NI expansions and song distribution

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

Having published several works lately I have noticed a common issue amongst several distributors. Simply, They ask that you either do not have samples in your tracks or seem very hesitant to do the necessary legal/paper work to secure free use. The other issue is with content ID on the different platforms. The distributors are concerned with multiple tracks having the same samples and confusing the system.

Now, we are not talking drum samples rather loops. NI expansions are full of these and they are quite useful and inspiring. however it seems they are virtually useless in 2021 when trying to distribute music commercially.

any thoughts on this?

for now...I use them to inspire me on a track and then remove them as I go. sometimes creating something similar other times just omitting.

[jancivil]

Well, my opinion in general is that loops are frequently easily seen as compositions someone else made, so the whole thing becomes problematic; the same musical phrase occurs in all kind of tracks as a result, it has to be major hassle to be able to fully ass-cover.

[LoveEnigma18]

Curious to know why is this the case? Doesn't the samples and loops in these Expansions being royalty-free help to avoid this problem?

I am sure I am missing something here, so please enlighten me.

[vurt]

Curious to know why is this the case? Doesn't the samples and loops in these Expansions being royalty-free help to avoid this problem?

I am sure I am missing something here, so please enlighten me.

online distribution, soundcloud for example, use an algorithm to detect copyright infringement.
algorithms will pick these out as infringements.
while, there is an appeal process available, a distributor (label) may have a couple hundred artists, say 10 platforms, it becomes a lot of work going through that appeals process.

in time, the algorithms will improve, and should! include information from vendors like ni to ignore these "loops".
but we are a long way off that.
computers are good at recognising patterns, not so good at discerning whether different patterns are ok or not, without someone inputting the data.

[cryophonik]

Curious to know why is this the case? Doesn't the samples and loops in these Expansions being royalty-free help to avoid this problem?

I am sure I am missing something here, so please enlighten me.

My thoughts exactly. I'm not sure I see the legal problem, if they're royalty-free and there's typically a clause in every contract to ensure no unauthorized use copyrighted samples. Maybe it's more of a creative thing, where they're finding that different artists/songs are using the same royalty-free loops or something? Surely, the majority of submissions to most dance/pop/hiphop/etc songs these days use a ton of drum samples, percussion loops, noise sweeps, etc.

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

It should so.....but like Vurt said the content ID systems get confused. Evidentially not just loops even on some extended one shots. Sure it's legal and royalty free but they don't want the hassle.as a rule. I am sure there are exceptions.

I released some music in 2010. Before content ID. I had a song make it on a playlist on YouTube and got 1.3 million plays. The real hook of that song was a stock harp loop that came from Reason 4. Now imagine if someone else used that harp loop.... actually it's hard to believe no one else did. But I got all the credit.....so to speak. I would bet if someone used that loop in a new track. They would receive a claim and I would get paid. Hmmmm maybe that's how I got so many plays anyway.....music was released in 2010. 1.3 million plays in 2019.

[cryophonik]

On a related note, my wife and I are photographers/videographers, and we sometimes make these short modeling videos for Instagram that use my own original music as a backing track. I've had several occasions where I've had copyright strikes/video deleted since their algorithm detected it as copyrighted music (they're signed to labels, on most popular platforms, etc.). And, there's no way to relay to IG that I'm the copyright holder!

[LoveEnigma18]

Curious to know why is this the case? Doesn't the samples and loops in these Expansions being royalty-free help to avoid this problem?

I am sure I am missing something here, so please enlighten me.

online distribution, soundcloud for example, use an algorithm to detect copyright infringement.
algorithms will pick these out as infringements.
while, there is an appeal process available, a distributor (label) may have a couple hundred artists, say 10 platforms, it becomes a lot of work going through that appeals process.

in time, the algorithms will improve, and should! include information from vendors like ni to ignore these "loops".
but we are a long way off that.
computers are good at recognising patterns, not so good at discerning whether different patterns are ok or not, without someone inputting the data.

Thanks for the explanation.

[LoveEnigma18]

It should so.....but like Vurt said the content ID systems get confused. Evidentially not just loops even on some extended one shots. Sure it's legal and royalty free but they don't want the hassle.as a rule. I am sure there are exceptions.

