[CSDb] - User Forums - The sid stealing continues! ...

Welcome to our latest new user Harvey ! (Registered 2024-11-25)

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > C64 Composing > The sid stealing continues! ...

2009-01-07 15:59

Conrad

Registered: Nov 2006
Posts: 847

The sid stealing continues! ...

... and this times it's not Timberland, but Frankmusik:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWDLsuPK280&feature=related

Jeff/ViruZ identified at 2:20 that it's his "caste camelot.sid" playing right there in the new release "3 Little Words"!

Frankmus(uck)'s myspace channel: http://www.myspace.com/frankmusik

I'm really ashamed of my people! :/

... 311 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....

2009-02-07 15:49

chancer

Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 346

Jeff , I did a bit of looking into it.. if it's 3 little words..

have you heard both versions of it? they change the part you did .. I'm guessing after what happened with janne / grg's thing..

it was released as a very limited edition EP.. 100 records though..

I'm not sure if that version is on an

the label itself , is based in a building I used to work in many moons ago (it's basically a load of studios in a complex) . I can pass on some details to you if you'd like

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Frankmusik

that specific tune was remixed a number of times.. so tricky to say what version it was.

also 200 copies of it were made..

http://www.discogs.com/Frankmusik-3-Little-Words/release/1586992

but maybe see if the one on itunes IS featuring the sid.

2009-02-08 07:08

Sequencer
Account closed

Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 13

As a musician who grew up within the demoscene and eventually did game music, recorded music, commercial music... I don't know if I agree one bit at the scene's almost immediate skewering of people who sample. It seems like an almost programmed overreaction in some cases (like this one). You can't keep culture locked up in a bubble and only accessible by secret handshake.

Bearing in mind that a lot of the music that influenced myself and many others (electro, early hiphop, post punk/wave etc.) relied heavily on renegade snippets to outright theft. Electro boosted Kraftwerk, HipHop boosted Electro and Punk, New Wave boosted Electro and made it white, and so on. And before sampling there was 'borrowful' composition.

And by the way, if I can recall back in the day ('88-'92 demo scene was more or less my time on the scene) people were stealing each other's code, SID replayer routines and in some cases just using each other's patterns from songs to manipulate and learn and make new songs from. How many times did somebody do a track that basically had JT's Eliminator bassline in it??? Drax' Warriors sounds a lot like JT's Myth. Oh and JT sampled Yes' seminal Owner of a Lonely Heart orchestral hit in his Outrun Europe soundtrack, which was a commercial release with a pretty big publisher at the time. And shit, I have sampled the piss out of things from bits of obscure vinyl (see JAL: Tour of Asia c. 1968 amongst others on The New Tetris/N64 game soundtrack) -- and yes, for fun I sampled some blips and fragments of C64 music and used it in music for TV when I was doing scoring for MTV/VH1 here in the states. I didn't do this because I couldn't make SID music, or because I was lazy or wanted to steal people's ideas... I did this because I enjoyed the idea of hearing that stuff piping out of people's TV sets and maybe some of them having deja vu.

I agree that sampled artists should be credited and compensated when sensible and possible, especially on tracks like Timbaland's. That said I believe sampling is in and of itself an art form, one that can be done masterfully, where it is basically done in part as an homage to the original or makes something entirely new from it, or poorly (ala Timbaland/P. Diddy or people who basically just boost a whole track and drop a little more bass in it). But 'poorly' is also subjective. If Timbaland can boost something, tweak it, pack it up and expose it to a whole another generation of people, and they are in turn influenced and inspired by it, than who I am really to judge and say he has no cultural merit? (Not saying he shouldn't be paying for that or crediting it appropriately... these aren't the marginalized, broke-ass early hip-hop producers of yesteryear).

In THIS case I think the sample is in perfect taste. And I'd withhold much judgement until I saw the LP -- maybe it has credits in the liner notes, and it is quite possible Jeff may get contacted by somebody to clear the sample (from a label) if there is ever going to be a bigger release. I know people who work in the music industry who basically do this for a living (clear rights and license), and believe it or not a LOT of labels ask the artists to give them a list of everything they sampled so they can go try to clear it. If they can't clear it they often ask the artist to mix it out (or re-score it). Unfortunately in many cases artists are artists -- they forget what they sampled, or they don't want to tell the label because they are afraid the label will ask them to remove something they think is important to their work. They can be lazy, flakey, disrespectful little cultural commodities.

