For debate: Sampling has RUINED pop music

The Czar sez:

>Covers have been around forever. In my opinion, I think a cover song is even more of a ripoff than sampling. The entire song is stolen word for word and note for note, then the band makes that their video cut. THAT'S THE BIGGEST COP OUT OF ALL TIME NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE. What skill does it take to listen and copy. At least with sampling, a variation is done to it and new drums and bass are infused and the verses are original. >

I'm not a huge fan of covers, or the bands that make it simply by doing covers instead of original material, but covers themselves are anything but a "ripoff." A well-done cover (for example, The Talking Heads' version of "Take Me to the River") takes the original material and interprets it in a fresh new way.

And at least the cover bands are giving the original composers credit for the composition, allowing the composers (or their heirs) to get additional royalties. For example, the estates of Cole Porter, Harold Arlen and Hoagy Carmichael have probably received more income in the last five years from Rod Stewart's execrable "standards" albums than they received over the previous 40.

Jeff in Boston

i think a lot of you are ignoring what sampling can be.

it is not always like kanye west, stealing a part of a famous song and looping it.

i like to take a sample from something (usually a song i love, like tom waits, for example) and do crazy shit to it, to make it unrecognizable.

i recently made a beat with some tom waits piano samples, and i meshed different parts that he played (a few notes/chords each) to create an entirely new string of notes and chords. then i resampled it, cut the very beginning and used that as another sample by itself.

later in the song, i reversed the original mesh i had created for a bridge type thing.

now, is someone really gonna tell me that what i do is wrong, and bad for the music industry?

mmm,
no loop, I would not say that is harmful or that you are stealing something/someone but ...
the point is that if you are creative enough to do all that, aren't you creative enough to compose your own "string of notes and chords" without having to sample something?


o - ...just could not afford the 8
(
\_/
hear what I've done with the 7

its really a different kind of creativity and talent.

for about a year i made music with my XP-30, and no samples or anything.

after a while i just exhuasted all ideas i had (and they weren't very good to begin with).

with sampling though you can have more than just single notes to mess around with; you can have part(s) of a phrase that you can manipulate and use in your own way, know what i mean?

Rainsdot...I could say the very same thing about sampling...in fact I did in the part you quoted.

We're both going to have our opinions, but honestly, covering a song...like limp bizkit did with faith, then running that as a video cut is bullshit. They didn't write the music or lyrics. They didn't even take a great song that didn't go to video. They covered a crappy ass bubble gum pop video song and instead of singing, they decided to yell. Now you can't say that something like that is better than a beat that Mix Master Mike makes using all sorts of different sounding stuff from multiple genres.

Smoke Club!

QUOTE]the point is that if you are creative enough to do all that, aren't you creative enough to compose your own "string of notes and chords" without having to sample something?[END QUOTE]

If he knows what he's doin, that makes him even more creative.. and with the ability to make patches with factory waves, and sought out samples, makes u very powerful. If u know what yer doin.

Fix I think u are missin loop's point..... if it takes a record sample to create the instrment (patch)I need, so I can then create my own melody, then no other sound on the fantom is gonna be close to what I need... the same way u use the Ultimate Grand (or any other patch) wich someone else actualy played and sampled.... u're just retriggering samples.

here's a question if I grab the final piano strike of the original "Incredible Hulk" tv show sountrak, and make a piano patch. Am I less talented than the guy who uses a factory piano?(if anything, more talented) it's not like u're copyin what they played. I say if it's noticeable, then u did not do a good enough job tweakin it, so go ahead and give credit where credit is due. but if not don't worry about it. I'm pretty sure ppl who sample the obvious, are taking "giving credit" into consideration..and that's ONLY if they get a record deal and make a million dollars doin it. other than that ain't NOBODY here that got's it like that.(and I doubt there will) So I really don't understand why this debate.


I think the ppl who are against it are the ppl who have nothing to do with a genre that reqires sampling. so their oppinion equals sh*t.

