Why are you people even discussing this?
Like it matters what others do. If someone claims to make music by just sampling and looping bars from different Darude-tracks, in which way do you have to even care about that?
If it bothers you that other people don't compose all their own loops, or any for that matter, you should seriously consider what difference to you it actually makes and if there's nothing more important you could be bothered about.
I don't use loops. Heck, I don't use samples. I don't care if you use loops. I don't think it's bad that some genres revolve around some certain kinds of beats and sounds. It's just plain silly to care, and just plain stupid to get upset about such issues.
And, oh, almost forgot.
People using loops do so because they are lacking potential in the genital area and hence never get laid.
Could someone please explain anti-loop snobbery?
-
- KVRAF
- 4737 posts since 20 Feb, 2004 from Gothenburg, Sweden
Stefan H Singer
https://dropshotaudio.com/
https://dropshotaudio.com/
-
- KVRAF
- 7936 posts since 18 Feb, 2003 from out there somewhere
stefancrs wrote: People using loops do so because they are lacking potential in the genital area and hence never get laid.
how true. do you think if I gave up my loops the missus might find me attractive again?-
- KVRAF
- 4737 posts since 20 Feb, 2004 from Gothenburg, Sweden
Npopiadream wrote:well thank god the people who don't care are here to bring us to page 18
Stefan H Singer
https://dropshotaudio.com/
https://dropshotaudio.com/
-
- KVRAF
- 5782 posts since 10 Mar, 2003 from Music Shed #8
except, of course, for the ones who are to busy getting laid to spend hours in front of a screen laboriously hand-crafting their own beats...stefancrs wrote:And, oh, almost forgot.
People using loops do so because they are lacking potential in the genital area and hence never get laid.
-
- KVRAF
- 5782 posts since 10 Mar, 2003 from Music Shed #8
um...CypherOne wrote:stefancrs wrote: People using loops do so because they are lacking potential in the genital area and hence never get laid.
-
- KVRAF
- 4737 posts since 20 Feb, 2004 from Gothenburg, Sweden
No, you started using loops because she didn't find you attractive. It's not the other way around.CypherOne wrote:stefancrs wrote: People using loops do so because they are lacking potential in the genital area and hence never get laid.
Stefan H Singer
https://dropshotaudio.com/
https://dropshotaudio.com/
-
- The Teach
- 8273 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from flatness
slightly drifting off topic here but this attitude REALLY pisses me off ...Lunatique wrote:I have a friend who has a degree in fine art, yet he cannot draw or paint his way out of a paper bag. I don't know why this is allowed to happen, since I seriously doubt you'd find someone who has a degree in other endeavors, but can't perform his chosen endeavor to even the most reasonable level of competence. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I believe if you want to call yourself an artist or musician or writer or whatever, you pay your dues and bite the bullet and learn to be able to do the very thing you claim to be able to do. I don't see this as being snobby--it is a perfectly reasonable thing to ask of someone. Musicians play instruments, and composers compose music out of his head. That's always been the case. Using a bunch of pre-recorded music made by other people is not what it means to be a musician or composer. Yes, loops have their uses, and I have nothing against using them to supplement your composition, but if that's all you know how to do, then I just don't see how anyone like that can look themselves in the mirror and call themselves musicians or composers. Maybe music-maker would be the more appropriate term--but even then, that person is just reassembling what others made already. Not that I don't respect it--because I do--I just think it's a seperate thing from being musician/composer. I'm a big fan of certain DJs, and I don't hold them in any less regard.
... i have a fine art degree AND i can draw and paint and sculpt f**king well BUT the art i produce shows no evidence of that whatsoever TBH (beyond the ability to choose the right manufactured colours and mass-produced materials to stick together) ... this attitude that not having the 'traditional' art skills means you cant be an artist stinks ... if your ideas are good enough and you can realise them in a way that connects with the viewer then youre an artist ...
