This whole time I thought the violin melody is what was sampled, but it’s actually the stuff (much quieter) behind it. Makes the lawsuit even more spurious and unbelievable.
You can still hear basically all elements of the song in the orchestral version. Most importantly, the melody of the song is the same as the melody of the original song. The violin melody is probably the most original part of the song, and it's still not entirely original - you can also hear it in the orchestral version (if you listen to the full version). It's played on piano and it misses some notes. But you can still hear where it comes from. Still, the fact that The Rolling Stones got 100% of the writing credits for this song is a bit strange, since there's almost no resemblance between the original Stones song and Bittersweet Symphony. It does use the same vocal melody, though, so I'm not saying Stones should get no writing credits. But most of the writing credits should go to the arranger of the orchestral version.
The sample adds depth, but without it, I´m sure they could have added something similar there just inspired by the sample to make it just as good. If they had known before hand the hassle the sample would create.
@@teppo9585 I believe you are right. The magic is there just needed to find a similar sample or vibe to add. Regardless it classic no matter where the royalties go.
Fascinating - I thought the entire orchestral string part was the sample. Even without it the song sounds amazing. Pity they got screwed by the lawyers on it but, it still sold millions of albums and gig tickets as well as their other amazing songs so, all in all, The Verve win in the end :)
@@martin-1965 This video isn't quite right ..the strings were copied as well, they just re-recorded them rather than sample them .... The Stones deserved to win as the verve added nothing but the lyrics
Best part is Keith Richards acknowledged they used the refrain from an old Gospel Song by The Staples Sisters. So basically the Rolling Stones ripped a song, then Andrew Oldham took the rip of that song and played it with an orchestra, then The Verve ripped it for a sample in this song. However, only The Verve got punished for lack of originality, by the people that weren't original in the first place.
The stones never punished the verve, infact they were insistent that the verve not be punished. They received royalties for the song a couple of years ago, thanks to jagger and Richards.
@@mickreynolds3306 Yes, it was their label and management that acted on copyright issues. Kudos to Jagger and Richards for working on behalf of the Verve.
@@ROOKTABULA I just always love how dismissive religious people are towards all the other like 3999+ religions that still exist today, nevermind all the ones through history... The Christian Right in the states are my favorite.. They view the Romans and Greek gods like "little kid" gods, that they chuckle and mock the idea anybody took seriously... They laugh off and talk around the simple question "well, who is right? Are Muslim teachings true? If so, which ones? Which sect of Islam? What about Hindus and Buddhists?? (Well... Obviously it's Christianity that's right... But it just depends how offensive they want to be with their response, or how "unwoke/not a PC snowflake" they want to be with their answer... ...Or they can tap dance around it forever...) My other favourites are the ones who quote scripture in response to anything and everything in their life, as if remembering scripture is proof of ANYthing besides their brainwashing from their parents/local society/culture for the most part, based on the religion they're born into...
What’s crazy about this is why the Stones continued to receive royalties for this song, when it was the AL Oldham Orchestra that performed it. It was all arranged by the Stones’ manager at the time, Allan Klein. Richard Ashcroft has finally started receiving royalties as songwriter for Bittersweet Symphony when the Stones relented after years of legal wrangling.
An executive at ASCAP told me that it was really shady how this happened. Allegedly, The Verve's manager thought he made a fair deal with Allan Klein, who agreed to a 50/50 split. But the devil in the details was that he meant a 50/50 split between Jagger and Richards, not The Stones and The Verve, The Verve's manager understood it to be.
@@eclectico78 It wasn't even the stones, it was their greedy manager Allan Klein who screwed over the verve. After his death, it was actually his own son and the rolling stones who finally gave the song back to the verve and did the right thing.
@@allroundlad The Rolling Stones were angry, Keith Richards said "We were ripped off." They blocked the broadcast of Sisters of Mercy's great version of Gimme Shelter as well. A$$holes.
It's insane how much the sample muddles that gorgeous guitar tone. They would've saved themselves so many legal headaches and probably had an even bigger impact without it!
@@JDelvaMusic but...but literally none of the rest of the song, besides the chord progression, was taken from the Stones song except the sample. Which is done literally every day in music. Explain how it would be plagiarism.
