There is CLEARLY intent to quote, because it's very direct with no variation. There is clearly NO MALICIOUS INTENT because the pieces quoted are EXTREMELY WELL-KNOWN. This solidifies Uelmen's desire to QUOTE from the greats. There is also not excessive quoting (he quotes 1 motif, that's it; it's not like he ripped off the entire piece!)
If any of you were actual working composers for commercial films, TV or video games, or at least educated in this area, you would understand Uelmen's need to so directly copy the parts: IF HE HAD SOME VARIATIONS, NOT ONE OF US WOULD REALIZE IT'S A QUOTATION. Why? Because, in today's world of extremely abundant music, "almost stealing" themes is rampant and I hate it more than anything else. Basically many many songwriters and composers will copy something 95%, change a couple of rhythms and notes, and claim it as their own.
About half of all FAMOUS film composers, including but not limited to Jerry Goldsmith and John Williams, will readily admit to straight up "ripping off" Stravinsky to the point of "plagiarism". So, if you want to criticize Uelmen, why don't you first instead start with 99% of the composers in Hollywood!
Also, look at all cases of true 100% malicious plagiarism: They are always from NON-well-known songs/pieces. e.g. Chris Brown's recent case.
So my point is, copying a famous piece DIRECTLY actually INDIRECTLY GIVES CREDIT TO THE ORIGINAL COMPOSER because it allows us to RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS SURELY FROM THOSE PIECES. If Uelmen had changed a couple things here and there, he'd be weaseling his way out, trying to claim it as his own! What Uelmen did, is magnificent.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It has to do with two of Matt Uelmen's compositions - one from D3, and one from D2. I'll start with "Lord" which is a newly-release 'composition' available on the new 15th Anniversary CD. There's not a whole lot to say about it except that it is a complete rip-off of one of the movements from Stravinsky's The Right of Spring. Take a listen to it for a moment. You won't have to go far, because it essentially loops the theme (I say theme here, but really it's just an ostinato):
"Lord" by Matt Eulmen
Now listen to Igor Stravinsky - The Rite of Spring, Part 4 (at 0:25).
Eulmen's 'version' is only a half-step up from the original (Eulmen's version is in E-minor and Stravinsky's is in Eb-minor):
This isn't the only time Uelmen has done this. You guys might not have noticed, but throughout all the Rimsky-Korsakoff/Wagnerian-sounding elements in Diablo 2, there's a direct quote from Wagner there:
Uelmen's "Ancients" from Diablo 2
Wagner's Overture to Tristan und Isolde
Likewise, here's the passage to which I'm referring:
My point here is that, while I adore all of Matt Uelmen's works, I find it bizarre that he would do this. Additionally, I hope "Lord" doesn't make it into the final game for the reasons mentioned.
TL2 teaser music
Not really. Music is often based on other music. In this case, in particular, this shouldn't be though of as a "rip-off" or "stealing" but as a homage. The fact that is it SO similar without any attempt to conceal the fact just goes to prove that. I highly doubt that if you went up to Uelmen and asked him if he created Lord entirely on his own he would say "yes". He would tell you that its original form was by Stravinsky and he felt that it fit the Diablo 3 theme perfectly so he modified it a bit.
Edit: Also, I linked the video mostly because it's somewhat related and I felt that its something everyone should see as it's pretty damn funny.
IF you claim it as your own. Otherwise it's a homage. Considering how ridiculously famous Rite of Spring is do you honestly think Eulmen thought he'd get away with plagiarizing it?
Lol, that was way too hilarious. +1 for you.
This Lord though, I agree is an abomination. Igor Stravinsky ought to be credited as writing this part of the score, with Matt as an arranger.
How did you run into these pieces btw, you'd just heard them in the past or did you use an android app or something.
2 bars of what amounts to quarter notes going up a scale on the low end and constant pitch quarter notes on the high end isn't necessarily plagiarism. He didn't take a melody or harmony, at best it's a basic rhythm. If it wasn't for that rhythm being repeated so much by an orchestra you wouldn't even notice.
It's just like Queen's "Under Pressure" vs. Vanilla Ice's "Ice Ice Baby." It's one riff, and if you don't want your song to sound just like someone else's you probably shouldn't base it off one riff using less notes than I have fingers on one hand for the whole song. Mathematically there's only so many sounds you can make before it all sounds the same again. Monkeys typing Shakespeare and all.
I'm just playing this devil's advocate because it pisses me off when people always claim plagiarism. Plagiarism implies intent, and if someone legitimately writes the same scrap of music as someone else, they didn't plagiarize.
That being said this guy probably did.
Wagner "influenced" the Worldstone piece. The whole expansion was very Wagnerian but it was also largely new. Matt just copied one small but extremely famous phrase and worked in into his own Diablo theme.
Igor Stravnisky didn't "influence" Lord. Lord is an arrangement and minor variation on Rite of Spring.
For those without music experience, arranging is like when someone looks at John Williams "Imperial March" for hollywood orchestra and adapts it to be played by a football marching band. The assigned instruments change, the repeats, tempo, lead-in, volume, etc. all changes. Sometimes some new transitions are thrown in if you're merging a suite of songs. But when you look at the sheet music, the composer still says "John Williams" and the guy who did all that work is just credited as an arranger.
I'm really shocked at people commenting that he just stole the cord progression or something. It's like a few drum fills are distracting people from it being the exact same melody, with the exact same dramatic 2nd part that follows after some added repeats of the first.
I'm not sure if I could possible make myself any more clear. The "Lord" piece directly copies the:
There is CLEARLY intent to quote, because it's very direct with no variation. There is clearly NO MALICIOUS INTENT because the pieces quoted are EXTREMELY WELL-KNOWN. This solidifies Uelmen's desire to QUOTE from the greats. There is also not excessive quoting (he quotes 1 motif, that's it; it's not like he ripped off the entire piece!)
If any of you were actual working composers for commercial films, TV or video games, or at least educated in this area, you would understand Uelmen's need to so directly copy the parts: IF HE HAD SOME VARIATIONS, NOT ONE OF US WOULD REALIZE IT'S A QUOTATION. Why? Because, in today's world of extremely abundant music, "almost stealing" themes is rampant and I hate it more than anything else. Basically many many songwriters and composers will copy something 95%, change a couple of rhythms and notes, and claim it as their own.
About half of all FAMOUS film composers, including but not limited to Jerry Goldsmith and John Williams, will readily admit to straight up "ripping off" Stravinsky to the point of "plagiarism". So, if you want to criticize Uelmen, why don't you first instead start with 99% of the composers in Hollywood!
Also, look at all cases of true 100% malicious plagiarism: They are always from NON-well-known songs/pieces. e.g. Chris Brown's recent case.
So my point is, copying a famous piece DIRECTLY actually INDIRECTLY GIVES CREDIT TO THE ORIGINAL COMPOSER because it allows us to RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS SURELY FROM THOSE PIECES. If Uelmen had changed a couple things here and there, he'd be weaseling his way out, trying to claim it as his own! What Uelmen did, is magnificent.