... weird thing is - in visual arts at least this negative view only seems (in my experience) to exist OUTSIDE the art 'establishment' ... those of us on the other side are generally more open-minded about what it takes to be an artist ...
... shame it seems the music world doesnt work the same way ...
slainte
rob-
- KVRAF
- 2323 posts since 4 Mar, 2004 from Portugal (Lagos)
On the other hand it's always interesting to see how creative efforts in one art field can lead to great work in another field, or how some people can be deeply creative in a cross-field way (Laurie Anderson comes to my mind right now). Maybe creativity is only one single thing, and some people can find their expression language in an unexpected manner, once they find suitable tools. Like loops? Why not?
Eventually something intelligent will appear written here. Watch this space.
-
- KVRAF
- 7217 posts since 21 Aug, 2004 from Trondheim, Norway
I'm ambivalent to this stuff.
On the one hand, I think that all music is...well...music. And shouldn't be categorized or cause a thread like this.
On the other hand, I really feel there are real things that can be pointed at that make the difference between, say, Beethoven and Creedence Clearwater Revival, or between Underworld and Moby, for that matter. And I'm not talking about taste.
It's the same kind of thing that makes me see a difference in the literary value of Moby Dick and the Boston Telephone Directory, which undoubtedly both are books.
Know what I mean?
Anyone know those things are please help... I don't think it's "loops", and I don't think it's "counter-point" or "melody". I don't know what it is, but it's there.
On the one hand, I think that all music is...well...music. And shouldn't be categorized or cause a thread like this.
On the other hand, I really feel there are real things that can be pointed at that make the difference between, say, Beethoven and Creedence Clearwater Revival, or between Underworld and Moby, for that matter. And I'm not talking about taste.
It's the same kind of thing that makes me see a difference in the literary value of Moby Dick and the Boston Telephone Directory, which undoubtedly both are books.
Know what I mean?
Anyone know those things are please help... I don't think it's "loops", and I don't think it's "counter-point" or "melody". I don't know what it is, but it's there.
-
- KVRAF
- 2135 posts since 12 Jul, 2004 from Brave New World
maybe its "appeal"?Hovmod wrote:Anyone know those things are please help... I don't think it's "loops", and I don't think it's "counter-point" or "melody". I don't know what it is, but it's there.
"Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together...." -Carl Zwanzig
-
- KVRAF
- 1643 posts since 18 Mar, 2004 from Lincoln, CA
See, I'm agreeing that it's a big grey area, because loops are used in different ways. But I do see a difference in using loops made by other people and making your own loops recorded by yourself, playing your own instrument or even making noises. My reason for feeling that way is this:
How many times have you listened to a song and thought to yourself, "Man, that guitar part is wicked!" or "That chord progression is pure genius!" or "Holy crap that's some really good drumming!" Let's say you meet the guy that made the song and compliment him on his talent and skill, and he tells you, "Oh, they're just pre-made loops I got off of a sample disc. I didn't play or write or arrange any of those parts, except throwing them in a sequencer and turning the mute/solo button on and off."
Tell me, how would that make you feel?
As far as demonstrating skills to be considered an artist/musician or whatever--I guess that's up to the individual. I personally would have trouble accepting some guy who claims to be a writer, but can't even string sentences together without horrendous grammar mistakes and practically non-existent prose style, or any sense of flow or rhythm.
Some people want to believe that it's cool to have no line drawn at all, and everyone should be able to proudly call himself an artist, musician, writer..etc. Well, if that's the case, it really doesn't make what we do very special, does it? Hell, we could all just call ourselves bona fide lawyers, doctors, dancers, directors, fireman, scientists..etc too then, and if anyone should object, we could just call them elitsts and close-minded.
Anyway, this is a huge wide world, and there's a place for everyone, and what I say has no meaning except to myself and the people that have similar beliefs. People live and change, and maybe one day I'll see things differently (lord knows thats what happens when you age), but for now, this is how I feel.