The real unsung hero here is all the lead guitar swells and slides. The feedback, the super fast delay here and there. It really adds depth to an already killer song. Nick is so damn tasteful.
Loads of songs do, it's the art of the studio to build it up into 'one sound', or the illusion of it. Even what seems like a quite simple pop song will have 30 or 40 separate different tracks.
Seriously? Didn’t you know that songs are usually made up of at least 32 tracks now? An individual track from every drum and instrument so they can all be individually processed and controlled. Have you never seen the huge mixing consoles in studios? Every strip does the same thing but to a different instrument
@@javiceres Yeah, but it's sad that the orchestral version seems to have nothing from the original stones song, and thus a shame that that sample, and poor advice from management, led to the 100% theft of their song.
@@guanoguy4800 and that's infuriates me! RS sued and got ALL the rights for TV song WHEN they themselves were using a sample from another song. The Rolling Hypocrisy. The Nerve to pull that out!
Ya know, after years of hearing this song, I don’t think I ever knew it sampled a previous work. Based on your video, it seems to me the Verve did a gods job of reworking and melding the sample just enough that it almost seems like it was originally part of their song.
Im 54, and this song is > than any Rolling Stones song on my hard drive. I don't hate the stones, but this song simply moves me more than any Stones song does.
I actually prefer it without the sample. You can really hear what I believe is McCabe's guitar which gets drowned out and lost when the samples are playing over the top. Edit: Any chance you could remove the samples completely and upload the full song for us? :)
Too much depth... or to be more accurate... they totally fucking ruined the original with their cluttered noisy garbage! Really makes one's ears bleed!
Agree with Sam, the 8th note sequence is still (mostly) there in the original, it just got a fresh arrangement. Definitely something you would need the rights for ahead of time. Glad they all worked it out.
@@bobcurrie1642the thing always has been (imho) that the original Rolling stones recording sounds nothing like that arrangement... So, tevhnically the autorship of that should have belonged to whoever orchestrated that rendition of the London Orchestra
@0000song0000, thanks for the reply. I hear ya, and have thought the same, to a degree. I hate that the music world is completely lawsuit crazed. That being said, this one is pretty much a dead-ringer, and they would have been wise to get the rights, regardless of who the owner was.
I remember not even hearing the song when it was premiered on Radio 1, instead going out and buying the CD single and playing it full blast when I got home after school. It was the extended version too (still the superior one), and can still picture me sat there listening to this incredible piece of music for the first time
Fun fact -I remember they had the Stones version on the PA before their gig when they were just “Verve” in 1993 at Riverside , Newcastle. 2nd fun fact - Oasis were the support act that night. Happy days.
@@bderrick4944 Yes, being genuinely blown away hearing Oasis sound check (I am the Walrus and Shakermaker) from outside, then mid set their PA blowing and Bonehead played “She’ll be Coming around the mountain” on the spoons and acoustic for a laugh. Then Verve at their psychadelic best , all for about £8 I think. It certainly ranks up there as one of the best I have seen.
He deserves the rights to 100 percent of the song he wrote. So glad to see him finally get it handed over by Mick and Keith in 2018. The right thing to do. MODERN DAY BLUES SONG, BABY! A classic x
If you listen to the “Lucky Man” single, there is a song called “MSG”. Which is basically the backing track for Bitter Sweet. Because as far as I can tell, the original sample was not used in the song - rather they recreated the magic the loops gave them. Anyhow, when you mix “MSG” and “BSS” you’ll see what I mean. Have fun, I used to get lost in mixing the two of them together when I discovered this in the 90’s.❤
Sounds great with or without the sample, I'd imagined the strings in the 'without sample' version were part of the infamous and much talked about sample (but then again the sample probably influenced the writing of the music so...). Excellent track in any case!
Good that folks still discuss this song near a 1/4 century on. Hopefully they still speak of it for many years to come. It hooked me when VH1 (remember them?) premiered this 'new' obscure UK band that had some funny lookin skinny lad walkin down the street. UH stayed in my backpack thru college and years later when i tossed the bag i cleaned it out and there was that CD. To be 18 again... -U10
Hello! Hey, I did my part promoting this song when I was so young IN A STRIP CLUB of all places. Not that many people frequent these places for the music, but if you're insecure , naked, with you're emotions RAW, there is nothing better than to spend those minutes on stage with THIS song, quieting the place replacing sleaze with MOONLIGHT...
