|
Sampling now illegal?! (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| slyfoxark |
| I can see how it is wrong to steal loops, lead sounds, and sound fx, but really... why would someone care that you used a recording of a kick, hihat, or crash? No one should. Now, if someone were to take your drum loop, put it in the latest crappy hip hop track, and make a lot of money off of it, I understand why you would be pissed off. |
|
|
| Akridrot |
Ok. Sampling is necessary to some muscians, it really is a form of art when you hear some original songs then the new songs. I agree, most popular hip hop is absolute garbage. But you'll have a few beats that are absolutely excellent, sometimes genius. But other than that, it's pure TRASH.
This new law means nothing, really. It can't be enforced if a sample is chopped beyond recognition, and no artist is gonna really suport it. People will always sample, regardless. |
|
|
| dj_alfi |
| haha Cincinnati rules doesnt apply to me!! HAHAH IN YOUR FACE CINCINNATI!!! |
|
|
| nhibberd |
| Didn't the whole house scene start out with squatters holding illegal outdoor house parties on some poor guys farm? Hence 'Revolution 909' remember? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Sampling (usually with blatant disregard for copyright) is essentially the foundation of all genres of electronic music. Certainly it is responsible for breaks, drum 'n bass and hip hop, the last item in particular being largely what made the record companies and their copyright lawyers so powerful in the first place. How ironic that they are trying to squelch the same creative drive that, in a manner of speaking, gave birth to them - it's like an artistic Oedipus complex.
While I very much agree that it's wrong to try and rip vocals from a commercial track without permission for your own remix (the original artist/singer should be compensated in that case), I think the point gets rather silly when we're talking about a 5-second drum loop or movie quote. We can always find new ways to mangle and rearrange beats and tracks, but when it comes to the basic elements of music, everything has already been done before, somewhere, by someone.
For anyone who works/has worked in software or engineering, you'll know one of the fundamental principles: "Don't reinvent the wheel." If you know something's been done before, then use the existing code/design, it's simply a waste of time to redo it yourself. It's really the same thing for electronic music - if we're capable of "reverse engineering" someone else's sound by listening to the chords/notes/words/whatever and making an almost perfect recreation from scratch with a synthesizer, then what's the difference between doing that and just using the version that already exists?
Of course it depends on the complexity... as I said, this rationalization doesn't work when you're talking about a 2-minute acapella or a full-length track, but it's a question of where to draw the line. And while I admit there's a lot of gray area, I think we all know that the line's been drawn in the way of progress. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by nhibberd
Didn't the whole house scene start out with squatters holding illegal outdoor house parties on some poor guys farm? Hence 'Revolution 909' remember? |
Actually, the house scene started out in abandoned warehouses in the '70s when funk and soul music were just beginning to lose popularity.
But your point is relevant, because I believe a significant amount of house music used samples from the same funk and soul music it was replacing. |
|
|
| Icone |
| quote: | Originally posted by IDarkISwordI
Hey. This is hardly an issue in the mostly liberal underground world of electronica. Remember people, many of our recording companies arent part of the RIAA/BPA. Some are yes but many that are dont agree with the current doings of those two organizations. Most people who produce electronica arent the same type of money grubbing people you see on MTV or the likes. Think about it. How many people know about this place? How many people here create remixes using an entire song as a sample or the accapella thats been bootlegged? My guess is, this will only affect hiphop producers and rap producers who use pre-fabbed acid loops and to construct the next radio masterpiece(of ). If someone wanted to deal with it in the scene, good for them, because theres a small enough fan base that word spreads quickly and its a good chance he (or the company) just ended thier career(s).
Cheers,
Zac |
Well, I would say THANK GOD they have a better conscience.
I can really understand for hiphop and such. I remember Puff Daddy crushing the legendary 'Every Breath You Take' from The Police. I wonder how that went :) |
|
|
| mzvirbulis |
this is funny bull, refer to this example. sampling
man people are so narrow!
the link talks about :
Heard it before? In all likelihood, yes. Oddly enough, the use of loops still remains a somewhat controversial issue. It's in the twilight zone, that fuzzy grey area between artistry and "pushing a button". After all, a loop is the product of someone else's efforts, talent and creativity. But then again, isn't that true for any kind of art? Aren't you using sampled instruments that have been recorded – and played – by someone else? And synth presets that someone else programmed? Who do you owe credit to when you play a violin trill on the NN-XT – the guy who sampled it? The conductor? The violinist? Antonius Stradivarius, who built it? The truth is, at the hands of a skilled artist a bunch of raw loops can be molded into a unique piece of artwork that holds its own against any other musical accomplishment. And never was there a tool more powerful for tweaking, bending, carving and re-shaping loops than Dr.REX! |
|
|
| qiushiming |
| quote: | Originally posted by mzvirbulis
...never was there a tool more powerful for tweaking, bending, carving and re-shaping loops than Dr.REX! |
agreed...utter BS..cant believe this came from the makers of reason
what kind of ty argument is that? afterall, if all you are doing is tweaking bending carving and whatever to the loop...does not change the fact that loop still belongs to someone else as they mentioned at first |
|
|
| Reactance |
| Im not even gona wast my time trping on this.:thepirate |
|
|
| nhibberd |
| quote: | Originally posted by mzvirbulis
this is funny bull, refer to this example. sampling
man people are so narrow!
the link talks about :
Heard it before? In all likelihood, yes. Oddly enough, the use of loops still remains a somewhat controversial issue. It's in the ................................................................................................................................into a unique piece of artwork that holds its own against any other musical accomplishment. And never was there a tool more powerful for tweaking, bending, carving and re-shaping loops than Dr.REX! |
Sounds to me that they just want to sell a product. This is probably a product that is made for quantity not quality. If they want to sell a large quantity, they make something that is usable by a lot of people. And there are probably more people looping stuff that was made by guys with names like Yushi Guatumoto than people who produce.
kind regards,
Charly Darwin |
|
|
| thesuperfunk |
| quote: | Originally posted by Chronosis
Well if you have made the sample into something completely new (which is the case when it's not identifiable, even by the original artist), then I think you can very well use it. It doesn't anymore represent the creative vision of the original artist.
|
It's still the basis for your work though. |
|
|
|
|
