Sampling- OK? yes/no
^ cool, glad it worked out for you, bro. I'm just saying that I have a lot to lose, and I wouldn't risk it one bit. I never ever use illegal samples or loops or anything that is questionable, and I never worry that anything I put out has any licensing or legal issues whatsoever, which leaves me free to focus on just the music alone. Just another perspective
-
leedsquietman
- Posts: 6659
- Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:56 am
- Location: greater toronto area
It is true that in most cases you're not going to be chased down, but there have been cases where people have been told to pull down tunes that sampled other's work by the original artist and some have threatened court action even on free internet release, citing that they can't control what happens online and that others will then rip off the track that ripped off them and could try and use it for commercial gain. You should at the very least give credit.
If you do this for commercial gain, then you can be sure you'd better credit and pay the royalties, or your day in court will very likely be coming soon.
There is so much Creative Commons stuff out there which can be sampled no probs for non profit gain, or public domain stuff that you shouldn't need to. And besides, jeez, do we really need to hear recycled material over and over again, make up something for yourself.
If you do this for commercial gain, then you can be sure you'd better credit and pay the royalties, or your day in court will very likely be coming soon.
There is so much Creative Commons stuff out there which can be sampled no probs for non profit gain, or public domain stuff that you shouldn't need to. And besides, jeez, do we really need to hear recycled material over and over again, make up something for yourself.
http://soundcloud.com/umbriel-rising http://www.myspace.com/leedsquietmandemos Live 7.0.18 SUITE, Cubase 5.5.2], Soundforge 9, Dell XPS M1530, 2.2 Ghz C2D, 4GB, Vista Ult SP2, legit plugins a plenty, Alesis IO14.
-
doc holiday
- Posts: 1683
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:49 am
- Location: NOW
i guess that is one of my main points/concerns...Kanye's tune wasn't bad but neither was the Daft Punk and the Edwin Birdsong track before it. is that really pushing culture somewhere new and different because hiphop sampled a "dance" hit?leedsquietman wrote: do we really need to hear recycled material over and over again, make up something for yourself.
i gotta agree with nebulae when it comes to ChiDj's mentality. YES you can have that work out for ya. Very glad to hear it did but you could also rack up the credit cards and buy all the sickest gear and MAYBE make it rich and then not have to worry bout the debt. The likelihood of someone coming after you is not HUGE but if you did hit it big with a hit with a samples do you want your whole back catalog with samples suddenly opened up like a garage sale?
i am curious as to WHY people think it is ok to sample anyone else's work besides their own. dont get me wrong, i have sampled as well...i just want to hear other people's opinion
it seems as if people think its a fight between good (being creativity) and evil (copyright laws and the big bad labels).
its cool for the up and commers to sample but as soon as a big guy grabs from a little guy its all gone to shit. for example- Timbaland and the Scandinavian dude's. So wouldn't copyright help the underground musicians?
is it a sense of entitlement or am i just missing how/why i should be allowed to use whatever i want?
second class robot
I think the digital age has created a new sense of entitlement...people have devalued music itself - they expect it for free...it's no surprise that artists also expect to take something they hear that they can easily copy or sample and create a derivative work and expect that it's free...
while market conditions create a scenario where consumer music is indeed free these days (like it or not, that's the way it is), I think you can't bridge that to a free-for-all in terms of sampling.
while market conditions create a scenario where consumer music is indeed free these days (like it or not, that's the way it is), I think you can't bridge that to a free-for-all in terms of sampling.
Here's looking at you kid...thing us, most of us don't make money from tunes. sample the world!! it's a beautiful thing. always show respect where respect is due but don't limit yourself.
make the best music you can with every single resource you can find.
too many of these conversations are so damn serious.
make the best music you can with every single resource you can find.
too many of these conversations are so damn serious.
In my life
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
EDIT: Sorry for going off on a wild tangent here, this post isn't so much about sampling as it is about the whole "music isn't free" mentality...
Sample everything and anything, twist it around, recontextualize it, whatever. If someone goes after you for copyright infringement, sample that too and use it in your next song. If they come to your house, pull a Waco and go down in a blaze of glory...
Music will always be here because people make music out of a passion to express themselves. And that requires no payment. IMO the best thing that could happen to music as an artform right now is the complete abolishment of all intellectual property laws. It will kill the recording industry of course, but that is something that I think A) Is already happening anyways and B) NEEDS to happen.
"But oh noes, how am I supposed to make a living as a composer if we do away with royalties and such?" My answer to that would be "why is it automatically assumed that just because you wrote a song people like you should get tons of money for it and be financially secure for the rest of my life?" Why is that the done deal?
The only reason the current arrangement came about was due to the limitations of hardware distribution of audio(wax cylinders, vinyl, CD´s) - in the larger scheme of things, the recording industry in it's current form will be only a blip on the historical radar, here and gone in the space of a few short decades.
There are few things I like more in music than to hear a snippet from a song I either hated or loved sampled and recycled into something completely different. Losing that is not worth keeping an industry already on life support alive for a few years more.
Live performances will always be paid for since they are inherently private goods. So musicians are here to stay no matter what. So are engineers, roadies, techs, lighting and video peeps and basically anyone involved in the creative side of music. If you got chops, you got a job.
It's the bean counters that have been rendered irrelevant for the most part, which is why the publishing giants are going after copyright infringers so hard, it's their jobs that are on the line....
Anyways, sampling anything from a hit single to enviromental sounds is IMO as legitimate a way of making music as any other. It's just as easy to compose bland, unoriginal guitar riffs as it is to compose an unoriginal song based around samples.
Sample everything and anything, twist it around, recontextualize it, whatever. If someone goes after you for copyright infringement, sample that too and use it in your next song. If they come to your house, pull a Waco and go down in a blaze of glory...
Music will always be here because people make music out of a passion to express themselves. And that requires no payment. IMO the best thing that could happen to music as an artform right now is the complete abolishment of all intellectual property laws. It will kill the recording industry of course, but that is something that I think A) Is already happening anyways and B) NEEDS to happen.
"But oh noes, how am I supposed to make a living as a composer if we do away with royalties and such?" My answer to that would be "why is it automatically assumed that just because you wrote a song people like you should get tons of money for it and be financially secure for the rest of my life?" Why is that the done deal?
The only reason the current arrangement came about was due to the limitations of hardware distribution of audio(wax cylinders, vinyl, CD´s) - in the larger scheme of things, the recording industry in it's current form will be only a blip on the historical radar, here and gone in the space of a few short decades.
There are few things I like more in music than to hear a snippet from a song I either hated or loved sampled and recycled into something completely different. Losing that is not worth keeping an industry already on life support alive for a few years more.
I think music should be free, especially today when the internet and file sharing have transformed music from a private good to a public good(if you don't understand the distinction, google the terms as they are used in economics)I think the digital age has created a new sense of entitlement...people have devalued music itself - they expect it for free...it's no surprise that artists also expect to take something they hear that they can easily copy or sample and create a derivative work and expect that it's free...
Live performances will always be paid for since they are inherently private goods. So musicians are here to stay no matter what. So are engineers, roadies, techs, lighting and video peeps and basically anyone involved in the creative side of music. If you got chops, you got a job.
It's the bean counters that have been rendered irrelevant for the most part, which is why the publishing giants are going after copyright infringers so hard, it's their jobs that are on the line....
Anyways, sampling anything from a hit single to enviromental sounds is IMO as legitimate a way of making music as any other. It's just as easy to compose bland, unoriginal guitar riffs as it is to compose an unoriginal song based around samples.
-
Johnisfaster
- Posts: 7251
- Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:34 am
- Contact: