They do almost sound the same but both of the repeated music sequences from their songs are so simple they could've easily come up with same music sequence by coincidence. I mean Perry's sequence basically just goes Db Db Db Db C C Bb. And it's all quarter notes except for the Bb which is a half note. It's not that hard for to separate people to come up with that.
Daren - 10 years ago
I'm a musician with over 30 years of experience performing live and writing songs. In the Christian song there are 4 cycles of 4 beats. The first three play straight and every forth cycle includes an extra off-shot to work the groove with the signature pitch-shifting notes playing over top. In Perry's song the beat is more complex and, overall, the beat and positioning of the beat offers more dynamics. I do not see reasonable grounds for copyright infringement on the basis of copying the beat.
Erika - 10 years ago
If you know music you can tell that one is a tad but slower but still the same beat. Yes you can copy right beats and these artist do make their beats. I do not think this is a stupid case because when making music a lot if time effort and money is put into it and to have something taken from you like you don't matter is disrespectful. Yes I do think Katy perry is a devil worshipper just listen to this song and look up the symbols and things that look abnormal and you will see if too!
Alex bell - 10 years ago
The songs don't even sound the same those suers are stupid. A lot of songs now sound the same but you don't start suing. Thats my opinion don't hate
Joe b - 10 years ago
Not important. ... your entitled to your opinion and I respect that but if you think she's a devil worshiping based off that song then who's the idiot lmao
mcknibble - 10 years ago
The music is somewhat similar, as in the case of George Harrison and My Sweet Lord or any of the hundred lawsuits like this......one song can have the exact same note but one song holds a quarter note longer then it is considered a whole different song. I had never heard of the song Joyful Noise...its a pretty good song but it isnt as playful musically or as fun music wise as Dark Horse. If the judge is a music lover he will laugh this one right out of the court room. It is similar but not even close.
not important - 10 years ago
Joe b you are an idiot. Katy perry is a devil worshiping freak. And she should not even be considered part of the christian family. No sympathy for that demon bitch. And the beat is CLEARLY the same.
Joe b - 10 years ago
Completely different. ... However the underlying rhythm in the synthesis is very similar but NOT the same .... I don't feel like this should even be entertained in the court system.... now for the Christian rappers to say that Perrys song ruined their image.... wow what a Christian thing to say or attempt to do... try and extort money or fame from a former Christian singer.... thought the Christian thing to do was turn the other cheek?
belle - 10 years ago
They have no case the words in the songs dont even match. There not even a same beat nothing similar bout the songs in my opionion it jus someone broke try get a quick buck if u ask me
Matt - 10 years ago
There is no case. It's not sampled and a beat cannot be copyrighted. A melody can be copyrighted, but they're no where near similar enough to have any substantial weight in court. This lawsuit is absurd... The prosecutor and clients obviously don't know what they're doing.
Toria Hughesnet - 10 years ago
Things like this happen all the time. Honestly some people have never heard of the song "Joyful Noise." There are plenty of songs in this world that have literally had two singers singing THE EXACT SAME THING. And they dont make a big fuss over it. GET OVER IT. Its life, things happen.
rae - 10 years ago
In order to determine whether they have a viable case each song will have to be pulled apart to it's simplest production n resynthesized n some other very technical things which unless the St. Louis artists actually produced the beat, they wouldn't have a case. Only the actual creator of the beat would have a case. Now if they did create the beat and put together the other pieces in production its possible they may have a case. The way that the music industry manipulates music frequently there's no telling where the Katy Perry beat could have originated with or without her knowledge.
Brandon Ross - 10 years ago
All they did was "chop & screw" the beat, if you don't see or hear it then you do not have an ear for music.
J Carter - 10 years ago
I hear the similarity and also hear a few notes from Si's Gangham style song also
Yvonne - 10 years ago
Ok, so there's that single beat at the start that they both have but Katy Perry's got a different singing style added to it. In this time and age, they are going to use similar beats and patterns and that doesn't mean both songs are the same. Like The Marvelettes sound like The Shirelles, The Supremes, The Ronettes, etc so I don't think they have a case against Katy Perry.
That's christian music? I'm disappointed ...
Amanda Bishop - 10 years ago
I dont hear the similarity. But alot of music sounds similar these days. It doesnt mean they should all sue one another.
Cindy Matlock - 10 years ago
I don't see any reason why the other group would want to sue Katy Perry. The words in both of the songs are not the same in any part of the songs at all. The music isn't even the same at all. Yes there might be a beat in part of the Flame's song that people thing is in Katy Perrys song but the beats sound the same in a scense but one beat in the Flames song is more of a rap beat and the only different in the beat in the background of Katy Perry's song is that it is changed a little bit to fit her song the way she wanted. Flames might think part of her song is from there song but really it isn't. There isn't really a case here unless they think she took the music from there song for her song but unless the courts rule that she did take part of there music which i don't think she did, there isn't a case.
Michael Smith - 10 years ago
I do see the signifance. Same intro in both songs, the main beat in Flame's song is used as background in Perry's song. They certainly have a case.
They do almost sound the same but both of the repeated music sequences from their songs are so simple they could've easily come up with same music sequence by coincidence. I mean Perry's sequence basically just goes Db Db Db Db C C Bb. And it's all quarter notes except for the Bb which is a half note. It's not that hard for to separate people to come up with that.
I'm a musician with over 30 years of experience performing live and writing songs. In the Christian song there are 4 cycles of 4 beats. The first three play straight and every forth cycle includes an extra off-shot to work the groove with the signature pitch-shifting notes playing over top. In Perry's song the beat is more complex and, overall, the beat and positioning of the beat offers more dynamics. I do not see reasonable grounds for copyright infringement on the basis of copying the beat.
If you know music you can tell that one is a tad but slower but still the same beat. Yes you can copy right beats and these artist do make their beats. I do not think this is a stupid case because when making music a lot if time effort and money is put into it and to have something taken from you like you don't matter is disrespectful. Yes I do think Katy perry is a devil worshipper just listen to this song and look up the symbols and things that look abnormal and you will see if too!
The songs don't even sound the same those suers are stupid. A lot of songs now sound the same but you don't start suing. Thats my opinion don't hate
Not important. ... your entitled to your opinion and I respect that but if you think she's a devil worshiping based off that song then who's the idiot lmao
The music is somewhat similar, as in the case of George Harrison and My Sweet Lord or any of the hundred lawsuits like this......one song can have the exact same note but one song holds a quarter note longer then it is considered a whole different song. I had never heard of the song Joyful Noise...its a pretty good song but it isnt as playful musically or as fun music wise as Dark Horse. If the judge is a music lover he will laugh this one right out of the court room. It is similar but not even close.
Joe b you are an idiot. Katy perry is a devil worshiping freak. And she should not even be considered part of the christian family. No sympathy for that demon bitch. And the beat is CLEARLY the same.
Completely different. ... However the underlying rhythm in the synthesis is very similar but NOT the same .... I don't feel like this should even be entertained in the court system.... now for the Christian rappers to say that Perrys song ruined their image.... wow what a Christian thing to say or attempt to do... try and extort money or fame from a former Christian singer.... thought the Christian thing to do was turn the other cheek?
They have no case the words in the songs dont even match. There not even a same beat nothing similar bout the songs in my opionion it jus someone broke try get a quick buck if u ask me
There is no case. It's not sampled and a beat cannot be copyrighted. A melody can be copyrighted, but they're no where near similar enough to have any substantial weight in court. This lawsuit is absurd... The prosecutor and clients obviously don't know what they're doing.
Things like this happen all the time. Honestly some people have never heard of the song "Joyful Noise." There are plenty of songs in this world that have literally had two singers singing THE EXACT SAME THING. And they dont make a big fuss over it. GET OVER IT. Its life, things happen.
In order to determine whether they have a viable case each song will have to be pulled apart to it's simplest production n resynthesized n some other very technical things which unless the St. Louis artists actually produced the beat, they wouldn't have a case. Only the actual creator of the beat would have a case. Now if they did create the beat and put together the other pieces in production its possible they may have a case. The way that the music industry manipulates music frequently there's no telling where the Katy Perry beat could have originated with or without her knowledge.
All they did was "chop & screw" the beat, if you don't see or hear it then you do not have an ear for music.
I hear the similarity and also hear a few notes from Si's Gangham style song also
Ok, so there's that single beat at the start that they both have but Katy Perry's got a different singing style added to it. In this time and age, they are going to use similar beats and patterns and that doesn't mean both songs are the same. Like The Marvelettes sound like The Shirelles, The Supremes, The Ronettes, etc so I don't think they have a case against Katy Perry.
That's christian music? I'm disappointed ...
I dont hear the similarity. But alot of music sounds similar these days. It doesnt mean they should all sue one another.
I don't see any reason why the other group would want to sue Katy Perry. The words in both of the songs are not the same in any part of the songs at all. The music isn't even the same at all. Yes there might be a beat in part of the Flame's song that people thing is in Katy Perrys song but the beats sound the same in a scense but one beat in the Flames song is more of a rap beat and the only different in the beat in the background of Katy Perry's song is that it is changed a little bit to fit her song the way she wanted. Flames might think part of her song is from there song but really it isn't. There isn't really a case here unless they think she took the music from there song for her song but unless the courts rule that she did take part of there music which i don't think she did, there isn't a case.
I do see the signifance. Same intro in both songs, the main beat in Flame's song is used as background in Perry's song. They certainly have a case.