Unpopular Opinions
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
Sampling = cheating, always. Basic things like drum breaks can be good background during development, but any finished product ought to be original. Sampling individual notes or perc hits and then arranging them yourself is somewhat more acceptable than appropriating entire phrases, but still lazy.
>>60733843
you're retarded
>>60733871
he's right tho
Unpopular opinion:
/mu/ prides itself on ''mucore'' but it is basically an unofficial pitchfork message board
>>60733843
>Sampling individual notes or perc hits and then arranging them yourself is somewhat more acceptable than appropriating entire phrases, but still lazy.
technically many keyboards are just playing samples of individual notes and perc hits, are all keyboard players lazy?
>>60733843
>any finished product ought to be original
that's why there are other elements in songs with samples and processing done to the sample itself a lot of the time
>>60733871
>>60733960
care to elaborate, or are you content being mad that I'm right?
>>60733895
accurate
>>60734048
the posts you chose to respond to/not respond to are pretty telling of what kind of thread this is gonna turn into if we let it
>>60733966
No, they're not. They're just playing an instrument. The sample-software synth in the keyboard was designed for that express purpose, so it's not "copying" in the same sense. I will concede to your point though.
>>60734123
>They're just playing an instrument
so is everybody who plays a sampler. do you build your own instruments and mics? because if not you're just copying other people's work
A good sample is a sample that you don't recognize
>>60733843
It's not about how you make the music at all, it's about the end product. If you can come up with something original using samples, that's all that matters
>>60733999
>that's why there are other elements in songs with samples and processing done to the sample itself a lot of the time
I'm aware of this, it's the very notion that I'm criticizing. No matter how many original elements are contained in the recording, the sample is still a cop-out.
>>60734120
I respond to all coherent posts, just not all at once.
>>60734168
>the sample is still a cop-out
only if your metric for the quality of music is where the sounds you're hearing are sourced from. which is why anyone who doesn't build all their own gear and press the records themselves is just being lazy, right?
>>60733843
Most people don't have easy access to recording studios and equipment. Sampling was a key element in the democratization of music and in the creation of new musical ideas.
The idea of "cheating" existing in musoc is laughable. What is the objective, what is right or wrong? Sampling gave the means of making and distributing music to poor communities and it pushed forward a new era of music making. If that's cheating, then the "right" way is stagnant and boring as fuck.
>>60734168
>the sample is still a cop-out.
well duh that's the nature of plunderphonics in general, but let's see it this way: context changes everything. you can use the word dog in many contexts, in one case you're talking about the animal, in another you might be talking about a very bad person.
Sampling works the same way, it recontextualises things when done properly. The vast Majority of samples are lazy shite though.
>>60733843
listen to venetian snares if you think all there is to sampling is pressing the loop button on a four bar snippet of someone elses song
>>60733843
I want this meme to end
>>60734164
>>60734165
These guys are right
http://www.passionweiss.com/2015/12/01/cavanaugh-open-mike-eagle-serengeti-takeover-artists-we-definitely-didnt-sample-for-the-cavanaugh-album/
here's a thing that open mike eagle wrote about sampling that came out today
>>60734143
>so is everybody who plays a sampler. do you build your own instruments and mics? because if not you're just copying other people's work
Like I said, it really depends what you have loaded on the sampler. If you're using full phrases from recordings of other peoples' legitimate efforts, then you have no excuse. Individual notes or hits are another story, I know that not everyone has the means to record their own note samples (I certainly don't,) but then you'd be better off spending your time on a real instrument anyay, even if you don't get to record it. TL;DR: The more we sample the less we actually play instruments.
>>60734164
>>60734165
I guess this is the thought trend which I am resisting. I think that the process is more important than the product, that people have become too focused on creating packaged recordings in order to show off their aesthetic packages.
>>60734262
>TL;DR: The more we sample the less we actually play instruments.
which is a good thing, because now instead of just being a guitarist or keyboardist, i can make whole songs by myself on a computer without having all the equipment and instruments that were needed to make the samples
>>60734262
>packaged recordings in order to show off their aesthetic packages
>>60734262
>creating packaged recordings in order to show off their aesthetic packages.
what?
