# Sampling



## Python Blue (Apr 3, 2013)

First of all, I do not want this to turn into a thread for personal attacks; the reason I start this read is to get an idea of the overall opinion.

In light of the recent Daft Punk thread, in which there was a tangent about sampling, I'm curious what the thoughts of others on this forum are when it comes to sampling preexisting songs and, in some cases, movies and games.

Personally, I have mixed feelings. I know perfectly well that many musicians don't give a crap about giving inspirations due credit, which is one reason why copyright is so overrestrictive now, not to mention occasional sampling of the complete essence of a song (usually within the composition, as opposed to the sound itself).

At the same time, however, one reason sampling laws are so readily broken is because they demand the world. As someone who's considered sampling legally, I know that you have to pay thousands of dollars or more on most occassions just for a second or two of a prerecorded sound, with no guarantee that your work will make enough money to make up for the money you lost. Combine this with the same standards applying to all aspects of a sound, whereas a single note or drum hit should be worth much less than a rhythm or melody. Hopefully the existence of things like Legitmix will start to make this easier for people in this situation.

I personally feel it should be allowed for single notes and drum hits with no overwhelming cost to the sampler. Beyond that, then MAYBE the current rates should apply.

So, what are your own thoughts? Should sampling be allowed, and if so, under what circumstances?


----------



## Kalmor (Apr 3, 2013)

I've always been one to sample single notes from an instrument that has been played by myself or someone who has given permission to use it (as is obviously the case with professionally recorded sound sets). But sampling a whole phrase deliberately from someone else's song just seems wrong to me (without proper credit/permission). It is my personal opinion that people who mix/mash together (or whatever term you want to use) sounds from copyrighted songs (and call it their own) are _kinda_ lacking in creativity on composition front. This is not to say that they're not talented as I know quite a few that are. It just seems wrong to me for some reason. As to the prices, sets a bit steep in cost, yes, but most of the premium ones are professionally recorded using specialised equipment that doesn't pay for itself. I may be rambling here (and I may actually be talking about something completely different from what you're asking, sigh).


----------



## Python Blue (Apr 3, 2013)

I fully agree with you when it comes to sampling entire melodies; it's uncreative. Drum rhythms seem to be a grey area to me, though; most of the underlying compositions tend to be the same for a specific genre, regardless of what kinds of drum sounds are making the rhythms, but there are always those unique oddities. Maybe it's just that I love how Gary Numan used the drum break for Led Zeppelin's "When the Levee Breaks" throughout the '90s.


----------



## Kalmor (Apr 3, 2013)

Python Blue said:


> I fully agree with you when it comes to sampling entire melodies; it's uncreative. Drum rhythms seem to be a grey area to me, though; most of the underlying compositions tend to be the same for a specific genre, regardless of what kinds of drum sounds are making the rhythms, but there are always those unique oddities. Maybe it's just that I love how Gary Numan used the drum break for Led Zeppelin's "When the Levee Breaks" throughout the '90s.


Drums are a strange one for that very reason, though I'd prefer that the composer/whatever goes out and records the drums themselves or creates it using soundsets/plugins/ect rather than ripping it from an original song.


----------



## Demensa (Apr 4, 2013)

It's an interesting argument. 
Consider someone who deliberately uses a melody from another song they have heard. That seems like obvious plagiarism and a lack of creativity on the composer's side.
However if someone came up with the exact same melody but never listened to the other song that originally contained the phrase it doesn't seem wrong at all.
The problem is, that (unless the person has actually sampled the original audio) you can't accuse someone of stealing a melody or phrase with 100% certainty.

The more complicated the sampled part is, the easier it is to say "PLAGIARISM", but small things, and by small things I mean nearly all drum patterns in existence, (Seriously, in rock and pop music especially, no one's going to get angry if you happen to use the same pattern as someone else. It's almost certainly going to happen), melodic licks, chord progressions... etc. as long as it is only ONE of these things that is the same.  Once you start putting the same drumline with the same chord progression or something similar, it really sounds familiar.

The above is just about musical ideas, more-so than actual audio being sampled. As for that, it's up to the artist who made the song in the first place to decide what they want to do about it.  As long as the original artist is happy, then all is well.
Anyways, it's not like people just have the right to take someone else's work and use it in their own without the artist knowing. (Actually if you're not making money off of it and you give credit to the original artist, I see no problem.)
There's plenty of cheap and free samples out there anyways.


----------