I released some music in 2010. Before content ID. I had a song make it on a playlist on YouTube and got 1.3 million plays. The real hook of that song was a stock harp loop that came from Reason 4. Now imagine if someone else used that harp loop.... actually it's hard to believe no one else did. But I got all the credit.....so to speak. I would bet if someone used that loop in a new track. They would receive a claim and I would get paid. Hmmmm maybe that's how I got so many plays anyway.....music was released in 2010. 1.3 million plays in 2019.

Interesting. Did not think about this. Thanks.

So, what do we do then? Can't we modify the loops to a decent length so that they don't are not easily identifiable? Or chop them up or whatever?

Considering a lot of modern music producers use samples from Splice, Loopcloud, etc. it is possible that the sample is used by more than one producer. Why are these sources present then? I do get your point, but then what we are witnessing today is kinda contradictory.

I had almost forgotten that music is still tracked for infringement, simply because of the volume of music being produced and released these days and the common resources that we all have access to. I started thinking no one really bothers of copyright anymore. Not that I don't know about it or its importance.

[xbow]

Yep, algorithms are good at detecting patterns, but don't know if your use is legitimate. Reminds me of a rant by Youtuber Dash Glitch: IIRC, someone released a remix of his track. As a result, his stream where he originally created that track is taken down.

[xtp]

Yep, algorithms are good at detecting patterns, but don't know if your use is legitimate. Reminds me of a rant by Youtuber Dash Glitch: IIRC, someone released a remix of his track. As a result, his stream where he originally created that track is taken down.

Good to see that he got one up the hustler or as me old-man was always fond of saying: "he bored one right up 'im."

[the expression is clearer if you picture an auger]

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

@loveinigma18

I'm not sure what length these algorithms are looking for. I would think at least a bar.

This type of sample is not a problem for copyright. They are not the same as sampling an actual published recording. They are infact royalty free and should stand up in court. These types create more of an issue with the platforms content is algo.

I have been constructing songs using these loops and one shots. Then as the peice comes together.....go through and make something similar or remove it completely. Usually the song holds up fine without.

But as we are learning in this discussion sometimes the algos block even our original idea or recording. That being said. I am more apt to leave the samples in now and take my chances

@xbow

I never even considered this going the other way. I would be VERY frustrated with that scenario.

[middle_color]

Having published several works lately I have noticed a common issue amongst several distributors. Simply, They ask that you either do not have samples in your tracks or seem very hesitant to do the necessary legal/paper work to secure free use. The other issue is with content ID on the different platforms. The distributors are concerned with multiple tracks having the same samples and confusing the system.

Now, we are not talking drum samples rather loops. NI expansions are full of these and they are quite useful and inspiring. however it seems they are virtually useless in 2021 when trying to distribute music commercially.

any thoughts on this?

for now...I use them to inspire me on a track and then remove them as I go. sometimes creating something similar other times just omitting.

Thanks for touching an interesting topic. The other day i wanted to investigate if i can make some money on stock music. So i watched a lot of videos discussing stock music on youtube. A lot of the stockers suggest that one can literally take all samples from Splice and construct a song quickly, without even touching any instrument (or virtual instrument). And make money. Turns out one can't do that easy thanks to algorithms

[LoveEnigma18]

@Scrubbing Monkeys

Thanks for the explanation. A bar would be too strict and unfair for producers.

So, to summarize, I consider it OK to use these loops by modifying them as long as it doesn't get too obvious.

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

@Scrubbing Monkeys

Thanks for the explanation. A bar would be too strict and unfair for producers.

So, to summarize, I consider it OK to use these loops by modifying them as long as it doesn't get too obvious.

Dont quote me on the one bar....a blind guess.
Well.....the loops are there as tools and should be used. Even if it is a progression. how many songs use the same progression. how many songs used the exact same DX7 patch. If you combine a group of loops and one shots that are pleasing to listen to.... we all win. Even if I recognize the sample from the expansion or another track.....My two cents. Using a recording of a publishid work ... not cool....UNLESS... you mangle it.