In this case I think the recording artist could easily have recreated something like this riff. He sculpted the sample... it is pitch shifted/time shifted. And the track 'around' it albeit pop is produced quite well and reminds me nostalgically of the early demo scene vibe. He could have easily and cheaply taken a sidstation or even quadrasid and thrown in an octave arp bass thing and a couple of arp chords. But in a funny way, to me, that would have had less magic than hearing this sample.

Frankmusik was born in '86. That's when I got my C-64. He is sampling music that is reminiscent of a time where he was 2-8 years old. I can fully relate to that...

The original composer SHOULD contact the label and ask them for credit and some compensation (and expect it). But we should all chill out and realize that we all borrow and steal in many ways. If we didn't we wouldn't still be working with 12 tones.

- Neil Voss aka Sequencer

2009-02-08 12:30

Playboy

Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 20

As a part of the music industry (I have my own record label now and worked for 2 major's in the past years) I can confirm what sequencer wrote about clearance and what is the industry attitude towards clearing samples. Not long ago I signed a track that the artist told me was 100% original. Later I sent it to some of the teams working with us to have it remixed and they recognized a heavy sample into it (which I hadn't recognized before). When asking the artist he said he had filtered the sample and he didnt think this would hurt anyone... Just imagine what could have happened if I did not had tried to have the track remixes and release it as it is...

So I agree clearance is out of discussion. In 2008 anything used should get a credit AND proper remuneration, but I still recognize the social value of sampling in the creativity process.

My 5 cents.

2009-02-08 13:13

chancer

Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 346

sequencer well because of the demo scene, thats how I got into music. I used to give demos to a producer and got to know a few labels because of it. (Thats why the way things are annoys me, as I have a lot of time for both demos and music.)

Thats going back to hhm 91 or so... musicians normally get the whole creative thing IF they are doing it for the love of music (and not just making money) and were amazed at what people were doing.. I mean the whole package, code / art / music.

you'd pay a session singer / musician , so why not a scener. the "I sampled it without knowing" argument is weak, esp if they load up sidplay it clearly shows the persons name (as well as the folder names) AND it's not like they aren't contactable..how many of these things were downloaded off HV ? I'm sure they would forward on messages to the composers in question.

If they don't want to clear it, then let them make their OWN work in say quadra-sid etc.

I use samples a LOT, but I'm VERY sure of their clearence status and have paid a license to use them e.g. sample cd's. Things like the classic example.. the amen break.. were commercial but mr cooper (the winstons) never got paid for the original tune. He never chased anyone for sampling it either.

sequencer / playboy .. you'd both ask sid musicians I'm sure.

It's not even about business vs scene... it's just about saying.. "ya know what.. thats great.. this guy needs paying or at least a credit.. he saved us a lot of time" and doing the right thing (although we all know the music world is shark infested waters)

part of the reason for them sampling I guess. to see what they can get away with.. oh it's obscure.. no one will know.. or it's a "demo" , but they use the context in the wrong way (as in a demo off a keyboard).. Also the fact it's not from a game, where it's VERY easily proven when the game was released.

Any labels I've worked with will ALWAYS ask about the status of samples, if so either clear them OR use something else that isn't gonna be problematic.. as a few of them have been caught out in the past and had to pay a bill regarding clearence later.

Playboy long time since x95 =) hope your well.

I'm going try to contact frankmusik to see what happens about it and see if they want to contact Jeff at least. I think he should get a mention at the VERY least.

2009-02-08 13:20

SIDWAVE
Account closed

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238

It's nice that some part of a melody can survive, being used as a sample in a new track, going to a new generation..

BUT..

Instead, creative and able as I am, I would try to bring the original music to the listener, and not cut it up and mangle it and so on.

People who do this just have no talent at all, and are only doing it for making money.

So they can kiss my ass.

You sample = You pay! A LOT!

I won't be happy if a tune i made, and love dearly, will be presented in a new version, where the whole background is cut away, and only the 4 famous notes are present.

This is destruction of MY ART!

2009-02-08 13:46

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11354

destruction can be an art by itself =)

also there is a whole culture formed around just playing the best 4 bars of a tune over and over (you know which). and thats an art by itself too.

2009-02-08 16:34

Playboy

Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 20

I dont remember mentioning they should not pay for sampling. I was just mentiong that the trick ppl are most likely not supposed to be the guys at the record label, but the producer/artist.

Chancer: thx, good to be back here :-)

And agree with Groepaz on the art definition too!

Andrea

2009-02-08 17:19

Sequencer
Account closed

Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 13

Quoting chancer

Musicians normally get the whole creative thing IF they are doing it for the love of music (and not just making money)

I don't know if making money and creativity are mutually exclusive, or that what one person believes about sampling is the same as another. Yeah the majority of people sort of understand this notion of 'fair use' (subjectively, creative use and not exploiting the original material beyond reason without compensating whoever owns the rights to the original), sort of.

