3 ms·
Responding to all your points would require repeating things I have already said above, and I feel like you are deliberately trying to pick an argument at this
by dakom 5y ago
Responding to all your points would require repeating things I have already said above, and I feel like you are deliberately trying to pick an argument at this point, which is clouding your judgement.
I guess that's not a super nice thing, so I'll share my reasoning, but I'm not really interested in taking this further unless you have something new to add:
1. your quote on fair use literally stops a few lines before citing the opposite of your point. any basic search on fair use will tell you that the length of the sample is one of the fundamental factors.
2. it's trivially easy to find music industry sites that call Posford and others "composer", such as discogs
3. Your distinction of exactly which types of music we are talking about appeared out of nowhere and doesn't seem to have any rules, feels like changing the goalposts to me.
4. I literally said that the original music synthesis person makes the bass line fatter. This is the work that goes into producing electronic music. It's original and not an issue of sampling.
5. You're ignoring the most fundamental fact: if we take the sum total of modern music, the amount of it which is composed of definitely copyrightable samples is extremely small relative to the amount of synthesis and traditional composition. I don't want to guess an exact number, but I would be shocked if it came anywhere even close to as high as 1%. You seem to think it's somewhere like 50% or more. My takeaway is you are only accounting for very specific sub-genres (e.g. if you think Goa trance is mostly composed of vocal samples, waaaayyy off, but vocal trance, certain kinds of hip hop.. yeah, of course).
Whatever, man, to be honest I am just not enjoying this convo anymore. Forgive me but I'm gonna bow out.
- hnlmorg 5y agoI think the issue here is you're conflating a whole bunch of other genres as "electronic dance music" but which are not. Film and computer game music, early goa, etc. None of that is part of the underground clubbing scene. So yeah, the points you're making are correct but you're arguing a different point to the one I was. Take Posford for example. Discords says he is a composer and record producer. This suggests that Simon has released other creative works outside of dance music; and given Goa's roots I'd say that was more likely than your argument that they're both listed as synonyms. The fact that Discogs also describes him as a sound engineer further illustrates that it's a list of his achievements rather than a thesaurus of related terms. > 5. You're ignoring the most fundamental fact: if we take the sum total of modern music, the amount of it which is composed of definitely copyrightable samples is extremely small relative to the amount of synthesis and traditional composition. I agree but I also never once said "the sum total of modern music". I was talking specifically about the evolution of electronic dance music. I said: "Electronic music wouldn't exist if it wasn't for ignoring copyright laws. The entire scene is built off the back of sampling and mix tapes." Quite why you decided to bring film scores into the equation and then blame me for moving the goal posts I don't know. Lastly I'm not denying fair use exists. I'm saying selling records doesn't fall under fair use. There are a thousand other ways to use samples outside of that and some of those will constitute as fair use.
- dakom 5y agoFair enough :)