Like if I was doin country western, soft jazz, or rock, where I'm required to play the whole thing on my own, or have a band, then I would probably be like "ppl who sample, in house/techno/HipHop/reggaeton/drm-n-bass, have no creativity." but theat's a bunch of crap. different styles reqire different intruments(equipment) and different points of creativity from one another. don't piss in my boots and I wont piss in yours.

remember, 'IF' u're makin rice and beans, make sure u have rice and beans in the ingrediants. u don't make pizza with noodles. now it doesn't mean that u have to sample all the time. just when it fit's. sometimes I like rice alone without beans, and sometimes I rip the cheese off my pizza, so go figure.

whoever does not understand and disagree with this is as dumb, as this thread.

and finaly,,,,Who gives a sh*t !?!

Septimo ,'^)
X6
XT

Sampling a single note/sound is not on debate
its the act if sampling phrases/songs or part of...

Results not Excuses
MSN: fantom01@hotmail.com

Get optimised: Rev 9.1
http://knightspawn.fws1.com/woodhazel_files/newsletters/filesys.htm

QuinnX universal tranlator below:-
(lets not be misunderstood)

!!!!!! Emphasis not anger
!!?? Confusion or Stupidity
ABC are you getting the point
&*$% Anger (but rarely seen)


Fantom-X6 with Audio Track Expansion (OS 2.0)
Windows 2000
Intel P4 2g
512mb

Septimo

Sorry, but I think you missunderstood me. You're the one who's missing my point. If you care to read again all my posts in this thread you'll find out why. I'm by no way against the use of sampling or agree with this thread titlle. Like you I think this discussion is endless and of no use - although I'm participating in it

loop said :
" ...to create an entirely new string of notes and chords..."

he didn't said he was using the samples to create NEW SOUNDS. This was the reason for my folowing post.


Anyway, I think Quinnx cleared it up


o - ...just could not afford the 8
(
\_/
hear what I've done with the 7

The Czar said:

>Rainsdot...I could say the very same thing about sampling...in fact I did in the part you quoted.

Covering a song...like limp bizkit did with faith, then running that as a video cut is ***...Now you can't say that something like that is better than a beat that Mix Master Mike makes using all sorts of different sounding stuff from multiple genres.>

Now you're misquoting me. I never said that covers were qualitatively "better" than sampling sounds from other pieces. For all I know, a Master Mike production may sound better than Limp Bizkit did with a cover--I haven't heard either, so I have no POV on this matter.

The point is, that sampling pieces from a recorded copyrighted performance and using in a mix and covering a song are two entirely different performance processes. The former is done with the intention of creating a new assembly out of found parts. The latter is done to do a new interpretation (good or bad) of someone else's original composition.

Putting aside the issue of "who is more original" (don't think common ground will be found there), the LEGAL difference between these two processes is that an assembler quite often does not pay royalties or give songwriting credits to the composers/band that made the original recording(s) he purloined from. On the other hand, a cover band is legally required to pay royalties to the composers of the song they're covering.

Jeff in Boston

Septimo said:

>If I grab the final piano strike of the original "Incredible Hulk" tv show sountrak, and make a piano patch. Am I less talented than the guy who uses a factory piano?(if anything, more talented)>

A more talented what? Sampler? Sure. Programmer? Undoubtedly. Musician/Composer? Well, that's up for debate. You may certainly disagree, but I personally respect the guy who can recreate the final piano strike of the Hulk by playing the actual notes using a Fantom, acoustic piano, or guitar a lot more than I do the assember who achieves the same end by simply grabbing the riff from the movie.

But that's just me. Your mileage, of course, will vary.

And I certainly will concede that making a piano patch certainly demonstrates more *programming* talent than the guy who plays the melody using a factory piano. But, at face value, it certainly doesn't demonstrate more COMPOSITIONAL or MUSICAL ability--any more than one could say that Stradivarius was a great violinist or composer because he built magnificent violins.

>I think the ppl who are against it are the ppl who have nothing to do with a genre that reqires sampling. so their oppinion equals sh*t. >

Exactly which genres *require* one to sample pre-recorded, copyrighted material? Are you saying that these genres *would not exist* without sampling technology being available?

