Worrying about using old samples and the legal ramifications...

[Passing Bye]

On another point: the assumption by many here seems to be that without IP, music has no value, and that's clearly not the case.

There's barely 3 of us debating here and I doubt any of us even think that, someone said something in that lines, but many, no, jancivil, ask her...

[thecontrolcentre]

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... C-gdPn7dZT

[Passing Bye]

[jancivil]

it felt good to type that, anyway. nm
some people should really just be ignored tho

[ghettosynth]

the greatest genre in the history of time, wouldnt have given the world vanilla ice.

Now now
People don't go around blaming Nickleback on rock n roll do they?
Do they? I wouldn't know,really....

I think that we've found the Nickleback fan.

[Memsterrr]

A few people in this thread clearly have no concept of what creativity is, and the merits of it. All I see is categorisation, and a generally elitist attitude. Things have to be "this" way or "that" way. And Hip Hop is an inferior form of art/expression because it evolved from sampling. Funny dudes!

[Memsterrr]

There is great music out there. Undoubtedly. And Hip Hop certainly doesn't have a monopoly on great music. But, it's about preferences, and also social impact that is still relevant. How many revolutionaries or revolutionary thinkers has Hip Hop fostered? We're talking in the thousands. Maybe millions if you consider the fanbase that actually took it onboard. How many other genres are still doing that today? Speaking truth to power. Partaking in critical analysis of socially accepted norms? Not many I can think of. Not saying they don't exist, but Hip Hop is probably the only genre that accommodates this aspect at its very forefront, and always will. And that's what makes it the greatest genre.

If you think Hip-Hop is the seed for revolution, You ARE delusional

Is that so? Depends entirely what your definition of revolution is, I guess

In your worldview, revolution must solely be the act of rioting in the streets, or protesting .

As Gil Scott astutely put it - "The revolution will not be televised"... because the true revolution happens in the mind. And to that end, Hip Hop is definitely the seed for revolution, since it holds socially accepted norms to account, constantly, and by doing so promotes growth.

The average garbage you hear on the radio, however, ONLY promotes stagnation and the general reinforcement of the status quo. Meaningless, lobotomised dance music lulling people in to a false sense of security -- that everything is fine. A complete waste.

But if you disagree with me, by all means state your points, with more than one sentence, preferably. And I will gladly give a constructive response.

(And if it isn't obvious already, the Hip Hop that I speak of is not your run of the mill commercial Hip Hop, in case you haven't realised this yet).

[melomood]

Just don’t be surprised when others can point out the hypocrisy in claiming it’s the greatest when you have to sample other works to make it great.

^^^ THIS ^^^

One could point out how pointless claiming any form of music is the greatest. It's all 99% derivative for at least half a century

[ghettosynth]

Just don’t be surprised when others can point out the hypocrisy in claiming it’s the greatest when you have to sample other works to make it great.

^^^ THIS ^^^

One could point out how pointless claiming any form of music is the greatest. It's all 99% derivative for at least half a century

^^^ THIS ^^^

[Passing Bye]

A few people in this thread clearly have no concept of what creativity is, and the merits of it. All I see is categorisation, and a generally elitist attitude. Things have to be "this" way or "that" way. And Hip Hop is an inferior form of art/expression because it evolved from sampling. Funny dudes!

Nice straw man, which few actually said any of that? You are the one honking about sampling and greatest music of all time here, sorry if we don’t agree with exclusivity of all that…

[JeffLearman]

Intellectual property is an illusion. 

No, it's something created by law, just like physical property.

[JeffLearman]

https://www.iflscience.com/technology/a ... ringement/

That work is pure BS and has no legal ramifications for US copyright law, which explicitly excludes generated material (with certain exceptions that don't apply here.)
Cite:
https://www.copyright.gov/comp3/chap300 ... 577%2C0%5D

The general position of most who argue against IP is not implying anything of the sort, or that people such as songwriters, performers, etc. shouldn't be compensated for their work.

I've yet to see a plausible explanation of how independent authors and songwriters could earn a living. Instead they say "Sure, they'd earn a living ... somehow. Much like the "insert miracle here" cartoon.

Are patents, trademarks, and copyrights abused? Yes, just like every other thing in existence. That doesn't mean we'd be better off without them.

[elxsound]

Just don’t be surprised when others can point out the hypocrisy in claiming it’s the greatest when you have to sample other works to make it great.

^^^ THIS ^^^

One could point out how pointless claiming any form of music is the greatest. It's all 99% derivative for at least half a century

^^^ THIS ^^^

Yeah, what melomood said.

[Memsterrr]

Melomood basically hit the nail on the head. But I would argue that, in one form or another, all music is derivative. Therefore it makes NO SENSE whatsoever to be anal about how such and such created a piece of music, or the particular methodologies a genre of music employs. Sampled or composed... what matters is creativity and the final outcome. Why can't we agree on that?

The idea that composed music is somehow superior, or more 'correct' than sampled music is nonsensical. Sometimes the only means to create a certain sound or texture is to sample. Unless, for example, you have/can afford a basement full of vintage instruments and synthesizers, not to mention know how to use them as masterfully as the old did lol... composition isn't practically viable in some instances, and it can greatly suppress creativity.

I concur that some people are extremely lazy with sampling, which I too disagree with. However, if I can play an entire octave of notes on an instrument and then some, but I can also do the same by chopping up a sample into infinite parts (not to mention modulate and change until the cows come home)... where is the difference exactly? How is composing "more unique" or "original"?

90% of composed music that I listen to in the modern era is boring, cheesy and hella synthetic. And sometimes I have to feel sorry for the composers because they feel as though they are validated, just because they spent lots of time on it "composing". The outcome = trash. That doesn't mean that composed music is not capable of being brilliant, of course I'm not arguing that, I'm simply arguing that the means never justify the end. What justifies the end is actual sound quality, level of creativity etc.

[Memsterrr]

A few people in this thread clearly have no concept of what creativity is, and the merits of it. All I see is categorisation, and a generally elitist attitude. Things have to be "this" way or "that" way. And Hip Hop is an inferior form of art/expression because it evolved from sampling. Funny dudes!

Nice straw man, which few actually said any of that? You are the one honking about sampling and greatest music of all time here, sorry if we don’t agree with exclusivity of all that…

People who arbitrarily accuse other people of employing logical fallacies in their arguments, are almost always idiots, seeking to take the high ground without actually thinking about what is being said, or the context in which it is being said. Don't be that guy

If you bother to look throughout this post, many people have either said outright, or inferred, that composed music is superior to sampled music. Which also implicates that these people like to categorise music... it's not difficult, and it most certainly isn't intellectual dishonesty on my part, it's just facts. I'm probably the least intellectually dishonest person you will come across. I say things as they are.