MAROON 5 – STRIKE 3!!

Los Angeles’ pop/ funk-rockers Maroon 5 recently graced Australia’s shores to perform and promote their third CD release “Hands All Over”. It’s hard to believe that it is seven long years since “This Love”, “She Will Be Loved” & “Sunday Morning” ruled the global airwaves, and the debut CD release “Songs About Jane” became a smash hit. 2007’s follow up CD “It Won’t Be Soon Before Long” also sold in large quantities, however Maroon 5 were swiftly becoming famous solely for the latest romantic exploits of their charismatic front man, Adam Levine.

So, how does the all-important third CD release “Hands All Over” shape up?

Whether it was an act of pure honesty or a cunning marketing strategy, Adam Levine told the media that “Hands All Over” would be Maroon 5’s final CD. I remain indifferent to this comment, as the band display enormous potential to move away from a “funk” sound into a general Adult Contemporary category, which could see Maroon 5 return to their original level of popularity.

It has to be said that Adam Levine has a weak voice, and his singing tends to get lost within the heavily produced funk songs most synomonous with the Maroon 5 “sound”. The lead single “Misery” is essentially an inferior re-write of “This Love”, and in general the CD is a case of song writing by numbers with very predictable lyrics. Not even the introduction of the mega-successful producer Robert John “Mutt” Lange can bring life to a collection of songs of this standard. The title track “Hands All Over” sounds very similar to Def Leppard’s “Pour Some Sugar On Me”, noting that Lange produced this classic 1980’s rock track.

“Hands All Over” shines brightest when focusing on the songs counter to Maroon 5’s funk brand. An acoustic version of Queen’s “Crazy Little Thing Called Love” works particularly well; it’s a great pop song and the arrangement provides space for Levine’s vocals to move to the fore. However, the stand out song is “Out Of Goodbyes”, a duet with the Nashville trio, Lady Antebellum. The whole “acoustic/ country” vibe could actually work wonders for Maroon 5’s popularity. A subtle acoustic arrangement & production tends to suit Adam Levine’s voice. Let’s face it, Maroon 5’s best song [“Sunday Morning”] is based around a simple piano riff and uncomplicated rhythm. Rock guitar doesn’t suit Maroon 5, as Levine’s voice can’t compete.

“Hands All Over” won’t be a mega-platinum selling CD, however this could be a blessing in disguise. Maroon 5 have pushed their “funk” edge within an inch of its life. A change in music direction could just be the trick to spark the band’s popularity & longevity.

MUSIC COPYRIGHT LICENSING: ART OVER COMMERCE, OR A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH?

Recent media reports indicate that David Byrne [of Talking Heads fame] sued former Florida governor Charlie Crist for $1 million on the basis that Crist did not seek permission to use Byrne’s “Road To Nowhere” in his US Senate campaign against Marco Rubio.

The matter appears to have now amicably reached closure, however it warrants discussion as to how Byrne may have reacted to a formal request to license the song in question:

1. If formally approached, would David Byrne have agreed to license “Road To Nowhere” for Charlie Crist’s political campaign?
2. If the answer was “Yes”, what would Byrne have sought in dollar terms for his license fee?
3. If the answer was “No’, what was Byrne’s rationale for the license rejection?

I have always viewed the art of writing songs in the same perspective as that of an inventor of a new machine, patent et al. It only makes sense that if you invent “something”, and it is party to public consumption, then you are entitled to seek some form of compensation for the ongoing use of your invention.

Let’s analyse David Byrne’s song writing career for one moment. “Road To Nowhere” was one of a handful of “commercial” songs released by Talking Heads in the mid-1980’s. Byrne’s solo career is a tad more esoteric these days, thus one would assume that his song writing royalties from Talking Heads’ halcyon days would represent the bulk of his present annual royalty statements. From a financial perspective, one would assume that it is in Byrne’s best interests to exploit his Talking Heads back catalogue.

Asides from having a staunch objection to Charlie Crist’s government policies, is there any meaningful rationale as to why Byrne would have rejected a license? “Road To Nowhere” has been public property since 1985. The song has a different meaning to each and every listener [and most likely a different meaning to the writer’s inspiration for the song], however this is what writing, recording & releasing songs to the general public is all about. Whilst legal ownership of the song remains with its creator [or to be legally precise, the song’s publisher], the song in itself lends itself to the public the moment that it is released. In general, the positive aspects of this point are multiple, including financial rewards and critical adulation!!

In an ironic sense, Crist’s illegal use of “Road To Nowhere” [and the subsequent media coverage of the incident] has most likely worked to Byrne’s favour. It is unknown as to whether Crist paid Byrne a financial settlement for closure of the matter, however publicity of this event shall generate a spike in mp3 and CD sales of “Road To Nowhere” and Talking Heads CDs in general.

If Crist had legally paid “market rates” for the song license, would the flow-on effect of song writer royalties to Byrne have been as large as they will be on the back of the subsequent media coverage? I guess not!!