>>60734262
>I think that the process is more important than the product
Well you're wrong. An artist creates their vision with any means available
>>60734262
>I think that the process is more important than the product, that people have become too focused on creating packaged recordings in order to show off their aesthetic packages.
Is vaporwave the only sample-based genre you've heard? You're missing out on instrumental hip-hop, turntablism, plunderphonics, house and a bunch of other genres that utilize sampling far better.
>>60734262
>people have become too focused on creating packaged recordings in order to show off their aesthetic packages.
>>60734262
i mean, there's always been good vs lazy songwriting, the same applies to sampling
just because you can play an instrument doesn't make you a good songwriter/musician
same goes with sampling, like there's lazy (that Pitbull song copping the hook from a-ha) and there's what the Beastie Boys and Public Enemy/The Bomb Squad did with sampling
in the process of borrowing, you're creating something entirely new and often worthwhile to pay attention to
>>60734374
We only allowed to use music related reaction images or something? Fuck off
>>60734202
It's a cop-out in the sense that it allows you to avoid the more difficult and rewarding labor of practice and performance. I'm not concerned with the way the finished product sounds, although many composers have been driven to design their own instruments in order to work with otherwise inaccessible microtonal scales (i.e. Harry Partch), or simply to experiment with timbre or other aspects of the sound, and I applaud them.
>>60734215
>democratization of music
Can you elaborate?
>If that's cheating, then the "right" way is stagnant and boring as fuck.
I'll admit, my use of the word cheating was somewhat intentionally inflammatory. But are you telling me that producing music by actually playing instruments, solo or ensemble, is "stagnant and boring as fuck"?
>>60734217
>it recontextualises things when done properly.
I can see how textural experiments with samples can be interesting and informative to the audiophile in each of us, but never as engaging as real music.
> The vast Majority of samples are lazy shite though.
Right.
If its something like vaporwave where its literally the original song slowed down slightly, then its inexcusable. Fuck vaporwave.
>>60734295
> i can make whole songs by myself on a computer
This is fun, but if you're just using a bunch of recordings of others' labors, you're missing out. Sadly it is true that musical instruments are extremely expensive, so we are often forced to turn to lesser means of production.
>>60734303
>>60734308
>>60734370
That was a lewd joke, sorry
>>60734350
I used to listen to >=75% sample based music, until I got serious about practicing my instruments and I realized that I can communicate so much more that way.
>>60734372
I'm not arguing about whether it can or does sound "good", as this is mostly subjective. My concern is that sampling alienates the artist from the art, and exacerbates the shallowness of our culture.
OP here, looks like it's time to sit back and enjoy being right. I hope you all learned something.
>>60734821
Kill yourself any time fameo
>>60734619
>Sadly it is true that musical instruments are extremely expensive, so we are often forced to turn to lesser means of production.
hahaha, no. you can find student models of pretty much any mainstream western instrument for like $100. that's about how much i spent on my first electric guitar and it was worth every penny. it didn't have the world's best tone or anything, but it was a start.
>>60734959
Let me know if you want to discuss the topic
>>60735019
This has always been my approach, and while I willl vouch for the $100 guitar, but the idea was that it gets expensive when you are trying to acquire all of the instruments for an ensemble. I have now done that, I have a bass, a few guitars, a drum set, piano, and some hand drums, all mid-low tier, but it took me years to get all that together. I was conceding to the point that a computer with a DAW is a good way to develop a piece when you can't afford all those instruments, or you don't have friends to play with you and you don't want to layer everything on your own. Still, I would only recommend this method as a cheap alternative. I've personally made hundreds of little laptop beats when I was away from home or it was too late to make noise, and while I do use some samples out of laziness I always prefer to learn to synthesize everything with rudimentary VSTs, as this allows me more intimate control over the sound, similar to building your own instruments or just playing them with live expression.
>>60734821
pls name all of the plunderphonics artists you have listened to
>>60735191
Why? In my early replies, I explained that I'm not questioning the merit of existing sample-based recordings, only the merit of sampling as a procedure as opposed to traditional methods.