>Now it doesn't mean that u have to sample all the time. just when it fit's....Whoever does not understand and disagree with this is as dumb, as this thread.>

Ah. So if I refute your assertion, and don't agree with your POV, then I am dumb. Thank you for letting me know where I stand in your estimation.

with all of this "blah blah said: " stuff, shouldnt there be a 'quote' function like on other boards?

>Ah. So if I refute your assertion, and don't agree with your POV, then I am dumb. Thank you for letting me know where I stand in your estimation. :)A more talented what? Sampler? Sure. Programmer? Undoubtedly. Musician/Composer? Well, that's up for debate. You may certainly disagree, but I personally respect the guy who can recreate the final piano strike of the Hulk by playing the actual notes using a Fantom, acoustic piano, or guitar a lot more than I do the assember who achieves the same end by simply grabbing the riff from the movie. <

Dude! u even quoted me....who said anything about a riff I said the final note to make a piano patch. wich is impossible on fantom but possible on V synth.. and if I ever use a riff u ain't never gonna know where the hell it came from. even I most of the time don't remember where it came from. I have sampled other ppls riffs and my own, from a bunch of different instruments...in many cases I can't tell mine from theirs, so I don't need u're respect, just your acceptance...

and no...... each of these genre's could have easily exsisted w/out the sampler, however none of them would have had the character they have now without them.(wich is the reason it's lasted so long, ther's always a new twist) it all started when ppl were playin breakbeats from old records like JB. then the invention of the sampler said "look where I can take u!" It started out of that and now it's a way of life.. so if your thinkin that it has ruined pop music then your in the wrong buisness amigo. time will let us know that. when u sell your fantom like alot of ppl who realise this do. maybe try photography. Ahh, but then that'll start more debate. like....

Let me ask u dot,, has the Camera ruined art? I mean is't easy to snap a picture. but it's hard work to draw one. should we bring our paper pad and pencils everytime we go on vacation, so we can "prove" our talent? stupid qusetion isn't it? I thik so too.

remember,, pop musicians are not makin music for raisindot who does not support it. They make music for ppl who do, and they outweigh u by multitudes. Kanye West could give an ass that I did not like his jesus song. there were millions who did.

What I really think u've been wantin to say is that sampling has made it easier for non-musicians to make music. that is true. but it has also given real musicians the tools to make magic. if they drop thier silly pride and really achieve their goals...once u start thinkin your way is the best way, your done! there's always better out there.

As far as me being a musician, I don't need u to let me know if I am or not cuz I know I am....I play piano/ guitar (not great)/drums or any other perc./ I don't know to technicaly play the flute, although I can find the melody I need/ and I can sing..I knew all these thing befor I knew how to sample. and I wouldn't be able to do the things I do with a sampler if I did'nt know my fundamentals as a musician first.

The sampler was invented for us broke musicians.

Septimo ,'^)
X6
XT

Fix: sorry_if_I mixxed that up.....

peace!

Septimo ,'^)
X6
XT

As to the use of sampling to bang together 'music'...

Last week an 11-year old introduced me to myCoke Studio at www.mycoke.com. The studio allows anyone to take 1 from column a, 2 from column b, and so on to string together a bunch of samples to create a [sequence of sounds] using a palette of samples they provide online. It's free, and lots of kids are having fun making "music" with it.

That being said, I seem to remember some wise person on this forum who said something along the lines of "technology simply allows a bad musician to make bad music easier/faster". My point is that anyone can make music, but good music, like most anything else that's really good, is the result of lots of effort by talented people (or a talented person).

Truly good music will always have an audience, whilst bad music may only enjoy a thin slice of the limelight. So you good musicians out there (and you know who you are, right?) can rest assured that your good music will always find discriminating ears to appreciate it. I, for one, really appreciate listening to the music posted on this excellent forum!

Just an .02 on this subject...

Cheers!
Chris G.

Well said, Chris.

Dave

http://www.drstudio.demon.co.uk/
"Musicians fall into three categories: those with a physical block, those with a mental block and those with a wooden block". Unfortunately, I'm in the 1st category!