How many times have you listened to a song and thought to yourself, "Man, that guitar part is wicked!" or "That chord progression is pure genius!" or "Holy crap that's some really good drumming!" Let's say you meet the guy that made the song and compliment him on his talent and skill, and he tells you, "Oh, they're just pre-made loops I got off of a sample disc. I didn't play or write or arrange any of those parts, except throwing them in a sequencer and turning the mute/solo button on and off."
Tell me, how would that make you feel?
As far as demonstrating skills to be considered an artist/musician or whatever--I guess that's up to the individual. I personally would have trouble accepting some guy who claims to be a writer, but can't even string sentences together without horrendous grammar mistakes and practically non-existent prose style, or any sense of flow or rhythm.
Some people want to believe that it's cool to have no line drawn at all, and everyone should be able to proudly call himself an artist, musician, writer..etc. Well, if that's the case, it really doesn't make what we do very special, does it? Hell, we could all just call ourselves bona fide lawyers, doctors, dancers, directors, fireman, scientists..etc too then, and if anyone should object, we could just call them elitsts and close-minded.
Anyway, this is a huge wide world, and there's a place for everyone, and what I say has no meaning except to myself and the people that have similar beliefs. People live and change, and maybe one day I'll see things differently (lord knows thats what happens when you age), but for now, this is how I feel.
-
- KVRAF
- 2336 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Terra Firma
pHz wrote:slightly drifting off topic here but this attitude REALLY pisses me off ...Lunatique wrote:I have a friend who has a degree in fine art, yet he cannot draw or paint his way out of a paper bag. I don't know why this is allowed to happen, since I seriously doubt you'd find someone who has a degree in other endeavors, but can't perform his chosen endeavor to even the most reasonable level of competence. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I believe if you want to call yourself an artist or musician or writer or whatever, you pay your dues and bite the bullet and learn to be able to do the very thing you claim to be able to do. I don't see this as being snobby--it is a perfectly reasonable thing to ask of someone. Musicians play instruments, and composers compose music out of his head. That's always been the case. Using a bunch of pre-recorded music made by other people is not what it means to be a musician or composer. Yes, loops have their uses, and I have nothing against using them to supplement your composition, but if that's all you know how to do, then I just don't see how anyone like that can look themselves in the mirror and call themselves musicians or composers. Maybe music-maker would be the more appropriate term--but even then, that person is just reassembling what others made already. Not that I don't respect it--because I do--I just think it's a seperate thing from being musician/composer. I'm a big fan of certain DJs, and I don't hold them in any less regard.
... i have a fine art degree AND i can draw and paint and sculpt f**king well BUT the art i produce shows no evidence of that whatsoever TBH (beyond the ability to choose the right manufactured colours and mass-produced materials to stick together) ... this attitude that not having the 'traditional' art skills means you cant be an artist stinks ... if your ideas are good enough and you can realise them in a way that connects with the viewer then youre an artist ...
... weird thing is - in visual arts at least this negative view only seems (in my experience) to exist OUTSIDE the art 'establishment' ... those of us on the other side are generally more open-minded about what it takes to be an artist ...
... shame it seems the music world doesnt work the same way ...
slainte
reply! I agree and despair that this 'craftist' attitude, outlined by Lunatique, still exists after almost 100 years of Modernism. 
It brings to mind the beardies booing Bob Dylan for using an electric guitar.What's extremely odd about this debate is the fact that we are all using computers to create music yet this concept of craftian slavery still seems to hold its allure. There's nothing wrong with crafting away at your music but to then turn round and dismiss using technological advances, depicting them as somehow inferior to craftism, is just absurd.
It also highlights how out of touch this attitude is in todays multimedia environment. The loop is not a new invention but it's part of the whole montage technique that's been around since the begining of Modernism. Montage underpins all of modern culture. To dismiss the loop is to dismiss all of modern culture and that is as backward as trying to cling on to powdered wigs.