@@megadave1197 The US has no idea of this band until this song. But yes who knew when i got into them that there was an even richer back catalog to listen to. -U10
@@Ultegra10SPD Ha ok fair play mate! I think they did tour US around 93 🤔 but yea it’d been very low key. There is a great live show on RU-vid in Frankfurt I think 93/94 search for it 👌🏼 😎
@@Ultegra10SPD ahem, those of us who were into shoegaze/ dreampop knew who VERVE were before they were forced to tack on "The", and loved the fuck out of the debut album/eps.
What I love, is that The Stones' Version, Andrew Oldham's version, and The Verve's are all incredible in their own right. I absolutely love all three tracks.
I've listened to the last time and although that string section on bittersweet symphony is not sampled, it is copying the strings on the last time. But clearer and louder
A brilliant masterpiece of a song, without the sample. It enhances the song, it doesn’t make it. This song instantly takes me back to the late 90’s, right before my son was born. I was 26, lol. One of the best decades for music ever.
Kudos for this video. This entire album is one of the truest definitions of “Wall of Sound.” So many little things hide in the background and this leads to a really satisfying soundscape
Really, who gives a fuck, the stones thing wasn't doing anything, sorta dead even, no one knew it. The Verve brought this old 5 sec tune back to life, a new life, on the TV on the radio, more than what it was doing just sitting there getting dusty. Share music people, it doesn't have to turn to greed. I love what The Verve did with this.
It doesnt matter if the theme wasnt being famous, if it belongs to them it belongs to them, if you steal somebody elses work it doesnt make it ok just because it was more popular with you, with that said, the verve did deserve a portion of the royalties
@Dan White I think the Stones stole the song from an old R&B group and the Orchestral melody itself was not written by Keith or Jagger. So in reality they never really had original ownership of anything.
greedy is so ugly, like the family of the man who wrote kookaburra lives in the old gum tree, who sued' men at work' for using it in the opening rift of 'land down under'. they won, causing one of the writers to kill himself
@@NoName-qv8ko well they should have give him credit, that was the correct way to proceed, i would call it hypocrecy, but in the stones favor they suposedly didnt want to take bitter sweet symphony's royalties, and they were not the ones aproaching the process, but their legal team acted "automatically"
Thank you! It's edifying when one uses the web to demonstrate others' merit, how strong music is built, spending time with the work FOR ITS OWN SAKE (rather than go for a 15min attempt at fame). I'm glad I stumbled on this, which is funny, since while this song is depressing (but beautiful) for so many of us yet YOU did put a smile on my face this second. Good work bro!
And don't forget A Storm In Heaven! That and the EP where when they were called Verve before they had to change their name to The Verve. Listened to those more times than I can possibly count.
@@TheMorganRose A Storm in Heaven is so damn good, I've had seperate periods where I'd just get obsessed with one song from the album and play it over and over, for multiple of the songs on the album
Why would it pain you? dramatic much? This is a fantastic song. One of the best songs of the 90s. Doesn't mean we can't love their other tracks like drugs don't work, lucky man, etc.
The YT algorithm brought me here. This is cool. Thanks for breaking this down. Nice to see that even without the sample Richard and the boys really had something. I played this song to death when it first came out. Such an incredible song.
In the words of Richard Ashcroft: "The best song they ever wrote." 😅 Gotta love that Northern sense of humour. Glad he's finally getting paid for this.
So the lead violin, which in my view is the song’s main hook, is all Verve?! Why on earth did they agree to turn over 100%? Should have let Allen Klein sue them, a jury would have ABSOLUTELY decided in The Verve’s favor. Agreed Mick and Keith should give them retro pay. Fat chance
sorry, but all of the music behind the lead violin is a clear copy of the orchestral version of the last time. with or without the samples, apart from the violin, musically and rythmically it is the exact same, so basically ashcroft only wrote the lyrics.
It went before a judge who unfortunately ruled 100% against The Verve. But Mick and Keith signed over the rights to the song eventually and gave them something like $2.5 million.
@@bobthebear1246 Eventually = 25 years later, when the biggest hype is over and the remaining profits are hardly noticeable. The Rolling Stones milked the cow and left the carcass to The Verve, therefore I don't see it as something we should give them credit for.
As a musician, we tend to overthink a lot of things in our songs. This goes to show that many things that WE (musicians) think are totally dynamic changing and life or death; really don’t matter. I don’t think this song would have been any less without the sample.
This is our wedding first dance song. It had been on the radio maybe a week, so hardly anybody had heard it yet. I heard it and instantly knew it would be incredible. When it started playing, everybody stood there stunned at how beautiful it was. Then when the swing really kicks in, everybody got on the floor and started waltzing. It was insane!
Oh, mannn! This is such an amazing bit of music history. Didn't know this at all. Also, it was refreshing to listen to the individual samples. Then to finally hear that Richards came through was a sweet end to the saga, sort of. I have new appreciation for this song, which, with or without the sample(s), is still one of my all time favourites. Thanks a lot for sharing this video. You rock! Stay safe.
Even with the actual sample removed, the entire basis for the rhythm, melody and harmony is derived from the sampled music. Play just the layered samples for anyone and they'll tell you it's the same song.
lol yeah, this guy's making like he's revealing some kind of epiphany of the greed of rights holders to us or something. The underlying rhythm and structure of the song comes directly from the sample. The Verve wrote the underlying sections AFTER deciding they were going to make a song to this pre-existing piece of music they sampled. It's not like they wrote their own parts of Bitter Sweet Symphony and then went, "Whoa, doesn't this sound like that Stones song that they themselves sampled from someone else? Let's sample that in over! Isn't this serendipitous! We could get in trouble for this but gee it sounds so good, we've got to do it." No, they took the sample, liked the sound and built the scaffolding underneath. It's a great track; everyone knows that. But this video doesn't prove much of anything beyond what we already knew, which is The Verve built a great track around someone else's sample.
But they paid for the rights to use the sample, but apart from it being distinct, i don't see how the argument by Klein "they used more than what the license covered" is sound. Anyways Klein is a piece of trash not because he sued them, but because that's what the company was built as, they've gone after every artist, they first outright bought the rights to song, then hunted artists using the songs to sue them. They even sued George Harrison over a song he wrote while being managed by them! These assholes first defended Harrison against a lawsuit by bright tunes, outright bought bright tunes, then sued Harrison for the same song! Ive always said be poor if you must but don't hand over song rights to corporations or to anyone else. Only give a license to reproduce if you need to.
It's right to say that it's not just the sample parts the band took. The arrangement, Tempo and structure all are based on the arrangement. The other main point in all this is the work of David Whittaker who did the orchestral arrangement rather than Oldham or the stones. But copyright doesn't cover arrangements as far as I know.
The lead violin was recorded by The Verve but it was ripped by the same Rolling Stones track (but in a different section). So even though the strings aren’t samples, it is a direct rip. So The Verve sampled AND ripped the melody. But to be fair, they should’ve gotten at least a 30% credit for the song.
The exact melody of the strings is not in the Stones' track. Check out this other video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kyzeyaW-emU.html
Loog Oldham made the largest contribution in the eventual creation of Bitter Sweet Symphony. The Stones, Oldham, and the Verve all deserved a three way split. We wouldn't have had the 1990's masterpiece without all three! I can see how things worked out like they did. It was far more than a simple sampling and very close to a remix.
Agreed. I think even without the sample of the bells, they still would've lost that case. Look at Radiohead/The Air That I Breathe case; or Oasis/Neil Innes, and now with the whole Marvin Gaye and Ed Sheeran thing. Unfortunately a bunch of music experts are not deciding the case so all we can do is pray and not write a song with slight familiarity and have it become a hit.
@@FerryLuckyMan: May I ask how you were able to remove the sample? I work with audio and mess around with RX 10 etc., so don't be afraid of getting technical. Thanks!
Really interesting, thanks! Sounds like (if they’d known in advance it would become a huge hit) they could’ve saved a lot of money by re-recording the sample themselves ... it adds character but nothing irreplaceable
