|
"Justice Faking Their Live Sets" (funny article on Beatportal) (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| The Highroller |
| quote: | Originally posted by knacker
not *everyone* samples other peoples music-- I sure don't, and many of the producers I love I know would not.
Not learning how to make your own sounds and/or play an actual instrument in this day and age when the tools are so easily available and affordable is just plain lazy
I'm not against sample based music -- some of it is great and has opened up new doors of possibilities -- but not giving proper credit is just disrespectful and shows you have no interest in being a true artist or musician. |
Did you even what the story is? Yes, it is true that Justice uses samples from other artists. However, many of the samples they have used are so short/tweaked that no one would ever be able to know where it came from. In other circumstances, Justice has paid for licensing fees for the samples they've used.
Do you know anything about production? Do you know how many house music songs are like the 500th remake of a song made in the 70s? Is using samples on Fruity Loops lazy and stealing too? |
|
|
| knacker |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Highroller
Do you know anything about production? Do you know how many house music songs are like the 500th remake of a song made in the 70s? Is using samples on Fruity Loops lazy and stealing too? |
lol, I've been a musician for 15 years and a producer for 8, so yeah I know a little bit ;)
and like I said, older electronic producers didnt have the access we have now to software, computers, vst synths, internet tutorials etc to make music -- many of them couldnt afford the tools, so the music came from sampling.
These tools are all available now for virtually nothing, so there should be no excuse not to LEARN how to create sounds and actually compose music...
If you want to compose music from sampling others music, fine, just give credit to the hard work of those artists.
Samples from fruity loops have been licensed or created for the program -- its not the same as taking a cd, extracting a portion from a song and acting like you wrote it. |
|
|
| geroin |
| quote: | Originally posted by knacker
not *everyone* samples other peoples music -- I sure don't, and many of the producers I love I know would not.
Not learning how to make your own sounds and/or play an actual instrument in this day and age when the tools are so easily available and affordable is just plain lazy
I'm not against sample based music -- some of it is great and has opened up new doors of possibilities -- but not giving proper credit is just disrespectful and shows you have no interest in being a true artist or musician (actually creating something). |
i agree and disagree as well
imo its wrong to sample other people's music (as in melody for example) without giving proper credit
but sampling just sounds and rearranging them, making them sound completely different and making a good track out of it is another thing.. |
|
|
| jon jon |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
but sampling just sounds and rearranging them, making them sound completely different and making a good track out of it is another thing.. |
sure... imo the sample doesn't have to be sounding completely different either, a lot of times the sample is done in such a way where it is almost an homage to the original...
this ability to sample/bite/recycle and to "give new life to" is one of my favourite things about dance music... the issue of the sample being "cleared" is a dicey one and probably the biggest blessing/curse to the dance music biz... |
|
|
| knacker |
| quote: | Originally posted by jon jon
a lot of times the sample is done in such a way where it is almost an homage to the original...
this ability to sample/bite/recycle and to "give new life to" is one of my favourite things about dance music... |
it's one of my favorite things too... this is why we have the 'remix' |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by knacker
These tools are all available now for virtually nothing, so there should be no excuse not to LEARN how to create sounds and actually compose music...
If you want to compose music from sampling others music, fine, just give credit to the hard work of those artists. |
Agree. |
|
|
| jon jon |
I'm not anti artist royalties by any means, but I don't think the neglect of "clearing" samples makes anyone LESS of an artist...
(I'm not sure if that makes any sense, I'm having a hard time putting it into words lol)
think of all the brilliant madonna/michael jackson bootlegs floating around, 99% of the time the label will never clear said sample (and I understand why)... but that doesn't make the remix/bootleg any less great of a song and the artist any less of an artist...
(in that example the the bureaucracy of the music industry actually impedes the artists from creating...) |
|
|
| knacker |
| quote: | Originally posted by jon jon
I'm not anti artist royalties by any means, but I don't think the neglect of "clearing" samples makes anyone LESS of an artist... |
I'm not really speaking from a $$$ royalties perspective -- more from the ethics an artist should have -- to want to give credit where credit is due -- to have respect for the music above everything else.
The whole clearing samples issue is one the record labels/ publishing companies have definitely ed up, but I dont think that should be the cause for one artist to lay claim on what another artist has created.
| quote: | Originally posted by jon jon
think of all the brilliant madonna/michael jackson bootlegs floating around, 99% of the time the label will never clear said sample (and I understand why)...
(in that example the the bureaucracy of the music industry actually impedes the artists from creating...) |
This is not about bootlegs either -- its not like the person who made the madonna bootleg is going around saying they wrote the words, and that they are singing on it... |
|
|
|
|