But I find people also tend to contradict themselves a lot here. People will complain about others who sample a riff or break out of a C-64 song, who have in themselves used the Amen break or other samples from older music, some without even knowing it...

Quoting chancer

you'd pay a session singer / musician , so why not a scener. the "I sampled it without knowing" argument is weak

It certainly is a weak argument. I think in many circumstances artists work in the heat of the moment. They aren't thinking about logistics when making music. If they are an artist who samples they are thinking of the result they desire, not whether or not they can clear the sample or make sure it gets properly credited. Reality doesn't set in until later, when and if the music gets marketed, and then there are many good and bad reasons artists will not take the high road (like if they simply know there is no way in hell a sample will clear or they can't afford it). For example, I know that to sample a pretty major track can cost upwards of $10k. An artist who may only sell a few thousand albums (or even less than 100,000 of them) can't really afford to do this, so their choices are don't do it at all, or occlude what they did and hope for the best.

Obviously that doesn't apply here... here we have an artist who is in early development and probably has at least some money to play with (they shot a video with some hot people dancing, and the track sounds pretty mastered, etc.). So you'd sort of hope they'd do the right thing and credit the lift on the album and compensate the sampled artist.

Quoting chancer

It's not even about business vs scene... it's just about saying.. "ya know what.. thats great.. this guy needs paying or at least a credit.. he saved us a lot of time" and doing the right thing (although we all know the music world is shark infested waters)

part of the reason for them sampling I guess. to see what they can get away with.. oh it's obscure.. no one will know.. or it's a "demo" , but they use the context in the wrong way (as in a demo off a keyboard).. Also the fact it's not from a game, where it's VERY easily proven when the game was released.

I don't think everybody samples to save time. In some cases it may have been easier not to. And I don't think everybody samples from obscure sources to try to conceal their efforts. You have to understand - for a musician who samples in the 'creative' way it is about making a reference to something, sometimes preferably obscure. It is there so that others might enjoy how you transformed something, and might relate to the reference you made. I think a lot of people have discovered new old music by hearing it sampled first. For example a generation of kids now know who Breakwater is because Daft Punk reshaped Release the Beast into Robot Rock.

That said, the better thing to do would be to credit and pay for the material whenever possible.

Quoting rambones

Instead, creative and able as I am, I would try to bring the original music to the listener, and not cut it up and mangle it and so on.

I think what you are missing here is the listener may not be interested in the original... or may be interested how somebody can contextualize something (how they cut it up, how they mangle it, what they mix it with). The sum of the parts sort of thing.

Quoting rambones

People who do this just have no talent at all, and are only doing it for making money.

That is a pretty hand-line stance. I think people who outright boost music (like Timbaland) show a lack of a specific sort of musical creativity (but show tremendous acumen in their social and marketing talents). But to say everybody who samples anything has no talent and only does it for money is a bit broad. It would mean that a considerable number of musicians (if we accept a wide enough definition of what a 'musician' is) have no talent.

Quoting rambones

I won't be happy if a tune i made, and love dearly, will be presented in a new version, where the whole background is cut away, and only the 4 famous notes are present.

This is destruction of MY ART!

You are definitely entitled to feel that way. But what you miss here is that other people -- an audience -- might be happy about it (they may like what somebody did with it more than the original). This is just a sad but true reality - some people are more adept at reaching an audience of a group of people (small or big) by speaking their language. You may not speak their language. You can be mad about this, and fight it and say their culture has no value or they are ignorant not to accept your original art and understand your language. Or you can accept it and feel like part of something bigger than yourself or your own vision. Obviously it is easier to accept things when you don't end up feeling financially exploited in the end...

We are all standing on the shoulders of giants (I guess was my original point). If it isn't sampling it is in the way we compose, the chords we use, the sounds we use, the beats we use, etc. are all for the most part shared ideas. Technology has made us more adept at sharing, for better or worse. There are always people who have done things that others find to be in distaste. But without them the world would probably be a pretty static place.

2009-02-08 22:48

SIDWAVE
Account closed

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238

Artists that are a result of a producer behind them, are crap, go only for fame and money, and are the thieves of music business.

Real artists make sounds and lyrics and music themselves.

I guess you know this..

I have only respect for the last mentioned.

The rest will be sued to hell and the outer limits if they ever steal from me.

To say... if Rolling stones will remix me, i would let them.

If some producer's popchick will loop 4 seconds ripped from my music, THEYRE GOING DOWN!

2009-02-09 01:54

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11354

Quote: