4 ms·

> Small nitpick- I'd say one of the hallmarks of electronic music was that it wasn't built from copyrightable samples. It was trackers and analog-then-digital s

> Small nitpick- I'd say one of the hallmarks of electronic music was that it wasn't built from copyrightable samples. It was trackers and analog-then-digital synths and all sorts of microtonal weirdness which had never been heard before. Depends on the genre to some extent but it's worth noting that Amiga trackers could double as samplers and even the Atari ST could trigger hardware samplers. A lot of electronic producers would swap samples even for percussion (eg the Amen break which is used massively in jungle and early DnB and was ripped from a B-side on a Winstons record). Even some riffs that sound like synths are actually samples layered over a piano roll. But you're absolutely right that synths and drum machines were also pivotal too. I wasn't trying to suggest that the entire scene existed only for sampling but instead stating that sampling was one of the cornerstones that lead to the creation of many of the genres we still listen to now. > However, if we can put aside the legal angle, there's an understood difference between copyright violation for the purpose of sampling and remixing vs. outright "gonna steal your stuff because I don't want to pay for it." If we're putting aside the legal angle, then it really depends on who you ask. Electronic (house, techno, trance, hardcore, etc) producers had no issue with their records being copied and shared on DJ mix tapes because that was a way for smaller artists and DJs in the scene to breakthrough. But as a DJ you'd sometimes avoid including tracks from big commercial labels -- particularly if you were a headliner DJ and thus your mix tape would been heard by more people -- because mainstream artists wouldn't turn the same kind of blind eye to their tracks being on mix tapes (source: I'm an ex-DJ) So it really depends on the scene and sometimes even the individual.

dakom 5y ago
Right, yeah, that's why I said _copyrightable_ samples.. e.g. sampling a sound from just about anywhere and slotting it into a tracker or drum machine is probably fine. I do agree the waters get muddy once it's multiple seconds long.. IANAL but there's the famous vanilla ice lawsuit, and I think there was some fair use wiggle room if it's under some amount of time (forgot the exact limit), it is fine to use. Good point about the DJ mixtape thing. I am guessing a lot of composers/producers got the raw end of that deal, but you are right, it helped a lot for promotion and growing the scene
- hnlmorg 5y ago
  > Right, yeah, that's why I said _copyrightable_ samples.. e.g. sampling a sound from just about anywhere and slotting it into a tracker or drum machine is probably fine. I was talking about copyrighted samples. eg Fatboy Slim - Rockafella Skank: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjgXPDzeZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjgXPDzeZo Daft Punk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhmnKUOxB4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhmnKUOxB4 Prodigy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIMQtMSnpBA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIMQtMSnpBA ...and these are just 3 headline artists. Sampling was common place in the underground scene too. eg The Amen break is a percussion loop that basically invented Jungle and early Drum and Bass, and that was a copyrighted loop too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFKMtv8tU0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFKMtv8tU0U > I do agree the waters get muddy once it's multiple seconds long.. IANAL but there's the famous vanilla ice lawsuit, and I think there was some fair use wiggle room if it's under some amount of time (forgot the exact limit), it is fine to use. Fair use doesn't cover sampling. Artists need to clear any samples used. If a sample is used creatively enough then there is a chance it might sound different enough that it goes unnoticed with anyone accosiated with the original artists estate. But that's a calculated risk the sampling artist chooses to take rather than their automatic right under copyright law. > Good point about the DJ mixtape thing. I am guessing a lot of composers/producers got the raw end of that deal, but you are right, it helped a lot for promotion and growing the scene Producers (nobody calls those kinds of artists "composers") didn't get the raw end because it wouldn't have affected their sales; if anything, it helped promote them). Bare in mind that mixed records on a cassette mix tape cannot be used for anything other than home listening (DJs didn't work of cassette players) and dance tracks didn't typically make for good home listening because they'd have long intro and outro sequences purposely designed for beat mixing. So mix tapes served an important role. The only caveat some artists would have placed was any unreleased promos stayed off mix tapes (unless specified otherwise) because those promos were often secret weapons for headliner DJs.
  - dakom 5y ago
    Erm... you've told me twice about the amen break.. I saw Aphrodite, dieselboy, and a bunch of other jungle artists live, sometimes in small hole in the wall places before they got big.. hung around the goa/psytrance scene a bunch too, and was idealistic about temporary autonomous zones and stuff for a while. Not unfamiliar with how the sausage was made. Long time ago though. Not a musician myself.. I dabbled a bit in Max/MSP, Acid (the program), Fruity Loops, and used to go wild with Rebirth or whatever it was called, but it was all just messing around. Did have had plenty of conversations with musicians who called themselves composers, esp. as they would make their living composing tunes for video games and film etc. Sure "producers" is the more common term, but it's a bit reductive for you to say "nobody". How about Squarepusher, Simon Posford, and folks like that? Guarantee you they have been called all kinds of things, hehe. Anyway, when it comes to actually creating original tunes, my experience and recollection tells me it's by far mostly about synthetic instruments and laying out tracks, e.g. actual original compositions. Significantly large samples of copyrighted material play a very small part, in the big picture. Of course there's some notable exceptions, but it's a drop in the ocean compared to original material. Not talking about DJing. By definition that is literally just sampling/remixing. And of course you have famous DJ's who put out mixes and nobody knows how hard the original music synthesis freak worked to get that fat bass line sounding just right. (Not dismissing the skill of a DJ, I liken it more to a conductor than a composer or the orchestra. Hard and important skill, just different) Re: fair use, I believe you're wrong. It isn't a hard law but in general the length of the sample is one of the major factors taken into account to determine whether a judge will lean one way or another. P.L.U.R.

dakom 5y ago

Right, yeah, that's why I said _copyrightable_ samples.. e.g. sampling a sound from just about anywhere and slotting it into a tracker or drum machine is probably fine. I do agree the waters get muddy once it's multiple seconds long.. IANAL but there's the famous vanilla ice lawsuit, and I think there was some fair use wiggle room if it's under some amount of time (forgot the exact limit), it is fine to use. Good point about the DJ mixtape thing. I am guessing a lot of composers/producers got the raw end of that deal, but you are right, it helped a lot for promotion and growing the scene

hnlmorg 5y ago
> Right, yeah, that's why I said _copyrightable_ samples.. e.g. sampling a sound from just about anywhere and slotting it into a tracker or drum machine is probably fine. I was talking about copyrighted samples. eg Fatboy Slim - Rockafella Skank: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjgXPDzeZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjgXPDzeZo Daft Punk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhmnKUOxB4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhmnKUOxB4 Prodigy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIMQtMSnpBA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIMQtMSnpBA ...and these are just 3 headline artists. Sampling was common place in the underground scene too. eg The Amen break is a percussion loop that basically invented Jungle and early Drum and Bass, and that was a copyrighted loop too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFKMtv8tU0U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFKMtv8tU0U > I do agree the waters get muddy once it's multiple seconds long.. IANAL but there's the famous vanilla ice lawsuit, and I think there was some fair use wiggle room if it's under some amount of time (forgot the exact limit), it is fine to use. Fair use doesn't cover sampling. Artists need to clear any samples used. If a sample is used creatively enough then there is a chance it might sound different enough that it goes unnoticed with anyone accosiated with the original artists estate. But that's a calculated risk the sampling artist chooses to take rather than their automatic right under copyright law. > Good point about the DJ mixtape thing. I am guessing a lot of composers/producers got the raw end of that deal, but you are right, it helped a lot for promotion and growing the scene Producers (nobody calls those kinds of artists "composers") didn't get the raw end because it wouldn't have affected their sales; if anything, it helped promote them). Bare in mind that mixed records on a cassette mix tape cannot be used for anything other than home listening (DJs didn't work of cassette players) and dance tracks didn't typically make for good home listening because they'd have long intro and outro sequences purposely designed for beat mixing. So mix tapes served an important role. The only caveat some artists would have placed was any unreleased promos stayed off mix tapes (unless specified otherwise) because those promos were often secret weapons for headliner DJs.
- dakom 5y ago
  Erm... you've told me twice about the amen break.. I saw Aphrodite, dieselboy, and a bunch of other jungle artists live, sometimes in small hole in the wall places before they got big.. hung around the goa/psytrance scene a bunch too, and was idealistic about temporary autonomous zones and stuff for a while. Not unfamiliar with how the sausage was made. Long time ago though. Not a musician myself.. I dabbled a bit in Max/MSP, Acid (the program), Fruity Loops, and used to go wild with Rebirth or whatever it was called, but it was all just messing around. Did have had plenty of conversations with musicians who called themselves composers, esp. as they would make their living composing tunes for video games and film etc. Sure "producers" is the more common term, but it's a bit reductive for you to say "nobody". How about Squarepusher, Simon Posford, and folks like that? Guarantee you they have been called all kinds of things, hehe. Anyway, when it comes to actually creating original tunes, my experience and recollection tells me it's by far mostly about synthetic instruments and laying out tracks, e.g. actual original compositions. Significantly large samples of copyrighted material play a very small part, in the big picture. Of course there's some notable exceptions, but it's a drop in the ocean compared to original material. Not talking about DJing. By definition that is literally just sampling/remixing. And of course you have famous DJ's who put out mixes and nobody knows how hard the original music synthesis freak worked to get that fat bass line sounding just right. (Not dismissing the skill of a DJ, I liken it more to a conductor than a composer or the orchestra. Hard and important skill, just different) Re: fair use, I believe you're wrong. It isn't a hard law but in general the length of the sample is one of the major factors taken into account to determine whether a judge will lean one way or another. P.L.U.R.