Is there such thing as a completely original song/style of music?
 

Has there ever been a song or style that has not been influenced by those before them? Or are they simply a compilation of ideas? Is a band's/musician's originality based off of how well they can hide their influences? Share your ideas (so I can put them all together to form my own original opinion). ;)

I don't think there is. In the end all music styles have at least some resemblance with some world music from a far away corner in the world.

Ganglion by Saltillo in my opinion is the closest thing to being unlike anything else, there is no such thing as a pure or original musical style it is intertwined that album though I reckon is the closest I could get, without going and getting something that is just a collection of obscure sounds for no reason!

Even random noises aren't original. It's been done before. All art is derivative no matter how hard you might try. The earliest art was cave paintings of animals and hunts, which was inspired by nature. Nothing is completely original.

4'33"

Inspired by silence!

This!

Everything is influenced in one way or another. You cannot pinpoint at one style of music and call it original. It is bound to be influenced from something else.

All things that are created are created by using materials and methods used to create something else, in the end everything that exists logically comes from the same place.

basically all music is influenced by other music. most likely man created music first to recreate some interesting sounds that were heard and it has evolved from there.

First of all, this thread reminds me of this series:

Everything is a Remix
It's really interesting.

I'm not sure how much I agree with this. I mean inspiration-wise, I guess random noises and such wouldn't be original, but at one time, something was original. It was inspired by something, but it was an original song/style.
I think the OP was talking about music, not about whether a song was inspired by something not-musical.

Subconsciously, I'm sure a lot of everything we write is based on something else we've heard, but I'm sure there are some sounds, some ideas, that are very partially original still.
I'm speaking from a more emotional point of view, than a literal one, I think, and this is probably where I'll end up butting heads with a lot of opinions.

The moment that you decide that you are going to create a piece of music, you are being wholly and completely unoriginal, but who gives a ****, really?

Only nature is original...at least in relation to us as humans. I only brought up the example of the cave paintings to show that even what we could consider to be the first human attempt at art was not completely original. If something was completely original, no one would understand it. Art is our attempt at communicating what is going on in our heads on a deeper level than just talking can.

Things can be built on in an original way...and that is what we mean when we say a new band sounds very original. If you boil it down to what true originality means, however, there is no way you can argue that there is something like that.

Really I think the nearest thing possible to truly original music would be to give a musical instrument to a person who was raised in total isolation and darkness since birth for them to make some form of noise. Although it would be interesting hear what that person would do with the instrument it would be of course completely barbaric.

No song is an island. Simple as that, really. If you've ever heard music, you've been inspired by music. Even if you decide that you will only create your own instruments and play music in 13/8, then you are inspired by all the music you are trying to not sound like.

However, somewhat original sounds pop up all the time. No one had made a song like Autobahn before Kraftwerk (more or less, bear with me here) because the feeling of driving along an endless autobahn wasn't well known before that. No album had sounded exactly like Fear of a Black Planet before, for the rage on that album was born out of a very specific time and place and sense of directionless rage. My attempt at a moral would be: Stop obsessing about 'sound' and 'influence', and start thinking about 'feel' and 'content'.

Right. But I'm speaking musically. :P

....so was I....

If music was initially inspired by nature or sounds then I'm not sure I would say that makes it unoriginal.

My snub-nosed two and a half pennies would be that either everything is original or nothing is. Even if you decide to write a note-for-note rip-off of an existing song and perform it, it will still feature your own subtle twists and phrasings.

Why? True originality is something that is completely distinct. The minute you say something is inspired by something else, it loses originality. Saying "band Y is inspired by band X" is the same thing as saying "ancient music is inspired by the seasons/animals/etc.". It didn't come out of nowhere, therefore it is not completely original.

I guess I'm just having a difficult time considering them to be the same thing.

noise?

Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music can be considered a total work of originality

silence?

John Cage's 4'33"

edit - oh nvm, you can disregard my post, both have been discussed above

Nothing is completely original and that's whey I get suspicious of people who praise something for being completely original and unique rather than for much else.

This one beats it with a good 15 years:



And that said, whoever moved heavy furniture across the room before 1960 even beats that one.